Attch2_SectionM.pdf

22 May 2018

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTRORS FOR AWARD

F-16 BRACKET PARTS AND KIT ASSEMBLIES

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

1.1. Basis for Contract Award

This acquisition will utilize the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) source selection procedures, conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation, as supplemented by the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation (DFARS), the Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation (AFFARS), DoD Source Selection Procedures, 31 March 2016, and Air Force Mandatory Procedures 5315.3, 3 October 2017. These regulations are available electronically at the Air Force FARSite, http://farsite.hill.af.mil.

This is a multiple-award Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) effort, with a five-year ordering period. The Government intends to select up to five (5) offerors whose proposals represent the lowest evaluated prices from among those meeting the acceptability standards for non-price factors. Technical tradeoffs will not be made, and no additional credit will be given for exceeding acceptability requirements.

This acquisition is a set-aside for all small business concerns in the United States.

Contract(s) may be awarded to the offerors who are deemed responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9.1, as supplemented, whose proposals conform to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation) and are judged, based on the evaluation factors and sub-factors, to represent the lowest price technically acceptable proposals. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

1.2. Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The Government intends to award up to five (5) IDIQ contracts for the F-16 Bracket Parts and Kit Assemblies competitive effort. However, the Government reserves the right to award fewer than five (5) contracts, or no contracts at all, depending on the quality of the proposals, prices submitted, and the availability of funds.

1.3. Discussions

It is the Government’s intent to award without discussions; therefore, it is imperative that offerors submit their best terms initially. However, if during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror’s responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs) and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision. If an offeror’s proposal has been evaluated as acceptable at the time discussions are closed, any changes or exceptions in the FPR will be evaluated and may introduce risk that the offeror’s proposal be deemed unacceptable and ineligible for award.

1.4. Solicitation Requirements, Terms, and Conditions

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors or sub-factors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in an offeror being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale.

The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable.

1.5. Correction Potential of Proposals

Throughout the evaluation process, the Government will consider the correction potential of any proposal uncertainty.

The judgment of such correction potential is within the sole discretion of the Government. If an aspect of a proposal not meeting Government requirements is deemed uncorrectable, the proposal may be eliminated from competition.

1.6. Source Selection Process

The Government is anticipating a high level of participation for this acquisition. As this is a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) effort, the source selection process may limit the number of proposals that are evaluated. The Source Selection Team will first verify that proposals are adequate (i.e. on-time, all volumes included, proper format, etc.). The team will then rank proposals according to Total Evaluated Price (TEP) and will begin full evaluations, starting with the lowest price offer (or a segment of the lowest price offerors), based on the TEP. The team will continue to evaluate in order of lowest TEP to highest TEP until at least five (5) technically acceptable offerors are identified. After at least five (5) such offerors are identified, the Government may choose to award without discussions and may refrain from evaluating the remaining proposals.

If discussions are needed to establish acceptability, the team will establish a competitive range in accordance with FAR 15.306(c), conduct discussions with all offerors within the competitive range, and solicit final proposal revisions (FPRs) from those within the competitive range. In accordance with FAR 15.306(c)(2), the competitive range may be limited for purposes of efficiency.

1.7. Item Description

This solicitation is for the procurement of build-to-spec production aircraft bracket parts and kits. The specifications for the bracket parts and/or kits will be included with each order Request for Proposal (RFP). The basic Statement of Work (SOW) applies to all orders.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS AND SUB-FACTORS

The following evaluation factors and sub-factors will be used to evaluate each proposal. The Government will evaluate proposals for acceptability, but will not rank the proposals by the non-price factors or sub-factors.

Factor One: Technical o Sub-factor One: Manufacturing o Sub-factor Two: Program Management o Sub-factor Three: Sample Task/Initial Delivery Order (IDO)

Factor Two: Price

2.1. Factor One – Technical

The Government’s technical evaluation team will evaluate the technical proposals on an Acceptable or Unacceptable basis, assigning one of the ratings described in Table 1 for each sub-factor. The technical evaluation for acceptability will be in accordance with the criteria set forth in this section. The Government will evaluate an offeror’s proposal to ensure it sufficiently explains how the offeror will accomplish/satisfy the requirements of each technical sub-factor listed below. Any sub-factor evaluated as “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal unacceptable and, therefore, un-awardable. Only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award. However, offerors are reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on initial proposals, as received, without discussions.

Table 1 – Technical Ratings

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

Proposals shall be evaluated against the following technical sub-factors and minimum levels of acceptability:

2.1.1. Sub-factor One – Manufacturing

This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s ability to source material and manufacture required bracket parts and/or kit assemblies.

Minimum Level of Acceptability: This sub-factor is met when the offeror’s written technical proposal provides a complete, thorough, and detailed description of the offeror’s, and/or significant subcontractors’, ability to accomplish the following:

Interpret a detailed Technical Data Package (TDP) and successfully execute manufacturing processes.

Obtain and handle a wide variety of required materials, given applicable specifications defined in a TDP.

Machine parts (i.e. form, contour, manipulate large and small unformed stock).

Conduct post-manufacturing processes (e.g. heat treat, peen, anodize, plate, paint, apply specialized coatings, harden, etc.).

Apply metrology and inspection to ensure dimensional conformity.

Perform non-destructive testing to ensure specifications are met.

2.1.2. Sub-factor Two – Program Management

This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s ability to conduct effective program management processes.

Minimum Level of Acceptability: This sub-factor is met when the offeror’s written technical proposal provides a complete, thorough, and detailed description of the offeror’s abilities related to the following:

Resource and manufacturing capacity.

Supply chain management and/or logistics processes required for integrating, kitting, packaging, and shipping bracket parts and/or kit assemblies.

Subcontract management processes, if subcontractors will be, or are anticipated to be, used in the performance of this effort.

Quality assurance processes that comply with SAE AS9100 (or equivalent) and SAE AS9102 (or equivalent), where applicable, including a description of the offeror’s ability to return Forms 1, 2, and 3 of SAE AS9102 standard (or equivalent), as deemed applicable by the Government on individual orders.

2.1.3. Sub-factor Three – Sample Task/Initial Delivery Order (IDO) This sub-factor evaluates the offeror’s ability to manufacture the items required by the Sample Task/IDO, provided as Attachment 5 in Section J of the solicitation, and deliver them in accordance with the required delivery schedule.

Minimum Level of Acceptability: This sub-factor is met when the offeror’s written technical proposal provides a complete, thorough, and detailed description of the following:

The offeror’s plan to manufacture and deliver the items required in the Sample Task/IDO.

A detailed Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) that demonstrates the offeror’s ability to meet the required delivery schedule.

A detailed description, if applicable, of any long-lead materials or components which introduce risk to meeting the required delivery schedule as well as a thorough description of effective strategies for mitigating those risks.

2.2. Factor Two – Price

Offerors whose price is determined to be unreasonable or unbalanced may not be considered for award. The Government will rank all technically acceptable offers by the proposed Total Evaluated Price (TEP). The offeror’s price proposal will be evaluated based upon the following:

2.2.1. Reasonableness

Price reasonableness is expected to be established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through cost or price analysis techniques, as described in FAR 15.404. The offeror’s price proposal will be evaluated to ensure it is fair and reasonable, pursuant to FAR 15.404. For additional information, see FAR 31.201-3. In general, price reasonableness is an assessment of whether or not the price is too high. Unreasonably high pricing may give the Government cause to eliminate a proposal from consideration.

2.2.2. Unbalanced Pricing

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more Contract Line Items (CLINs) is significantly overstated or understated, as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques.

The Government will analyze proposals to determine whether or not they are unbalanced. A proposal may be rejected if it is determined that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable program risk to the Government. The Government will analyze proposals to determine whether they are balanced in accordance with FAR 15.404-1. An offer may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

2.2.3. Total Evaluated Price (TEP)

The TEP will be computed and provided to the Source Selection Authority (SSA) for award purposes only and will not be incorporated into the contract at award; however, the proposed CLIN prices shall be contractually binding. The TEP will be calculated by summing the total of all CLINs identified in the fill-in sections of the Sample Task/IDO letter RFP, as provided in the Price Volume.

3. PRE-AWARD SURVEY

The Government may conduct a pre-award survey(s) (PAS) as part of this source selection. Results of the PAS, if conducted, will be evaluated to determine each offeror’s capability to meet the requirements of the solicitation.

4. REVIEWS AND VISITS

The Government reserves the right to conduct plant visits, as needed, during the evaluation phase to gather information for judging an offeror’s potential for correcting deficiencies, quality of development or manufacturing practices/processes, or other areas useful in evaluating the offer. If conducted, the results will be addressed under the applicable factors/sub-factors and will be used to validate and confirm the offeror’s written proposal. Plant visits shall be conducted only at the request of the Government.

The Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB) may request a Small Business Administration (SBA) Certificate of Competency (CoC) for an apparent successful awardee. If the SBA will not issue the certificate, the offeror may be considered not responsible and may not be eligible for award.

5. SMALL BUSINESS STATUS

An offeror’s small business status information is required, as per Paragraph 6.3.4. of Section L – Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors. Offerors that meet the small business size standard under the NAICS identified in Section L are eligible for award. If an offeror does not meet the small business size standard, the offeror will be ineligible for award.