Attachment_23_-_Section_L.pdf

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR

RESPONDENTS

1.0 PROGRAM STRUCTURE AND OBJECTIVES

The Government intends to award a single contract in Fiscal Year (FY) 2017 for the Advanced Radar Threat System-Variant 2 (ARTS-V2) development, production and Interim Contractor Support (ICS). The contractor will develop and produce one Production Representative Article (PRA), produce up to a quantity of five systems per production option, and perform ICS to sustain produced systems for up to five one-year options.

The ARTS-V2 is a Surface-to-Air Missile (SAM) threat radar based on a foreign fielded, medium range, double digit, SAM threat system. The ARTS-V2 is designed to be used at Department of Defense (DoD) training ranges for aircrew training and tactics development to increase combat effectiveness and aircrew survivability by training aircrews to engage or defend against an advanced SAM threat before encountering it in actual combat. Various aircraft platforms will train against the ARTS-V2, but the most stringent requirements placed on the ARTS-V2 system design come from 5th Generation aircraft capabilities.

1.1 BUDGET/FUNDING INFORMATION

For consideration in developing your proposal, the Government’s cost estimates for the contract are as follows:

Then-Year $M RDT&E Funded Elements Contract Total

Contract Cost Estimate $114.7 Procurement Funded Elements Contract Total

Contract Cost Estimate $360.5

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

(a) The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by this Information to Offerors (ITO) and must be submitted In Accordance With (IAW) these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the System Performance Specification (SPS), Statement of Objectives (SOO), Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), and Model Contract/Solicitation. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

(b) The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for an effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet those requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal.

(c) Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

(d) The offeror shall make a clear statement in both Section 2 of Volume IV, Cost/Price, and Section A of Volume VII, Contract Documentation, of the offeror's proposal that the offer is valid for a minimum of 365 days from the solicitation closing date.

(e) IAW FAR Subpart 4.8, Government Contract Files, the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

2.1 General Information

2.1.1 Point of Contact (POC)

The Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) is the sole POC for this acquisition. Address any questions, concerns, or clarifications you may have to:

Mr. Cory Hansen, PCO 6039 Wardleigh Rd, Bldg. 1206 Hill AFB UT 84056-5838 cory.hansen@us.af.mil

2.1.2 Debriefings

2.1.2.1 The PCO will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing IAW FAR 15.505, Pre-Award Debriefing of Offerors. Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a pre-award debriefing or, at the offeror’s request, this debriefing may be delayed until after award. However, offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to no more than one debriefing.

2.1.2.2 After award, the PCO will notify unsuccessful offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision IAW FAR 15.506, Post-Award Debriefing of Offerors.

Upon such notification, successful/unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request IAW the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

2.1.3 Discrepancies

If an offeror believes the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the PCO in writing with supporting rationale, as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the PCO to consider as related to the omission or error. Government responses will be published on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website for access by all offerors. The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

2.1.4 Electronic Reference Documents

The referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the FBO website at https://www.fbo.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

Classified documents not available on FBO will be made available per 2.1.5 below.

mailto:cory.hansen@us.af.mil http://www.fbo.gov/

2.1.5 Classified Bidder’s Library/Vault

2.1.5.1 The classified bidder’s library will reside within the vault located at Hill Air Force Base. It will consist of classified documents the ARTS-V2 Government team believes are necessary to prepare a proposal.

2.1.5.2 Offerors may request access to the ARTS-V2 classified or other restricted-access documentation. Access may be granted over Secure Internet Protocol Router (SIPR) network, or by secure mailing of a classified CD/DVD, or offeror courier of classified CD/DVD. In order to request access, the offeror must have a certified storage facility. All offerors will be treated equally and will be provided access to the documents/information as requested, consistent with need-to- know and security clearance.

2.1.6 Communications

Exchanges of source selection information between the Government and offerors will be controlled by the PCO. Email used to transmit such information must be encrypted and include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the subject line.

Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via other means as appropriate.

Information on e-mail encryption procedures can be found in Section J, Attachment 21, Exchanging Encrypted E-Mail.

2.1.7 Oral Presentations

Oral presentations will not be allowed.

2.1.8 Amendments to Solicitation

If this Request for Proposal (RFP) is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this RFP by the date and time specified in the amendment(s) by signing and returning the front page of each.

2.1.9 Alternate Proposals

Alternate proposals will not be considered.

2.2 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table (Table 1 below). The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table 1. The volumes identified in the table shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose-leaf binders. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph as noted in the table below.

Table 1 - Proposal Organization

VOLUME ITO

Paragraph Number

VOLUME TITLE CDs/ DVDs

HARD

COPIES

PAGE LIMIT

(not to exceed)

I 3.0 Executive Summary 2 4 3

II

4.0

Factor 1: Technical Approach/ Technical Risk

- Note: CSOW, CWBS, Event

Schedule, IMP, and Classified Appendix (if applicable) will count towards page limit, the CDRL package does not count towards page limit

III

5.0

Factor 2: Technical Data and Computer Software and Associated License Rights

- Note: Technical Data and

Computer Software and Associated License Rights Tables (Attachment 6) do not count towards page limit

IV 6.0 Factor 3: Cost/Price 2 4 unlimited

V

7.0

Factor 4: Past Performance

- Note: Consent letters, Client

Authorization, and Organizational Structure Change History Roadmap do not count towards page limit

6 sheets per PPI

(Section J, Attachment 1)

VI 8.0 Factor 5: Small Business Participation 2 4 5

VII 9.0 Contract Documentation 2 4 unlimited

2.2.1 Page Limitations

Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal and excess paper copies will be shredded. Each page shall be counted except the following: blank pages, title pages, tables of contents, lists of tables, lists of drawings, tabs, glossaries, CWBS Dictionary, Cross- Reference Matrix (Section J, Attachment 31) and those noted in Table 1 above.

Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the offerors.

2.2.2. Page Size and Format

2.2.2.1 A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Page size shall be 8.5 by 11 inches, not including foldouts. Pages shall be typed with 1.5 line spacing. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text shall be Times New Roman and no less than 12-point font. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software. Use 1 inch margins on the top and bottom, and ¾-inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page format restrictions shall also apply to responses to ENs. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals with the exception of the PPI tool outputs.

2.2.2.2 Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 by 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and count as a single page. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, and schematics, not for pages of text. For charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 8-point and alternate fonts will be accepted. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

2.2.2.3 All portions in the electronic version (with the exception of the PPI Tool file) of the proposal shall be searchable for text in the host program. This includes narratives as well as all tables, foldouts, graphics, and figures.

2.2.3 Cost or Pricing Related Data

All cost or pricing information shall be addressed ONLY in the:

• Cost/Price and Contract Documentation Volumes

• Section J, Attachment 6, Government Rights in Data and Software (GRIDS)

• Specific DD Forms 1423-1 Section J, Attachment 20, Exhibits, identified in Table of Contents (TOC), Section 2.1

Cost trade-off information, work-hour estimates, and material kinds and quantities may be used in other volumes only as appropriate for presenting rationale for design and trade-off decisions.

2.2.4 Classified Information

Classified information will be allowed in a classified appendix to the unclassified proposal.

The page count of the classified appendix will count towards the Volume II page limit.

2.2.5 Cross-Referencing

2.2.5.1 Volumes I through VI shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that their contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal.

2.2.5.2 Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity.

2.2.5.3 The offeror shall fill out Section J, Attachment 31, Cross-Reference Matrix, indicating relations between the ITO, proposal paragraph, Contractor Statement of Work (CSOW), Contractor Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS), Integrated Master Plan (IMP), Event

Schedule, SOO, SPS, Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs), and CDRLs. The Cross- Reference Matrix is used for evaluation purposes only and does not count towards the volume page limit.

2.2.6 Indexing

Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections. Tables of contents do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

2.2.7 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

2.2.8 Binding and Labeling

Each volume of the proposal shall be separately bound in a three-ring, loose-leaf binder permitting the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet shall be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification, and the offeror's name. The same identifying data shall be placed on the spine of each binder. All document binders shall be white or black. Apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed IAW FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

2.3 Electronic Offers

The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. In the event there is a discrepancy between the hard copy and the electronic copy, the hard copy will take precedence and will be used for evaluation. The offeror shall submit all electronic copies using virus-free CD-R or DVD-R. In no cases shall the offeror use CD-RW or DVD-RW.

Each disk shall be properly labeled to indicate the volume number, title, solicitation identification, and the offeror’s name. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed IAW FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information. Use separate files for each proposal volume, to permit rapid location. When naming files, use titles to describe the content of the file rather than using numbers alone to more easily navigate and identify specific data. Each volume shall be in a different directory on a separate CD/DVD. If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable and searchable by Adobe XI, Microsoft (MS) Office Word 2010, MS Office Excel 2010, MS Office Project 2010, MS Office Visio 2010, and MS Office Power Point 2010, as applicable. Ensure all graphics (to include tables, charts, and foldouts) in the electronic version of the proposal are pasted into the proposal (do not paste as picture only). Ensure all formulas used are included in Excel Spreadsheets.

2.3.1 Hyperlink

The table of contents of all proposal volumes should be hyperlinked to the corresponding material within each proposal volume.

2.4 Distribution

2.4.1 Proposal Delivery

The original proposal shall be identified “Original.” The proposal shall be addressed to the PCO and mailed or hand carried to:

AFLCMC/PZZKA

Attn: Mr. Cory Hansen 6039 Wardleigh Rd, Bldg. 1206 Hill AFB, UT 84056-5838 cory.hansen@us.af.mil

Hand carried delivery of proposals shall be coordinated at least 48 hours in advance of the due date/time with the PCO. Proposal delivery cannot occur after 1600 MT. Electronic and paper copies of proposals must be received IAW the hour and date specified in the solicitation. Each offeror shall submit the Past Performance Volume (Volume V) no later than 30 calendar days after RFP release. Proposals received after the due date and time (1600 MT) specified herein shall be treated IAW FAR 15.208, Submission, Modification, Revision, and Withdrawal of Proposals. As necessary, advise the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) for prime and subcontractors that the proposal is “For Official Use Only” and “Source Selection Information– See FAR 2.101, Definitions and FAR 3.104, Procurement Integrity.”

2.4.2 Classified Appendix Delivery

Any and all classified information, e.g. proposal/classified appendix, shall be marked and delivered IAW DD254 and DoD 5220.22M National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (NISPOM). Classified information that is mismarked will not be accepted. Classified proposals shall be submitted by either of the following methods:

1) Shipped to:

Hill AFB Security Office Attn: Mr. Britton Hayden 6062 Fir Ave Bldg. 1234 Room 19 Hill AFB, UT 84056-5816

2) Hand carried, following the instructions for hand carry in Section 2.4.1, to:

AFLCMC/PZZKA

6039 Wardleigh Rd, Bldg. 1206 Hill AFB, UT 84056-5838 cory.hansen@us.af.mil

3.0 VOLUME I - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Executive Summary Volume must be consistent with information in other volumes. Do not include cost information in Volume I Executive Summary. In the executive summary volume, the offeror shall provide the following information:

3.1 NARRATIVE SUMMARY

The narrative summary of the entire proposal should be concise, to include addressing the significant risks, and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding cost/price. The salient features should tie in with Section M Evaluation Factors/Subfactors. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal.

3.2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Include a master table of contents of the entire proposal.

4.0 VOLUME II - FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH/TECHNICAL RISK

4.1 GENERAL

The Technical Approach/Technical Risk Volume shall be specific and complete. When referring to technical or design approach, identify not only the processes and methodologies involved in coming up with the design but also notional design elements and architectural frameworks including system/subsystem/component decomposition to the extent possible.

Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Responses will be evaluated as defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award, paragraph 4.0. All requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. Proposal submission represents that the offeror will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. It is not necessary or desirable to state such in the proposal. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation.

4.2 FORMAT AND CONTENT

4.2.1 Volume II shall be organized according to the following general outline:

Section Title 1 Table of Contents 2 List of Tables and Drawings 3 Glossary 4 Cross-Reference Matrix 5 Subfactor 1: Technical Acceptability 5-1 CWBS & CWBS Dictionary, CSOW, IMP & Event Schedule 5-2 Technical Approach/Technical Risk: Realistic Radio Frequency Environment, Realistic Operational Employment, and Physical Representation 6 Subfactor 2: Design Adaptability 7 Subfactor 3: Logistics Supportability 7-1 Deployability 7-2 Mobility 7-3 Maintainability 8 Classified Appendix (if applicable)

4.2.2 Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual approaches (processes/methodologies) and capabilities proposed for use in accomplishing/ meeting or exceeding the minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor, as well as the risks in the proposed capabilities in terms of technical performance, cost, and schedule.

4.2.2.1 Technical Risk: Address technical risk associated with the aspects of the proposed technical approach/technical risk considered to have the potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Classify each risk IAW DoD Source Selection Procedures Table 3, Technical Risk Ratings (also found in Section M, 4.2.1.1 and 4.2.2.4.1). Provide the rationale for each risk and its rating, including quantitative estimates of the impact on cost, schedule, and performance. Describe the impact of each identified risk in terms of its potential to interfere with or prevent the successful accomplishment of other contract requirements, whether or not those requirements are identified as subfactors. Propose realistic risk mitigation for identified risks that eliminates or reduces risk to an acceptable level. Identify and classify any new risks introduced by such risk mitigation. The Government will not be bound by the offeror’s proposed risks, risk ratings, or risk mitigations; the Government will make the final determination of the technical risk rating assigned in the evaluation.

4.3 TECHNICAL SUBFACTORS

The Technical Subfactors are:

Subfactor 1: Technical Acceptability Subfactor 2: Design Adaptability Subfactor 3: Logistics Supportability

4.3.1 SUBFACTOR 1: TECHNICAL ACCEPTABILITY (SOO paragraphs 2, 3.1)

The offeror shall provide a CWBS, CWBS Dictionary, CSOW, CDRLs, IMP, Event Schedule, and technical approach/technical risk.

4.3.1.1 CWBS and CWBS Dictionary

A preliminary government WBS for the ARTS-V2 has been provided as Attachment 10 in Section J of this solicitation. The reference document for developing the WBS and dictionary is MIL-HDBK-881, “Work Breakdown Structure for Defense Materiel Items”. The offeror shall develop a CWBS and dictionary, which reflects their view of the contract effort. The CWBS shall serve as the framework for organizing the ARTS-V2 to include in-house, inter-divisional, subcontractor, and associate contractor activities. The CWBS shall be developed to a depth (level) and breadth sufficient to accurately describe the offeror's understanding of the effort required for the ARTS-V2 as reflected in the SOO and SPS. The CWBS should use the Government WBS numbering scheme. Also, the CWBS may identify any Government inherent functions as “N/A” and provide brief explanation in the CWBS Dictionary. More detail to the CWBS, as well as updates, will be submitted after contract award as a CDRL deliverable.

4.3.1.2 CSOW and CDRLs

A SOO is provided as Attachment 19 in Section J of this solicitation. This SOO represents the Government's minimum objectives for the ARTS-V2. The offeror shall use the SOO to propose a WBS-structured SOW (known as CSOW) which expands upon these minimum objectives to the extent necessary to conduct this acquisition. The proposed CSOW shall define the tasks required for the ARTS-V2, ensuring all minimum objectives of the Government provided SOO have been addressed. Within the CSOW, the contractor shall expand upon the following SOO paragraphs: 2, 3.3, 3.4, 4.3.7, and 4.6. The proposed CSOW shall consist of tasking statements.

Each tasking statement shall reference the CDRL items which will be delivered by that task.

The proposed CSOW shall not contain informational notes, as the Technical Volume provides ample opportunity for discussion and description of the offeror's approach, and the IMP and Event Schedule provide the mechanisms for describing specific details of the offeror's approach. The tasking statements in the CSOW shall be cross-referenced with the elements of the CWBS, IMP, and Event Schedule. The CSOW will be incorporated into the contract upon award.

The offeror shall provide an updated CDRL package to include all CDRLs, completed according to the Attachment 20, CDRL Instructions. The offeror shall also provide a list of any CDRLs modified (except filling in block 5), deleted, or added including a summary of the modifications at the end of the CDRL package.

4.3.1.3 IMP

The purpose of the IMP is to demonstrate that the ARTS-V2 Program is structured to minimize and control risk, to accomplish up-front summary planning and commitment, to provide a basis for subsequent detailed planning, to instill a balanced design discipline, to measure progress of ARTS-V2 Program life-cycle requirements, and to provide management with in-process verification of requirements in order to make informed milestone decisions.

The offeror shall provide an IMP down the level deemed necessary by Offeror as long as the IMP covers all Events, Significant Accomplishments, and Accomplishment Criteria defined below. More detail to the IMP, as well as updates, will be submitted after contract award as a CDRL deliverable. The IMP shall capture the core activities and processes necessary to implement the program, throughout the contract period of performance, to include activities/processes not directly controlled by the offeror. The IMP shall be written as an event-based plan containing significant accomplishments and accomplishment criteria needed to successfully complete each major program milestone. IMP milestones shall be event-oriented and represent integrated product development (encompassing all functional disciplines) of the CWBS elements. The IMP measures program maturity by marking the initiation/conclusion of events/milestones, significant accomplishments, and associated completion criteria which describe the total work effort necessary to acquire a system which meets contract requirements.

The IMP shall be a single plan for the entire effort, including associate and/or major subcontractor activities. Each section/subsection of the IMP shall contain events, significant accomplishments, accomplishment criteria, and selected narratives.

a. Event: An IMP event is a key contractual or programmatic event defined by the Government or the offeror, which defines progress at a specific point in time. The offeror shall include definitions of each event at the beginning of the IMP. IMP events shall be properly sequenced and may include demonstration milestones, technical or program reviews and audits, and other key decision points. For each IMP event, there shall be one or more entry or exit significant accomplishments (either entry or exit).

b. Significant Accomplishment: Significant Accomplishments are interim or final critical efforts that must be completed prior to entering or exiting an event. Significant Accomplishments are organized by the CWBS element/product. Entry accomplishments reflect what must be complete to initiate an event. Exit accomplishments reflect what must be done in order for the event to be successfully closed and that the program is ready for the next event. For each Significant Accomplishment, there shall be one or more accomplishment criteria. The Government is seeking Significant Accomplishments that provide sufficient insight to the process for achieving objectives of the SOO. The accomplishments shall be sequenced in a manner that ensures a logical path is maintained throughout the effort and tracks against key events.

c. Accomplishment Criteria: Measurable and useful indicators demonstrating that the required level of maturity/progress in an associated significant accomplishment has been achieved.

4.3.1.4 Event Schedule

The offeror shall provide a Gantt Chart depicting the start and end points of all events to include, but not limited to, PRA delivery, Initial Operational Capability(IOC) and Full Operational Capability(FOC), measured from award date/After Receipt of Order (ARO) (e.g.

30 days ARO).

4.3.1.5 Technical Approach/Technical Risk

At a minimum, the technical hardware and software approach shall contain processes, methodologies, and capabilities detailing how SPS requirements related to Realistic Radio Frequency (RF) Environment, Realistic Operational Employment, and Physical Representation (Radar Cross Section) will be met (Reference Table 8-1 of the SPS). If the offeror proposes an Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA) solution, then the technical approach/technical risk shall include an explanation of how the proposed solution addresses risk areas identified in the Air Force Research Laboratory produced AESA feasibility study.

4.3.1.5.1 The technical approach/technical risk shall address technical risk IAW 4.2.2.1 of this document.

4.3.2 SUBFACTOR 2: DESIGN ADAPTABILITY (SOO paragraph 3.1.4)

4.3.2.1 Describe how the system design provides adaptability, modularity, and scalability to support future updates to the base threat (Threat C) and upgrades to add a future threat (Threat G), by addressing the following:

o Modularity in hardware and software o System software architecture o Use of open standards, if applicable, for hardware and software o Use of Commercial-Off-The Shelf hardware and software

4.3.2.2 The approach shall address technical risk IAW 4.2.2.1 of this document.

4.3.3 SUBFACTOR 3: LOGISTICS SUPPORTABILITY (SOO paragraph 3.1)

4.3.3.1 Deployability

4.3.3.1.1 Deployability is defined as system movement off range (air/sea/commercial road), e.g. C-5, C-17, cargo ship, etc. Reference MIL-STD-1366E, Section 5.3 when dealing with sea board movements.

4.3.3.1.2 The offeror shall describe their configuration design as it pertains to deployability.

4.3.3.1.3 Describe the process required to move a system from one range to another, moving to and from the depot, etc. (air/sea/ground-trailer). Examples include: description and number of major assemblies/subsystems affected, complexity of the effort, and equipment required for disassembly, transport, and reassembly.

4.3.3.1.4 Describe how the subsystems will be affected and managed through the deployment process.

4.3.3.1.5 Notional deployment configuration figures may be submitted to support the narrative.

4.3.3.2 Mobility

4.3.3.2.1 Mobility is defined as system movement on range (not within-mission), e.g.

from garage to mission start location and setup, etc.

Note: Within-mission movement, as defined in the SPS, will not be evaluated as part of this subfactor.

4.3.3.2.2 The offeror shall describe their mobility configuration design. Describe number of vehicles needed to move across a training range. (SPS paragraphs 3.3.4.2.7 and 3.3.4.2.8)

4.3.3.2.3 Describe the process required to move the system across a training range in a non-operational configuration. Examples include: description and number of major pieces affected, complexity of the effort, and equipment (if required) for pack-up, movement, and setup.

4.3.3.2.4 Describe how subsystems will be affected and managed during movement.

4.3.3.2.5 Notional mobility configuration figures may be submitted to support the narrative.

4.3.3.3 Maintainability

4.3.3.3.1 Maintainability requirements are in SPS Section 3.13.

4.3.3.3.2 The offeror shall describe how their design will meet maintainability requirements.

4.3.3.3.3 Describe maintainability features and how they affect deployability design.

4.3.3.3.4 Describe accessibility to critical components, routine replacement items, and service points.

4.3.3.3.5 Describe how single points of failure will be addressed in support of SPS availability, reliability, and maintainability requirements.

4.3.3.3.6 List projected peculiar support equipment for Organizational Level maintenance, if required.

4.3.3.3.7 Describe how the design will impact the long term logistics footprint. Examples include: number of vehicles, fuel consumption and handling, preventative maintenance actions, etc.

4.3.3.4 The approach shall address technical risks IAW 4.2.2.1 of this document.

5.0 VOLUME III – FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL DATA AND COMPUTER

SOFTWARE AND ASSOCIATED LICENSE RIGHTS (SOO paragraph 3.11)

5.1 GENERAL

The offeror shall, in its proposal, describe an approach to technical data and computer software and associated license rights that will be delivered to the Government that will result in an executable ARTS-V2 Program by minimizing life-cycle costs to the Government. For example, allowing the Government to use FAR Part 6.1 Full and Open Competition for production, maintenance, sustainment, overhaul, modifications, and upgrades of the ARTS-V2 system.

5.2 FORMAT AND SPECIFIC CONTENT

5.2.1 Technical Data and Computer Software and Associated License Rights Approach The offeror shall provide a narrative describing how the proposed Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS provides the Government with the ability to use full and open competitive procedures for system, sub-system, and component procurement and organic and/or Contractor Logistics Support (CLS) maintenance and sustainment for the ARTS-V2 system. In addition, the offeror shall describe the analysis it conducted (including all assumptions made) to determine that the technical data and computer software deliverables and associated license rights the offeror will deliver to the Government (listed in its completed Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS), will be sufficient for the Government to successfully execute the ARTS-V2 Program and will minimize life-cycle costs to the Government. For example, allowing the Government to use FAR Part 6.1 Full and Open Competition for production, maintenance, sustainment, overhaul, and modifications and upgrades of the ARTS-V2 system. The narrative shall include rationale for any CDRL changes or additions proposed by the offeror per Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS, Paragraph 5.5.

5.2.1.1 Gap and Risk Analysis - In cases where the offeror is unable to fully comply with the minimum needs identified in Paragraph 1.2 of Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS, the offeror shall provide analysis of the gaps between the Government’s requirement for an executable ARTS- V2 Program that will minimize life-cycle costs to the Government. For example, allowing the Government to use FAR Part 6.1 Full and Open Competition for production, maintenance, sustainment, overhaul, and modifications and upgrades of the ARTS-V2 system and the proposed technical data and software and/or associated license rights offered to the Government.

5.2.1.1.1 The offeror shall analyze the risks associated with the gaps and describe a risk mitigation approach. The offeror shall classify each risk using the following definitions:

Low: Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate: Can potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High: Is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring. (DoD Source Selection Procedures, Table 3 – Technical Risk Ratings)

5.2.1.1.2 Provide the rationale describing each risk, including quantitative estimates of the impact on cost, schedule, and performance for the life-cycle of the ARTS-V2 system.

5.2.1.1.3 Propose realistic risk mitigation for identified risks that will eliminate or reduce risk to an acceptable level for the life-cycle of the ARTS-V2 system. Identify and classify any new risks introduced by such risk mitigation for the life-cycle of the ARTS-V2 system.

5.2.1.1.4 The Government will not be bound by the offeror’s self-identified risks, risk classification, and/or proposed risk mitigations for the life-cycle of the ARTS-V2 system;

the Government will make the final determination of the rating that will be assigned in the evaluation of each proposal for Factor 2 IAW Section M, 5.1.

5.2.2 Section J, Attachment 6, Government Rights in Data and Software (GRIDS)

5.2.2.1 The offeror shall complete Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS, Tables 1, 2.1, 2.2, 3, and 4, IAW Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS, Section 5.0. The offeror shall propose in Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS, a solution that is sufficient for the Government to successfully execute the ARTS-V2 Program that will minimize life-cycle costs to the Government. For example, allowing the Government to use FAR Part 6.1 Full and Open Competition for production, maintenance, sustainment, overhaul, and modifications and upgrades of the ARTS-V2 system.

5.2.2.2 The offeror shall complete Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS appendices, IAW Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS, Section 6.0. The offeror shall propose in Section J, Attachment 6, GRIDS, a solution that is sufficient for the Government to successfully execute the ARTS-V2 Program that will minimize life-cycle costs to the Government. For example, allowing the Government to use FAR Part 6.1 Full and Open Competition for production, maintenance, sustainment, overhaul, and modifications and upgrades of the ARTS-V2 system.

6.0 VOLUME IV – FACTOR 3: COST/PRICE

6.1 General Instructions

6.1.1 Cost/Price Reasonableness

The purpose of this volume is to provide the Government contracting office and cost team evaluators with an understanding of how the price proposal was developed. The price evaluation criteria of reasonableness, balance, realism, affordability, and Total Evaluated Price (TEP) as defined in paragraph 6.1 of Section M of the RFP will be assessed from the information provided by the offeror in the price proposal volume. Note that proposals which do not meet required tests of reasonableness, and realism initially or subsequently may be eliminated from competition either on the basis that the offeror does not understand the requirement or has submitted an inadequate proposal. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal.

Offers shall be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness and realism, where applicable. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs/prices rests with the offeror.

6.1.2 Estimating Techniques and Methods

When responding to the Cost/Price Volume requirements in the solicitation, the offeror and associated subcontractors are encouraged to provide any data/information deemed necessary to assist the government evaluators in understanding the proposal. Any generally accepted estimating technique, including contemporary estimating methods (such as Cost-to-Cost and Cost-to-Non-Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs), commercially available parametric cost models, in-house developed parametric cost models, etc.), may be used to develop their estimates. If necessary, reasonable and supportable allocation techniques may be used to spread hours and/or costs to lower levels of the work breakdown structure (WBS).

6.1.3 Incentive Arrangements

Use the below share ratios, target profit rate, and ceiling rate for bidding Fixed Price Incentive Firm Target (FPIF) CLIN 0001. FPIF CLINs will be evaluated at ceiling price.

- Over/Under Target Share Ratio: (Government Share/Contractor Share) 80/20

- Target Profit Rate: 12% of Proposed Target Cost

- Ceiling Rate: 130%

6.1.4 Restrictions

Data/information beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless you consider it essential to document or support your price position. All data relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation, must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Cost/Price Volume. Under no circumstances shall this data and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

6.1.5 Requirements

IAW FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), data other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support a determination of price reasonableness. Data shall be provided IAW FAR 15.403-5 . If, after receipt of proposals, the PCO determines that there is insufficient data available to make this determination and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the offeror shall be required to submit additional cost or pricing data. If only one offer is received, the Government will follow procedures found in DFARS 215.371-3.

6.2 Volume Organization

The Cost/Price Volume shall consist of the following sections:

SECTION 1 - Table of Contents: Specifying by page number the location of information requested in these instructions; summary descriptions of estimating, purchasing, and accounting systems; changes to estimating, accounting practices, or Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Disclosure Statement. Also provide abbreviations and acronyms used in the price volume.

SECTION 2 – Pricing Assumptions: Summarize all significant pricing assumptions, scope https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5315/templates/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR15.DOC%23b154031 https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5315/templates/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR15.DOC%23b154033 https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5315/templates/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR15.DOC%23b154035 https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5315/templates/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR15.DOC%23b154035 https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5315/templates/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR15.DOC%23b154031 limitations and/or qualifications of the cost/price proposal. List exceptions to any ground rules or assumptions provided in the solicitation and each qualification to the price volume, if any.

Provide complete rationale for any exceptions. Detailed support shall be provided for all cost type CLINs included in the TEP. The offeror shall state the period for which the proposed price is valid.

SECTION 3 - Other information such as Government Furnished Property/Government Furnished Equipment (GFP/GFE), base support, long lead costs, development/production schedule, inflation rate summary and explanation, life cycle cost, and special tooling/test equipment.

6.3.1 Business Systems

If business systems have been reviewed recently, the offeror shall provide the system name, the results (approved/ disapproved), and the date of the most recent review. If a business system has not been reviewed recently, it should be stated. This must include a statement on the adequacy of the accounting system and the CAS disclosure statement if there is one.

In the absence of this information, the Government will assume that no systems have been evaluated. If this is the case, a proposal will not be eliminated from consideration. An accounting system review will be initiated and must be completed before award. The following link will take you to the Pre-award Accounting System Adequacy Checklist in the DCAA website. It should be completed and sent to your local DCAA office at the time of proposal submission.

http://www.dcaa.mil/preaward_accounting_system_adequacy_checklist.html

6.3.2 Estimating Methodology/Basis of Estimate

For any cost type CLINs to be evaluated and requiring the submission of data, please discuss the methods used to propose each cost element as well as the basis for all proposed values.

This must include information on any management reductions included in these portions of the proposal.

6.3.2.1 To be sufficiently detailed, an offer must include the following elements:

• Firm Fixed Price (FFP)-Total price per unit, and extended total price.

• Fixed Price Incentive Firm Target (FPIF)-Target Cost, Target Profit, Target Price, and Ceiling Price.

• Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF)-A detailed breakdown of the proposed cost to include the following:

o Labor hours by rate category, labor rates by category, and extended labor cost for each category and a total labor cost. A Basis of Estimate (BOE) shall be included giving the rationale for the hours and rates proposed o Material cost along with a BOE for the proposed material o Other Direct Costs with a BOE for those costs o Overhead (O/H) rates and amounts with a BOE for the proposed O/H rates and the base cost categories for the extended amounts o For indirect costs other than O/H provide a BOE for the proposed rates, and the http://www.dcaa.mil/preaward_accounting_system_adequacy_checklist.html base cost categories for the application of those rates o If Facilities Capital Cost of Money (FCCM, or COM) is proposed, provide a

BOE for the proposed bases and factors proposed o For the Profit rate on CLINs where no profit rate is directed, provide rationale for the proposed profit rate. FCCM/COM must not be included in the base for profit.

• Cost Reimbursable (CR)-An estimated total cost of support required.

6.4 Cost/Price Data

6.4.1 Cost, Profit, and Price for FPIF CLINs

The offeror shall complete Section J, Attachment 15, Line Item Matrix for CLIN 0001 by filling in the proposed target cost, target profit, and unit price. The share ratios, target profit rate, and ceiling rate required for use in determining these values are found in section 6.1.3 of this document.

6.4.2 Cost and Fee for CPFF CLINs

The offeror shall complete Section J, Attachment 15, Line Item Matrix for CLINs 0002, 0500, 0507, 5001, 6001, 7001, 8001, and 9001 by filling in the proposed estimated unit cost, fee, and estimated unit price for each CLIN.

6.4.3 Cost for CR CLINs

The offeror shall complete Section J, Attachment 15, Line Item Matrix for CLINs 1008, 2004, 3004, 4004, 5003, 6003, 7003, 8003, and 9003 by filling in the proposed estimated cost and estimated price for each CLIN.

6.4.4 Price for FFP CLINs

The offeror shall complete Section J, Attachment 15, Line Item Matrix for CLINs 0003, 0004, 0006, 0007, 0008, 0010, 0501, 0504, 0505, 0508, 0509, 0510, 0511, 1001, 1002, 1004, 1005 1006, 1007, 1010, 2001, 2002, 2006, 3001, 3002, 3006, 4001, 4002, 4006, 5005, 6005, 7005, 8005, and 9005 by filling in the proposed unit price for each CLIN.

6.4.5 TEP

The TEP will be determined from prices listed in Section J, Attachment 15, Line Item Matrix.

The method for determining the TEP is discussed in paragraph 6.1.4 of Section M of this RFP.

7.0 VOLUME V – FACTOR 4: PAST PERFORMANCE

7.1 GENERAL

Each offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume. Past performance information shall be submitted IAW the format contained in Section J, Attachments 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. The Government may use data provided by each offeror in this volume and data obtained by the Government from other sources in the evaluation of past performance.

7.2 SPECIFIC CONTENT

7.2.1 Past Performance Information (PPI)

Any PPI submitted by an offeror shall use the EZ Source PPI Tool (Section J, Attachment 1, Past Performance Information for Offerors). The offeror may submit up to two (2) recent, relevant contracts for the prime offeror and up to one (1) recent, relevant contract for each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner considered most relevant in demonstrating an ability to perform the proposed effort. To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past five (5) years prior to the date of issuance of this solicitation. This information is required for the offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners who are proposed to perform 20 percent or more of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price or perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to overall successful performance. For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining recency and relevance, see Section M, paragraph 7.0, FACTOR 4: PAST PERFORMANCE FACTOR.

7.2.1.1 PPI Content

Offerors should explain what aspects of the past performance contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts, as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a limited or no confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The offeror should clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. For example, submittal of quality performance indicators or other management indicators that clearly support that an offeror has overcome past problems should be demonstrated. Categorize the relevant information into the specific Technical Subfactors and Cost/Price Factor used to evaluate the proposal.

7.2.2 Consent and Client Authorization Letters

The offeror shall submit a consent letter (Section J, Attachment 2, Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Letter), signed and executed by the subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information. For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the offeror shall submit a client authorization letter (Section J, Attachment 3, Commercial Client Authorization Letter), authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror's, subcontractor’s, teaming partner’s, and/or joint venture partner’s performance.

7.2.3 Organizational Structure Change History

Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition.