FA851913R30382______0002.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE Page 1

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

FA8519-13-R-30382-0002

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

22 MAY 2013

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

FD20601330382

5. PROJECT NO (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE

SUPPORT EQPT - SERVICES, AFLCMC/WNKBBA

235 BYRON ST STE 19A

BLDG 300 CML PHN 478 222 1901

ROBINS AFB GA 31098-1670

BUYER: Brandi R. Matlock Brandi.Matlock@robins.af.mil Phone: (478) 926- 2241 Fax: (478) 222-1854 No Collect Calls

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6) CODEFA8519

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

CODE

X

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

FA851913R30382

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

5-NOV-2012

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended. Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods. ( a ) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; ( b ) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or ( c ) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified. 17-JUN-2013 12:00 PM

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

ROUTINE

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

BY ________________________________________________________

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY ____________________________________________________

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

FACILITY CODE

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PRESCRIBED BY GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

X

X X

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

Amendment/Modification FA8519-13-R-30382-0002

Continuation of block 14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

The purpose of this amendment is to incorporate revised RFP provisions "Instructions to Offerors" and "Evaluation Basis for Award", incorporate a revised Attachment 25, and extend the RFP closing date as shown below.

A. Section L provision "Instructions to Offerors" is hereby revised and incorporated as shown on the following pages. The specific revisions are highlighted in yellow for convenience. This revised RFP provision supersedes any previous versions.

B. Section M provision "Evaluation Basis for Award" is hereby revised and incorporated as shown on the following pages. The specific revisions are highlighted in yellow for convenience. This revised RFP provision supersedes any previous versions.

C. The revised Attachment 25, Contract Work Breakdown Structure Matrix, dated 9 May 2013, is hereby incorporated as attached. This revised attachment supersedes any previous versions.

D. The RFP closing date is hereby revised as follows:

FROM: Indefinite

TO: 17 JUN 2013, 12:00 PM EST

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

END OF AMENDMENT

Request for Proposal FA8519-13-R-30382-0002

PART III - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS, AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

SECTION J

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Form Number Description/File Name Date Number of Pages Attachment 25: Contract Work Breakdown Structure Matrix

09MAY2013 2

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

A. The following instructions cover the preparation and submittal of the offeror’s proposal for this solicitation. Non-conformance with any instructions provided below may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation. Proposals shall be submitted to the Government in four separate volumes as set forth below:

VOLUME PAGE

LIMITS

NUMBER

OF COPIES*

DESCRIPTION

I N/A** 2 Completed RFP – Includes Total Compensation Plan, Subcontracting Plan and Cross Reference Matrix

II 150 5 Written Technical Proposal III N/A 5 Past Performance IV N/A 2*** Price Proposal

*NOTE: In addition to the paper copies listed above, the Offeror will submit one (1) CD-R or DVD-R (write once/read only) with Volumes I through IV saved to the CD/DVD, and one (1) CD-R or DVD-R (write once/read only) with only Volume IV saved to the CD/DVD. Both CD/DVDs should be “closed” so that no further writes can be made to the media. CD-R/W or DVD-R/W media types are not acceptable. All CD-Rs or DVD-Rs must be virus scanned by the Offeror prior to submittal to the Government.

**Page limit for Total Compensation Plan is reflected in paragraph (B) below.

***Cost/Price proposal information shall be submitted in written form (1 copy) and CD-R or DVD-R (write once/read only) (1 copy) that is “closed” so that no further writes can be made to the media. CD-R/W or DVD-R/W media types are not acceptable. Media must be virus scanned by the offeror prior to submitting to the Government.

Each volume shall be marked with the solicitation number, the Offeror’s name and address, and the buyer information contained in Block 7 of Standard Form 1447 (RFP cover page) and shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitation for their respective volumes. In addition to the page limitations set forth above, proposals shall comply with the following format:

(1) All text print shall be formatted no smaller than a font size of 12 and shall be on 8 ½ x 11 inch paper. Characters are to be in black ink. Charts, graphs or spreadsheets may be on fold-out pages and each fold-out page will count as one page. Fold-outs must not exceed 55 x 55 inches unfolded, and must fold within the 8 ½ x 11 inch page size. All text shall be double-spaced, with the exception of the FACTS Sheet which shall be single-spaced.

(2) Any page that has text on one side shall be counted as one page. Any page that has text on both sides shall be counted as two pages.

(3) Margins shall be no smaller than 1 inch.

(4) Each page within a section shall be numbered consecutively. The page limitation includes any drawings, diagrams, and/or illustrations, but excludes any table of contents, glossaries, list of acronyms, filled-in matrixes of RFP Attachments 24 and 25, Integrated Master Schedule (IMS), Systems Engineering Plan (SEP), and Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS). Offerors are cautioned that any pages that exceed the limitations shall not be read but shall be removed and either retained in the contract file without being considered in the evaluation or sent back to the offeror.

(5) Each page containing proprietary information should be so marked.

(6) Each page should contain the following legend at the bottom of each sheet:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION--SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

Communications:

Exchanges of source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. Email may be used to transmit such information only if the email can be sent encrypted, and must include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line of the email. Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via direct mailing or facsimile. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted emails, offerors must use MS Outlook email configured to support encryption or a different email product that is S/MIME compatible and configured to support encryption. If you intend to submit your source selection information via encrypted email, you will need to contact the Buyer/Contracting Officer indicated on the face page of the solicitation prior to that first submittal in order to exchange certificates used for encryption. To ensure the process is working correctly, send a test encrypted message first (without including any source selection information).

B. Volume I

Will consist of the completed and signed RFP with a cover letter delineating any exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions. However, offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined unawardable. The Offeror shall submit proposals in accordance with the instructions contained in RFP sections L and M at the times and on the dates established in the Request for Proposal (RFP). Offerors shall ensure that all clauses and provisions that require “fill-in” information are appropriately completed, including the proposed prices associated with the contract line items in the Schedule of the RFP. The Total Compensation Plan required by FAR 52.222-46 shall be submitted as part of Volume I and shall be no more than 10 pages.

The plan shall set forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for professional employees and include supporting information to enable the Government to review the proposed salaries and fringe benefits in accordance with FAR 52.222-46. Note: the compensation plan pertains to the offeror (prime contractor) only. However, if a populated joint venture is formed (a joint venture in which the employees are employed by the joint venture itself and not by any individual joint venture member), the joint venture must submit the Total Compensation Plan for the joint venture. If an unpopulated joint venture is formed, each individual joint venture member must submit its own Total Compensation Plan.

A cross reference matrix will be utilized as a tool to help offerors ensure they have responded to all the evaluation criteria and proposal submittal requirements identified in the solicitation. The offeror shall fill out the cross reference matrix at RFP Attachment 24 indicating where in their proposal the information can be found as it relates to the RFP. The cross reference matrix will be utilized to show critical interrelationships and dependencies among the technical requirements documents (Performance-Based Work Statements (PWSs) listed in Section J), the Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), Section L (Instructions to Offerors) and Section M (Evaluation Basis for Award). The cross reference matrix will help offerors ensure they have responded to all the evaluation criteria and proposal submittal requirements identified in the solicitation. If the matrix conflicts with any other requirement, direction or provision of this solicitation, the other reference shall take precedence over this matrix. Section M references in the matrix are for information purposes only, and the Government shall be obligated to evaluate proposals solely in conformance with the provisions of Section M of the solicitation.

The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. Proposals must be received by AFLCMC/WNKBBA, 235 Byron Street, Suite 19A, Robins AFB GA 31098-1670, Attention: Brandi R. Matlock/Contracting Officer, no later than 12:00 PM Eastern Daylight Savings Time.

However, offerors are requested to submit Volume III, Past Performance Information, so that it is received ten (10) calendar days prior to the required due date for proposals. Failure to submit Volume III by the earlier date will not result in offeror disqualification as long as Volume III is received by the proposal due date.

C. Volume II, Technical Factor

1. Proposals shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume 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. The proposal shall concentrate solely on the subfactors identified below.

2. The following information shall be provided and will be evaluated to assess technical acceptability (which includes the consideration of technical risk) in accordance with Section M-900, Evaluation Basis for Award. The technical proposal shall address each of the following subfactors describing the offeror’s proposed approach to performing the requirements set forth in the Overarching (OA) PWS, Program Engineering Support (PES) PWS, Material Management (MM) PWS, and Overhaul (OH) PWS (see Section J for listing of PWSs). For each subfactor, the offeror shall identify risks, if any, associated with the proposed approach and actions the offeror will take to mitigate the identified risks. If no risks/mitigations are identified in the offeror’s proposal, the Government will assume that the offeror does not consider there to be any risk associated with their proposed approach.

Subfactor 1: Systems Engineering (SE). The technical proposal shall include:

i) A Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) in accordance with PES PWS paragraph 4.2.1;

ii) A comprehensive discussion of how the offeror intends to implement and ensure personnel compliance with SE processes in accordance with PES PWS paragraph 4.2 by the time the offeror would become responsible for PES;

iii) A comprehensive discussion of how the offeror intends to qualify any new parts and accomplish a parts fit and function check for the 1,579 parts of PES PWS paragraph 4.2.6.3 by the time the offeror would become responsible for PES;

iv) A comprehensive discussion of how the offeror intends to comply with the reverse engineering and technical data package requirements of PES PWS paragraph 4.3 and its subparagraphs;

v) Information about certification/approval (if any) by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) of the Earned Value Management System (EVMS) that the contractor intends to use to facilitate performance of this contract, or a comprehensive discussion of how the offeror intends to reach compliance with the EVMS standards. If the offeror has an EVMS certified as compliant by DCMA, or has an Advance Agreement, submitting a copy of the certification/Advance Agreement is sufficient;

vi) An Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) for MM Ramp-up, PES Ramp-up, OH Qualification, PES, and OH Low-rate and Full-rate efforts in accordance with PES PWS paragraph 4.1.1, MM PWS paragraph 4.1.1, and OH PWS paragraph 4.1.1. The IMS shall correlate with the CWBS;

vii) A listing of the lower level objective criteria for each of the key exit criteria elements for MM Ramp-up, PES Ramp-up, and OH Qualification, in accordance with PES PWS paragraph 4.1.5, MM PWS paragraph 4.1.5, and OH PWS paragraph 4.1.7; and ,

viii) A level 3 Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) for PES, MM, and OH segments (fill out the matrix at Attachment 25) and CWBS dictionary. The CWBS shall correlate with the IMS.

Subfactor 2 - Material Management (MM). The technical proposal shall include:

i) A comprehensive discussion of how the offeror intends to establish a high speed parts pipeline to receive parts orders worldwide, and to purchase, fabricate, alter, finish, repair, overhaul, store, handle, pack, and ship quality parts to Halvorsen users worldwide sufficiently to meet field tempo and performance requirements, in accordance with MM PWS paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3;

ii) A comprehensive discussion of how the offeror intends to date/time stamp their parts ordering information in accordance with MM PWS paragraph 4.3.1 such that the Government can verify the information is correct; and,

iii) A comprehensive discussion of how the offeror intends to establish supply points, and establish a technical support team to respond to technical requests from the Halvorsen users and contractor personnel in accordance with the MM PWS paragraphs 4.3.1 and 4.3.2.

Subfactor 3 - Overhaul Management (OH). The technical proposal shall include:

i) A comprehensive discussion of what the offeror intends to provide as adequate facilities and layout in accordance with OH PWS paragraph 4.1.7; as a minimum, include equipment, facilities square footage, placement of workstations, workflow processes, work area for onload/offload of oversized transport vehicles, work area for inspection, work area for wash rack, work area for test, warehousing of parts, and parts flow throughout the plant;

ii) A comprehensive discussion of how the offeror intends to establish types 1, 2, and 3 time standards for Halvorsen overhaul, and how the offeror intends to gain efficiencies on the overhaul line to reduce costs, in accordance with OH PWS paragraph 4.1.2.4; and,

iii) A copy of the offeror’s ISO 9001:2008 certification or comprehensive discussion of how the offeror intends to complete certification not later than contract award. Offerors shall provide either a copy of the certification or a comprehensive discussion, not both.

Subfactor 4 - Small Business Utilization Plan. The offeror shall submit Small Business Utilization Plan for itself and any joint venture member, as well as each proposed critical subcontractor. The Small Business Utilization Plan is required from all offerors, including small businesses and companies with Master, Individual, commercial subcontracting plans and/or comprehensive subcontracting plans. The offeror/joint venture member and each proposed critical subcontractor shall include only the first tier of subcontractors for this effort. Offerors are advised that the Small Business Utilization Plan is not the same as the Small Business Subcontracting Plan required by FAR 52.219-9. Large business offerors shall not utilize the Small Business Subcontracting Plan in the place of the Small Business Utilization Plan. In the performance of this resultant contract, identify the following:

i) The extent of participation of proposed small businesses when subcontracting possibilities exist;

and,

ii) The description of the subcontracted work these firms are to perform, the company names/CAGE code and contact information of the small businesses planned for use in the performance of this resultant contract, and the associated goals expressed in terms of percentages of the total planned subcontracting dollars.

iii) If limited or no subcontracting possibilities exist for these socio-economic entities adequate rationale for such shall be provided. Offerors are cautioned against only acknowledging a goal is not met, if applicable. Adequate rationale includes specific reasons why a goal is unmet and any actions being taken to increase in any unmet goals. Additionally, if the offeror/joint venture member or critical subcontractor is a small business concern, it should include the work it will be performing when calculating the goals for Small Business Utilization Plan.

D. Volume III - Past Performance Factor:

The offeror shall submit Past Performance Information for itself and any joint venture members, and each proposed critical subcontractor in accordance with the format contained in the FACTS Sheet (see RFP Attachment 32) and the following paragraphs. A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor, teaming contractor) other than the offeror itself that will perform at least 20 percent or more of the total proposed effort based on the total program price for any one of the following four (4) areas:

Program Engineering Support, Material Management (Infrastructure), Material Management (Parts), or Overhaul. The percentage of work performed is based on the Offeror’s total (including options) proposed dollar value excluding materials. The 20% or more measure applies for any 365 day period as identified in Schedule B of the solicitation.

(1) The requested past performance information shall be provided in a separate section (i.e., 3-ring binder) labeled "Volume III - Past Performance Information." A summary page shall be provided describing the role of the offeror, each joint venture member, and each critical subcontractor (nature of work, criticality of work, and percentage of overall work.). Each offeror/joint venture member shall complete a separate FACTS Sheet for each active or completed contract (preferably with at least one year of performance history) in the past five (5) years that the offeror/joint venture member considers relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed effort. If the total number of such contracts exceeds four (4), the offeror/joint venture member shall address the four (4) most recent and relevant contracts. For each critical subcontractor included in the offeror's proposal, a FACTS Sheet for four (4) of their most recent and relevant contracts shall also be included.

Note: If the contract you are submitting is an ordering type contractual vehicle (e.g., an Indefinite Delivery “D” type contract per FAR 16.5), only after issuance of a delivery/task order does performance occur. Given this, an individual order (or orders) under the basic ordering contract shall be submitted in lieu of just the basic ordering contract itself. Each submitted order shall be considered a separate effort unless information is provided indicating follow-on or series of orders for continued performance of the same scope and such can be verified by the user/customer. In this event, such submitted multiple orders shall be considered as a single effort for evaluation purposes.

For all submittals, the performance on efforts identified shall be restricted to those completed or ongoing during the past five (5) years from the issuance date of this RFP. The offeror's/joint venture members’ or critical subcontractors’ past performance information may include data on efforts performed by other divisions or corporate management, if such resources will be used in the performance of the proposed effort. Contracts listed may include those with the Federal Government, state and local governments or their agencies, and commercial customers. Offerors/joint venture members or critical subcontractors that are newly formed entities (in existence less than five (5) years from the issuance date of this solicitation) who either have no prior contracts or do not possess relevant corporate past performance, but have key personnel with relevant past performance while employed by another company, may demonstrate the performance of such key personnel by submitting FACTS Sheets for four (4) of their most recent and relevant contracts under which such key personnel performed the same role currently being proposed on the extant acquisition and this performance occurred during the past five (5) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. Note, however, that the quality of the key personnel’s performance under the submitted contract must be able to be verified by the Past Performance Evaluation Team in order to be considered in the assessment of confidence. Any such key personnel must already be employed by the offeror/joint venture member, or in the case of a critical subcontractor, must already be employed by the critical subcontractor. In addition to the FACTS Sheets for each entity as required above, the offeror must submit a consent letter executed by each of its proposed critical subcontractors authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the prime contractor to allow the prime contractor an opportunity to respond. A sample Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Form is attached as RFP Attachment 31. The consent form should be completed by the critical subcontractors identified in the offeror’s proposal. The completed consent forms should be submitted as part of the offeror’s Past Performance Volume.

On the four (4) contracts submitted in Volume III, Past Performance Information, include relevant information in the FACTS Sheet concerning the offeror’s/joint venture members’ (and critical subcontractors’, if applicable) compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and/or FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, if these clauses are or were contained in the contract . Please note that FAR 52.219-8 does apply to ALL businesses, whereas FAR 52.219-9 only applies to a large business. When subcontracting possibilities existed on the contracts submitted by the offeror/joint venture member and critical subcontractor, address whether or not the offeror/joint venture member and critical subcontractor awarded subcontracts to small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUB Zone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance. If none of the submitted contracts included these clauses, whenever subcontracting possibilities existed in the performance of these contracts, address whether or not it was the offeror/joint venture member; and critical subcontractors’ policy to utilize small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance.

(2) The FACTS Sheet responses shall clearly correlate past performance with the requirements of this RFP. Describe the relevance of the effort to the work proposed. The answering space on the FACTS Sheet may be expanded so that the filled-in FACTS Sheet for each relevant contract covers no more than both sides of three (3) 8 ½ x 11 inch pages. (See paragraph L of the FACTS Sheet.) Provide the most current information for the Points of Contact (POCs) identified on the FACTS Sheets.

(3) If problems were encountered during the performance of the identified contracts, provide evidence of the ability to isolate the root causes of problems and include in the FACTS Sheet a description of programs or actions taken to resolve those causes. Problems not addressed in the FACTS Sheet but found by the Government during the evaluation of the information in this volume will be assumed to still exist.

Note: In the case of Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), if your input is provided and the rationale/circumstances have not changed, DO NOT repeat it here.

(4) The Past/Present Performance Questionnaire (see RFP Attachment 33) will be one means used by the Government to obtain past/present performance information. The Government reserves the right to change, alter, and/or supplement the questionnaire without further notice to the offeror(s). The offeror shall send out - and track the completion of - the Past/Present Performance Questionnaires to each of the offeror’s/joint venture members’ points of contact identified on the FACTS Sheets. The responsibility to send out and track the completion of the Past/Present Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror – i.e., it shall not be delegated to any other entity. The Transmittal Letter (See RFP Attachment **whatever number is next**) shall be used by the offeror in sending out the Past/Present Performance Questionnaires. The offeror shall exert its best efforts to ensure that at least two POCs per relevant contract submit a completed Past/Present Performance Questionnaire directly to the Government not later than the date established in this RFP. Each of the offeror’s POCs may submit its completed Past/Present Performance Questionnaire either electronically, by fax or by mail. If sending electronically, follow the procedures outlined in paragraph (b) Communications above, and e-mail to Alicia.Vogel@robins.af.mil or Brandi.Matlock@robins.af.mil. If mailing, the POCs may return the completed questionnaire via mail to:

AFLCMC/WNKBBA

Attn: Alicia Vogel or Brandi Matlock 235 Byron St., Suite 19A Robins AFB GA 31098-1813

If mailing, the outside envelope must be marked as follows:

NOTE: TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY

The completed questionnaires should be contained in a second envelope marked with the mailing address and the following legend:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

POCs may send the completed questionnaires via telefax numbers to (478) 222-1854. Please have your POCs call Alicia Vogel, (478) 222-1896, or Brandi Matlock, (478) 926-2241, before telefaxing their response.

Once the Past/Present Performance Questionnaires are completed by your POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered source selection sensitive and shall not be released to the offeror. Therefore, any exchange/contact between the offeror/joint venture member and its own POC’s in regards to comments made on the questionnaire is not permitted. Questionnaires shall be sent to and best efforts made to ensure completion and submission directly back to the Government from at least two of the following:

(a) Procuring Contracting Officer/Contract Negotiator or equivalent

(b) Program/Project Manager or equivalent

(c) Administrative Contracting Officer/Administrator or equivalent

(d) Other (As specified in your FACTS Sheet)

(5) In the event that commercial contracts are presented as past performance sources of information, a client authorization letter shall be issued to those commercial POCs requesting/authorizing them to verbally complete a Past Performance Questionnaire when contacted via telephone by the Government. A sample client authorization letter is attached to this RFP (see RFP Attachment 30). The offeror is required to send the client authorization letter(s) with the Past Performance Questionnaire(s) to each POC on commercial contracts. A separate copy of client authorization letter(s) for each commercial contract shall be included in the offeror’s Past Performance submission to indicate the commercial client has been notified of the requested/authorized interview.

(6) RFP Attachment 32, FACTS Sheet, must include the following legend at the top and bottom of the page:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

E. Volume IV, Cost/Price Factor

The Cost/Price volume will consist of completion of Labor Rates and Material Add-on Factor Table, Attachment 26 of the RFP as well as the completed Schedule B proposed prices. Proposed prices shall be rounded to no more than two (2) decimal points.

i. General Instructions: These instructions are to assist Offerors in submitting cost/price information that is required to evaluate the unit prices proposed and to calculate the Total

Evaluated Price. Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the proposal.

ii. Labor Categories and Material Add-on Factor Table, Attachment 26: In addition to completing the RFP’s Schedule, each Offeror shall also submit prices in accordance with the Labor Categories and Material Add-on Factor Table contained in the RFP at Attachment 26, which will be posted along with the RFP on FedBizOps. Each Offeror should download the spreadsheet and complete for submission in response to the RFP. Each Offeror shall submit the Cost/Price Volume in hard copy (scanned PDF files not acceptable) and in electronic (Microsoft Excel) format. Do not limit/protect the files to “read only” format. The paper and electronic copies shall be identical in all respects. Electronics submittals shall comply with the following:

Submittal via CD:

1. Shall be submitted on a CD-R or DVD-R only (write once/read only) and “closed” so that no further writes can be made to the media. CD-R/W or DVD-R/W media types are not acceptable.

2. Media must be virus scanned by the Offeror before media is provided to the Government.

3. Data files/CD-Rs should be accessible by a computer running MS Office 2000, Office XP or MS Windows World Office 2003 (or compatible).

4. Data files should be .xls file format (MS Windows Excel Office 2003 or earlier)

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION BASIS FOR AWARD

1. Basis for Contract Award.

A. This acquisition will utilize the Tradeoff source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.3 as supplemented by the DoD Source Selection Procedures referenced in DFARS 215.3 and the AFFARS Mandatory Procedures 5315.3 to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. The Government intends to award a contract as a result of this solicitation. A decision on the technical acceptability of each offeror’s proposal will be made. For those offerors who are determined to be technically acceptable, tradeoffs will be made between past performance and cost/price. Past performance is approximately equal to cost/price. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the tradeoff process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the selection process. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, technical requirements, and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation described in paragraph B below.

B. The Government intends to award without discussions, but reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary. Any discussions will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. If the Contracting Officer determines the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer, with the concurrence of the Source Selection Authority, may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

C. The total compensation plan and supporting information will be evaluated per FAR 52.222-46 to assure it reflects a sound management approach and understanding of the contract requirements. Failure by the offeror/populated joint venture/each joint venture member in an unpopulated joint venture to submit this total compensation plan will result in the offeror being considered as failing to meet the RFP terms and conditions.

2. Proposal Evaluation. The evaluation process will be accomplished as follows:

A. Technical Factor.

Each offeror’s technical proposal shall be evaluated based on the subfactors below to determine if the offeror provides a sound, compliant approach that meets the requirements of the OA, PES, MM, and OH PWSs, and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The technical proposal must address each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail.

For each subfactor, the offeror should identify risks, if any; associated with the proposed approach and actions the offeror will take to mitigate the identified risks. If no risks/mitigations are identified in the offeror’s proposal, the Government will assume that the offeror does not consider there to be any risk associated with their proposed approach.

Subfactor 1: Systems Engineering (SE). This subfactor is met when the offeror’s proposal demonstrates:

i) A Systems Engineering Plan (SEP) that contains all the mandatory elements of PES PWS paragraphs 4.2.1 and ensures that a sound systems engineering process will be executed;

ii) The offeror’s approach to effectively implement and ensure personnel compliance with SE processes of PES PWS paragraph 4.2 by the time the contractor would become responsible for

PES.

iii) The offeror’s approach to effectively qualify any new parts and accomplish a parts fit and function check of the 1,579 parts of PES PWS paragraph 4.2.6.3 by the time the offeror would become responsible for PES;

iv) The offeror’s approach to effectively comply with the reverse engineering and technical data package requirements of PES PWS paragraph 4.3 and its subparagraphs by the time the offeror would become responsible for PES;

v) DCMA certification/approval (if any) of the offeror’s EVMS, or a viable approach to achieving DCMA certification/approval of EVMS;

vi) A comprehensive Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) that ensures the offeror‘s ability to achieve MM Ramp-up, PES Ramp-up, OH Qualification, PES, and OH Low-rate and Full-rate efforts (in accordance with PES PWS paragraph 4.1.1, MM PWS paragraph 4.1.1, and OH PWS paragraph 4.1.1) that correlates to the Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) ;

vii) A comprehensive listing of the lower level objective criteria for each of the key exit criteria elements for MM Ramp-up, PES ramp-up, OH Qualification, PES, and OH Low-rate and Full-rate efforts in accordance with PES PWS paragraph 4.1.5, MM PWS paragraph 4.1.5, and OH PWS paragraph 4.1.7; and,

viii) A level 3 Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) that provides a thorough explanation of tasks and resources (i.e., labor hours, labor categories and material requirements narratives) that ensures the offeror’s ability to achieve PES, MM, and OH segments that correlates to the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) (fill out the matrix at attachment 25).

Subfactor 2: Material Management (MM). This subfactor is met when the offeror’s proposal demonstrates:

i) The offeror’s approach to effectively establish a high speed parts pipeline to receive parts orders worldwide, and to purchase, fabricate, alter, finish, repair, overhaul, store, handle, pack, and ship quality parts to Halvorsen users worldwide, including but not limited to, what the offeror intends to provide in the way of facilities, equipment, and personnel, how the offeror intends to establish a shelf-life program and quality assurance program for the parts, and how the offeror intends to forecast pipeline flow requirements and predict parts stock levels, required to meet tempo and performance requirements, in accordance with MM PWS paragraphs 4.2 and 4.3;

ii) The offeror’s process to effectively date/time stamp their parts ordering information in accordance with MM PWS paragraph 4.3.1 such that the Government can verify the information is not corrupt from change; and,

iii) The offeror’s approach to effectively establish supply points to ensure timely deliveries to satisfy the performance requirements, and establish a technical support team to respond in a timely manner to technical requests from the Halvorsen users and contractor personnel in accordance with the MM PWS paragraphs 4.3.1 and 4.3.2.

Subfactor 3: Overhaul Management. This subfactor is met when the offeror’s proposal demonstrates:

i) The offeror’s approach to effectively provide adequate facilities and layout in accordance with OH PWS paragraph 4.1.7; as a minimum, include equipment, facilities square footage, placement of workstations, workflow processes, work area for on-load/off-load of oversized transport vehicles, work area for inspection, work area for wash rack, work area for test, warehousing of parts, and parts flow throughout the plant;

ii) The offeror’s approach to effectively develop types 1, 2, and 3 time standards for Halvorsen overhaul, and the offeror’s ability to effectively gain efficiencies on the overhaul line to reduce costs, in accordance with OH PWS paragraph 4.1.2.4; and,

iii) ISO 9001:2008 certification or a viable approach to achieving ISO certification of the offeror’s quality program not later than contract award.

Subfactor 4: Small Business Utilization Plan. This subfactor is met when the offeror’s proposal adequately provides:

i) A description of the extent of participation of proposed small businesses when subcontracting possibilities exist; and

ii) A description of the subcontracted work to be performed by small businesses, the company names/CAGE codes and contact information of the small planned for use in the performance of this resultant contract, and the associated goals expressed in terms of percentages of the total contract value. Additionally, if the offeror/joint venture member or critical subcontractor is a small business concern, it should include the work it will be performing when calculating the goals for Small Business Utilization Plan.

iii) The associated goals in paragraph ii above in the offeror’s Small Business Utilization Plan will be evaluated against the FY13 DoD Small Business Subcontracting goals:

Small Business Category FY13 DoD Small Business Subcontracting Goals

Small Business 36.7%

iv) If limited or no subcontracting possibilities exist for these socio-economic entities adequate rationale for such shall be provided. Offerors are cautioned against only acknowledging a goal is not met, if applicable. Adequate rationale includes specific reasons why a goal is unmet and any actions being taken to increase any unmet goals.

Technical Rating: The technical rating reflects the evaluation of the acceptability of the offeror’s technical solution for meeting the Government’s requirement. The technical risk associated with the offeror’s proposed technical approach will also be considered as part of the technical acceptability decision.

Technical risk, which is manifested by the identification of weaknesses, assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach for the requirements of the solicitation may cause disruption of schedule, increased costs, degraded performance, the need for increased government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The evaluation shall address the Source Selection Team’s identification of any weaknesses as well as the offeror’s identified risks and proposed mitigation (if applicable) and document why that is or is not acceptable. The offeror’s proposal shall be evaluated to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined below. One technical rating will be assigned to each technical subfactor. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every subfactor.

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings:

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

B. Past Performance Factor. The past performance assessment will assess the Government’s confidence in the offerors’/joint venture members’ ability (which includes, if applicable, the extent of its critical subcontractors’ involvement) to successfully accomplish the proposed effort based on the offeror’s demonstrated present and past work record. A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor, teaming contractor) other than the offeror itself that will perform at least 20 percent or more of the total proposed effort based on the total program price for any one of the following four (4) areas: Program engineering Support, Material Management (Infrastructure), Material Management (Parts), and Overhaul.

The percentage of work performed is based on the Offeror’s total (including options) proposed dollar value excluding materials. The 20% or more measure applies for any 365 day period as identified in Schedule B of the solicitation.

The Government will evaluate the offeror’s/joint venture members’ and, if applicable, critical subcontractors’ demonstrated record of contract compliance in supplying products and services that meet users’ needs, including cost and schedule. The recency and relevancy of the information, the source of the information, context of the data and general trends in the contractor’s performance will be considered. For purposes of this evaluation, recency is defined as active or completed efforts performed within the past five (5) years from the issuance date of this solicitation. The Government will perform an independent determination of relevancy of the data provided or obtained. A relevancy determination will be made for each of the four (4) submitted contracts for each offeror/joint venture member and critical subcontractor. The Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy. The following relevancy criteria apply:

VERY RELEVANT: Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. The effort must have included all of the following:

a. Accomplishing overhaul of large complex self-propelled equipment which are hydraulic intensive; and

b. Performing Performance Based Logistics (PBL) Level 1;** and

c. Experience in reverse engineering at a system or platform level;***

d. Performing worldwide supply chain management functions for large, complex systems, and three of the remaining five requirements below:

e. Selecting and managing multiple (more than 20) subcontractors. *

f. Implementing engineering modifications for large, complex, hydraulic intensive equipment.

g. Implementing systems engineering.

h. Developing and implementing reduction of total ownership cost (RTOC) plan.

i. Complying with Operational Safety, Suitability, and Effectiveness (OSS&E) policies and procedures.

RELEVANT: Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. The effort must have included all of the following:

a. Accomplishing overhaul of large, complex, self-propelled equipment which are hydraulic intensive; and

b. Performing Performance Based Logistics (PBL) Level 1;** and

c. Experience in reverse engineering at a system or platform level;***; and, four of the remaining six requirements below:

d. Performing supply chain management functions.

e. Selecting and managing limited (20 or less) subcontractors.*

f. Implementing engineering modifications for large, complex, self-propelled equipment.

g. Implementing systems engineering.

h. Implementing cost reduction efforts.

i. Complying with OSS&E policies and procedures.

SOMEWHAT RELEVANT: Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. The effort must have included all of the following:

a. Overhauling large complex equipment; and

b. Demonstrate the principles of Performance Based Logistics (PBL) Level 1;** and, one of the remaining two requirements below:

c. Performing some supply chain management functions.

d. Provide basic engineering services to maintain hydraulic intensive equipment.

NOT RELEVANT: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

NOTE: Large complex is defined as 15,000 lbs curb weight minimum, 15 feet in length minimum, 2,000 parts minimum, heat-treated metal structures, and hydraulically actuated lift mechanism.

NOTE: Magnitude of effort and complexities includes not only the technical features and characteristics identified, but also the logistical and programmatic considerations (including but not limited to: quantity produced, length of effort, complexity of data deliverables, etc. When assigning a relevancy rating to a contract effort, the Government will consider the technical scope and magnitude of work and complexities, and the program/logistical scope and magnitude of work and complexities as separate aspects. If both these aspects are not reflected in the submitted contract effort, the overall relevancy rating will be affected.

For example, if a submitted contract effort meets essentially the same technical scope and magnitude of work and complexities but involves only some of the program/logistical magnitude of work and complexities, a lesser relevancy rating will be assigned (see the relevancy definitions relative to the underlined terms).

*NOTE: In those instances whereby the relevancy criteria includes subcontractors, the definition of subcontractor as stated in FAR 3.1001 applies as follows: “Subcontractor” means any supplier, distributor, vendor or firm that furnished supplies or services to or for a prime contractor or another subcontractor.

**NOTE: Refer to overarching PWS for PBL Level 1 definition.

***NOTE: Definition for reverse engineering at a system or platform level is as follows: "5,000 lbs curb weight, 500 minimum parts, with hydraulically actuated lift mechanism."

In assessing present and past performance, the Government will employ several approaches, including, but not limited to:

(i). The Past Performance Team evaluation is not limited to review of the information provided in the offeror’s Past Performance volume. Past Performance information may be obtained from the Government’s Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) and the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS).