DRAFT Sections L and M_Pricing Cost language included.pdf

L-900. INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS –INITIAL SOURCE SELECTION, CAT-F SYSTEM DESIGN

I. Introduction and Overview This acquisition will be a source selection comprised of an Initial Source Selection that will yield contracts to two

(2) offerors with a Final Downselect to at least one (1) contractor following Critical Design Review (CDR). The Initial Source Selection will result in the award for CAT-F System Design. In the Initial Source Selection, the Government will conduct a full and open competition to narrow the competitive field down to no more than two (2) contractors that will execute CAT-F System Design and proceed to the Final Downselect. The Initial Source Selection instructions and evaluation criteria can be found in Section L-900, Instructions to Offerors - Initial Source Selection, CAT-F System Design and Section M-900, Evaluation Basis for Award - Initial Source Selection, CAT-F System Design. The Contracts will contain options for the execution of the program beyond the basic contract. The Final Downselect source selection will determine which contractor’s Option I may be exercised. It is the Government's intent to exercise the Option with one contractor, however, the Government is reserving the right to exercise the Option with both contractors. The determination of whether or not to exercise options will be based on evaluation criteria spelled out in the Section L-901, Instructions to Offerors, Final Downselect, CAT-F Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD), Production and Section M-901, Evaluation Basis for Award- Final Downselect, CAT-F Engineering and Manufacturing Development, Production. The successful offeror will complete EMD and may proceed to later stages of the program (Production and Sustainment). After the down select determination is made, the government does not plan to exercise any additional contract options for the unsuccessful offeror.

II. Proposal Format

A. General: The following instructions cover the preparation and submittal of the offeror’s proposal for this solicitation. Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined not eligible for award. If a joint venture arrangement exists for this acquisition, the offeror shall provide a copy of the joint venture agreement that is signed and dated by all joint venture members as part of the proposal submission. Offerors shall submit only one proposal for the CAT-F as the Government will review only one proposal per offeror. Proposals must be received by AFLCMC/ROKB, Attention: Oya Harrison, Contracting Officer, and Alexis Davis, Buyer/Contract Specialist, no later than the date and time specified in Block 9 on the face page of the RFP.

B. Communications: Exchanges of source selection information after submission of the initial proposal packages between the 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. In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted emails, offerors may use any email configured that is S/MIME compatible and configured to support encryption. Non-encrypted proposals will not be accepted. 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). Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via DoD SAFE). When submitting source selection information via email, file suppression utilities, to include but not limited to zip files, will not be accepted.

The test encrypted message process is as follows:

1. The offeror shall send a digitally signed “test” e-mail message containing no proprietary or source selection information to oya.harrison.1@us.af.mil and alexis.davis.13@us.af.mil. Please clearly identify the email as a “Test email for Common Armament Tester for Fighter (CAT-F) RFP FA8533-25-R-0002”.

2. The PCO will open the test e-mail and add (or update) the sender’s e-mail address (and corresponding encryption certificate) to their Outlook “Contacts List”.

3. The PCO will send a digitally signed reply to the sender’s e-mail address.

mailto:oya.harrison.1@us.af.mil mailto:alexis.davis.13@us.af.mil

4. The sender must open the PCO’s digitally signed reply and add (or update) the PCO’s e-mail address in their “Contacts List” (For Outlook users - right-click the name in the “From” box, and then click” Add to Contacts” on the shortcut menu. Shortcut menu: a menu that shows a list of commands relevant to a particular item. To display a shortcut menu, right-click an item or press shift + F10. If you already have a contact entry for this person, select “Update New Information” from this contact to the existing one).

5. When you are ready to send an encrypted email, ensure encryption is selected and include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line of the email.

If an offeror’s computer system cannot support encryption technology, DoD Safe at https://safe.apps.mil is the preferred alternative method of electronic submissions. The offeror should send an unencrypted email, including “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line, requesting a Drop Link for transmission purposes. When submitting source selection information via email (to include DoD SAFE), file suppression utilities, to include but not limited to .zip files, will not be accepted.

NOTE: When sending files via encrypted email, please note there is a size limit of 20MB.

NOTE: When sending files via DoD SAFE, please note there is a size limit of 8GB, as well as a 25 files number limit. Offerors shall advise the PCO and buyer of any submissions that will be outside of these limitations so that multiple DoD SAFE drop-off request links can be sent. A formal notice must be sent to the PCO and buyer for a drop off link to be sent. Drop off request/links sent to companies by the Government are only valid for 14 days.

Additionally, drop off request/links are only good for one submittal per use.

If the offeror chooses not to utilize encrypted email or DoD Safe, the offeror shall send the PCO correspondence at the time that it submits the proposal stating that it accepts the risk of sending and receiving unencrypted electronic mail.

III. Volume Organization

A. General: Proposals shall be submitted to the Government in separate volumes as set forth below:

PAGE NUMBER

VOLUME LIMITS OF COPIES* DESCRIPTION

I N/A 1 Completed RFP (Including RFP Attachments, Cross

Reference Matrix (CRM), and copy of Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable))

II 50 1 Written Technical Proposal (Statement of Work (SOW) and Integrated Master Schedule are Attachments and are not counted towards the 50 page limit) III 10 1 Small Business Participation IV N/A 1 Cost/Price Proposal

*All proposal information shall be submitted in electronic form via encrypted email or DoD SAFE. Media must be virus scanned by the offeror prior to submitting to the Government.

In addition to the page limitations set forth above, proposal volumes shall comply with the following format:

1. Each volume shall be marked with the RFP number FA8533-25-R-0002 and the offeror’s name and address, and the number of the Volume, i.e. I, II, III, etc.) Proposals shall be in the English language and all monies shall be proposed in United States dollars.

https://safe.apps.mil/

2. Print shall be no smaller than a font size of 12. Paper size shall be 8 1/2” X 11,” excluding any charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, and/or supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc. Charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, and/or supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc. shall not be greater than 11” x 17.” Margins shall be no smaller than 1 inch and each page within a volume shall be numbered consecutively. Elaborate formats or color presentations are not desired or required. In order to verify the font size and margins utilized, the offeror shall provide an electronic copy of the technical proposal in Word format.

3. The page limitation for Volume II, Written Technical Proposal is 50 pages, this does not include the SOW or IMS, as they will be attachments to the Written Technical Proposal. The page limitation for Volume III, Small Business Participation, is 10 pages. The page limitations include any executive summaries, company introductions, cover letters, charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc., but excludes any cover page(s), table of contents, list of acronyms (if utilized), or attachments as specifically identified in this provision.

Offerors are cautioned that any pages that exceed the page limitations shall not be read but shall be removed and retained in the contract file without being considered in the evaluation.

4. Each page containing proprietary information should be so marked.

5. Each page should contain the following legend at the bottom of each sheet:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION--SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104

CUI

B. Volume I, Completed RFP-

1. General: Volume I, Completed RFP shall consist of the completed and signed RFP, to include any amendments issued, with a cover letter delineating any exceptions taken to the RFP terms and conditions with accompanying rationale. The Government reserves the right to independently identify exceptions taken to the terms and conditions of the RFP outside of those identified in the offeror’s cover letter. However, offerors are cautioned that any noncompliance with the terms and conditions of the RFP may cause their proposal to be determined not eligible for award. 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.

2. Cross Reference Matrix: The offeror shall fill out the cross-reference matrix at RFP Attachment 1 indicating where in its proposal the information can be found as it relates to the RFP. The cross reference matrix will be utilized as a tool to show critical interrelationships and dependencies among the technical requirements document (Statement of Objectives (SOO), System Requirements Document (SRD), the Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), Section L-900 (Instructions to Offerors), and Section M-900 (Evaluation Basis for Award). The cross-reference matrix will help an offeror ensure it has 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 the matrix. Additionally, Section M-900 references in the matrix are for informational purposes only, and the Government shall be obligated to evaluate proposals solely in conformance with Section M-900 of the solicitation.

3. Small Business Subcontracting Plan: The small business subcontracting plan required by FAR 52.219-9, as supplemented by the DFARS and DAFFARS, shall be submitted by large business offerors. The plan shall set forth the offeror’s plan for subcontracting with small businesses to the maximum extent practicable, in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 as supplemented by the DFARS and DAFFARS. The small business subcontracting plan shall include the information required by FAR 19.7, DFARS 219.7, DAFFARS 5319.7, and all associated clauses within this RFP. NOTE: The small business subcontracting plan is required by large business offerors only.

4. Supplier Performance Risk System: If available, offerors shall have a current assessment in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) as required by DFARS 252.204-7019 and DFARS 252.204-7020. An assessment date is considered current within the last three years of this solicitation issuance. The Government will consider the offeror’s risk assessment for item, price, and supplier risk, as applicable. Offerors are able to access their risk assessments by following the access instructions in the SPRS users guide available at https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/reference.htm.)

C. Volume II, Written Technical Proposal

1. General: The written technical proposal shall be clear, concise, and include all the information required by this provision in sufficient detail for effective evaluation. 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 these requirements. Offerors shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of their capabilities, work processes, facilities, and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s technical proposal.

2. Format and Specific Content: The following information shall be provided in the written technical proposal and will be evaluated to assess the proposed technical approach and associated technical risk in accordance with Section M-900, Evaluation Basis for Award. The written technical proposal shall address each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail to describe the offeror’s proposed approach to performing the requirements set forth in the SOO and SRD. 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, it indicates the offeror does not consider there to be any risk associated with their proposed approach. The Government reserves the right to independently identify risks with the proposed approach outside of those risks identified by the offerors themselves.

In order to assist with streamlining the evaluation, offerors shall address only one subfactor per section in the technical proposal, avoid including subfactor discussions in multiple sections, and use the same headings/subfactor numbers/PD/paragraph numbers/etc. as used in this paragraph.

Subfactor I: Systems Engineering

The offeror’s written technical proposal shall provide detailed narrative with supporting documentation, such as (but not limited to) charts, diagrams, figures, graphs, and supporting illustrations to demonstrate that the offeror’s technical approach will meet the Performance Specification and Statement of Objectives requirements as follows:

• Technical Data Risk Mitigation Plan. The offeror’s written technical proposal shall provide a risk mitigation plan that addresses the lack of existing technical data needed to generate the required Alternate Mission Equipment (AME) test program sets (TPS) found in the SRD, Section 1.2, to include all Subsection.

• Integrated Master Schedule with Rationale: The offeror shall submit a detailed preliminary Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) for Phase I (or Handheld Phase) and Engineering Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase per the SRD Section 1. The proposed IMS shall communicate how the contractor shall meet the Phase 1 CDR within 10 months after contract award. The offeror shall identify and define those assumptions used when constructing the IMS. The proposed IMS shall include the start date, duration, dependencies, and the end date for schedule activities, events, and milestones. Additionally, the proposed IMS shall identify the critical path for Phase I EMD and provide a schedule rationale narrative identifying, explaining, and providing mitigation plans for moderate and high-risk activities and events along the critical path. The proposed IMS shall include top level schedule activities, events and milestones for Phases II (Intermediate-Level Tester Phase) and III (Production Phase) with the duration of days from exercise of contract option to CDR and Production Readiness Review (PRR) IAW SOO. The proposed IMS is for all 3 phases and shall not exceed 300 lines overall length, shall be depicted in Gantt format and provided in Microsoft Project 2010 format. The IMS phases do not necessarily align with the contract basic year and option years.

Subfactor II: Statement of Work The offeror’s written technical proposal shall provide detailed Statement of Work (SOW) to demonstrate that the offeror’s technical approach will meet the provided SOO.

https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/reference.htm

Subfactor III: MOSA Utilization The offeror’s written technical proposal shall provide detailed narrative with supporting documentation, such as (but not limited to) drawings, charts, diagrams, graphs, and supporting illustrations to demonstrate that the offeror’s technical approach will meet the Modular Open Systems Architecture (MOSA) requirements. At a minimum, the Offeror shall address the following:

• Plans/approaches for integrating the systems both internally and with external systems.

• The means for ensuring conformance to open standards and profiles throughout the development process,

• A description of how the technical approach ensures having access to mature as well as the latest technologies by establishing a robust, modular, and evolving architecture based on open standards that enhances interoperability and the ability to integrate new capabilities without redesign of entire systems or large portions thereof.

• A description how risks associated with reliance on a single source of supply over the life of the system will be mitigated; to include but not be limited to, technology obsolescence and dependence on proprietary or vendor unique technology.

• A description of the strategy for maintaining the currency of technology, e.g., through COTS or reusable NDI insertion, technology refresh strategies, and other appropriate means to reduce the development cycle time and total life-cycle cost

• Identification of processes for:

Isolating functionality through the use of modular design Evaluating modular open system baseline standards, defining and updating profiles, and evaluating and justifying new or vendor-unique profiles Validating implementation conformance to selected profiles Managing application conformance to selected profiles Training in use of profiles

Subfactor IV: Data Rights The offeror’s written technical proposal shall provide detailed narrative with supporting documentation, such as (but not limited to) drawings, charts, diagrams, graphs, and supporting illustrations to demonstrate that the offeror’s technical approach will meet the data rights requirements as follows:

• Data Rights Plan. The Offeror shall propose the extent to which the rights in technical data (TD), computer software (CS), computer software documentation (CSD), and inventions/patents offered to the Government ensure unimpeded, innovative, and cost effective production, operation, maintenance, and upgrade of the CAT-F throughout its life cycle; allow for open and competitive procurement of CAT-F enhancements; and permit the transfer of the CAT-F non-proprietary object code and source code to other contractors for use on other systems or platforms. The Offeror shall also propose the TD, CSD, and CS reuse portability for use on other systems or platforms.

• Data Availability Plan. The Offeror shall describe its plan for making design and interface information available as soon as possible after it is defined or established. The Offeror shall establish and maintain a process that will provide “early and often” design disclosure directly to the Government or to third-party contractors via Government established access to in-process design documentation and computer software. Access and the ability to download this information shall be supported using industry standards. The information products available in the repository shall be easily discovered and accessed. The exchange of information shall be structured so as to protect the Offeror’s and third-party developers’ proprietary rights in the information. The Offeror shall address how it intends to resolve any comments from the Government and third-party contractors. The Offeror shall describe how it intends to provide all non-proprietary licenses, source code, drawings, repair and engineering documentation to the Government and third-party contractors at specified key events or at defined intervals.

D. Volume III, Small Business Participation

1. General: The Small Business Participation proposal 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 (see definition in paragraph L.II.D.1 above) shall include only the first tier of subcontractors for this effort. Offerors are advised that the Small Business

Participation proposal 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 Participation proposal.

2. Format and Specific Content: The offeror shall submit a Small Business Participation proposal for itself and any joint venture member, as well as each proposed critical subcontractor (see definition in paragraph L.II.D.1 above) in a separate volume labeled “Volume III – Small Business Participation”. The Small Business Participation proposal shall address each of the following elements in the proposed performance of this resultant contract:

The extent of participation of proposed Small Businesses (SB)* when subcontracting possibilities exist, including the company names with CAGE codes the offeror plans to use in the performance of this resultant contract; and, The description of the subcontracted work these proposed firms are to perform; and, The associated goals expressed in terms of percentages of the total acquisition value. If limited or no subcontracting possibilities exist for these socio-economic entities, provide rationale for such. Offerors are cautioned against only acknowledging a goal is not met, if applicable. Rather, adequate rationale includes specific reasons why a goal is unmet, and any actions being taken to increase any unmet goals.

Additionally, if the offeror/joint venture member/critical subcontractor is a small business concern, it should include the work it will be performing when calculating the goals for your Small Business Participation information.

* Small Businesses include service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns.

E. Volume IV, Cost/Price

The Offeror shall submit the following with its Volume IV, Cost/Price Factor Proposal Submission:

1. The offeror shall complete a cost model for all CLINs (live, working price/cost model in Microsoft Excel including formulas with notional numbers for all elements of cost. For all indirect costs, factors, CERs, etc. include all bases and calculations to arrive at computed amounts). The format for the cost model is supplied within RFP Attachment XX. Offerors shall review all instructions contained within RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model, and shall ensure the information provided is compliant with the provided instructions. Cost or Pricing Data Requirements can be found in Section 9 below.

2. Detailed table of contents.

3. Glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation for each.

4. Definitions as necessary.

5. List identifying each major/minor subcontractors and vendors, reflecting the estimated total price, by

CLIN, for each.

6. Date of current FPRA/FPRR for Prime, and all subcontractors with a proposed value equal to or greater than $2,000,000 (hereinafter referred to as major subcontractors) for cost-type CLINs X001, X002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006, 0014, 0015, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1011, 1012, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2013, 2014, 3003, 3004, 3012, 3013, 4008, and 4009. Rates and factors shall be supplied for Prime, and all major subcontractors. If an FPRA/FPRR is not available, refer below to Number 9. Cost and Pricing Data Requirements.

7. Names, addresses, telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses of the Offeror’s (and the Offeror’s subcontractors and teaming partners) cognizant Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) administrative contracting officers (ACO) and cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) offices

8. Synopsis of Current Estimating, Purchasing, Cost Accounting Standards, Disclosure Statement, Accounting Systems, and Adequacy Determination for the Prime Contractor:

The Offeror shall provide a summary description of the Offeror’s standard estimating system or methods, current policies, and/or new policies. The Offeror shall state whether the estimating system and new policies have been reviewed by the Government and shall provide evidence of review and/or Administrative Contracting Officer approval. The Offeror shall provide any known/cited estimating system deficiencies and identify any deviations from the Offeror’s established/standard estimating procedures used in preparing this proposal. For known/cited estimating system or methods non-compliances, provide a schedule and description of corrective actions the offeror is taking to eliminate the non-compliance issues.

The Offeror shall provide a summary description of the Offeror’s purchasing system or methods. The Offeror shall state whether the purchasing system has been reviewed by the Government and provide evidence of review and/or Administrative Contracting Officer approval. The Offeror shall provide any known/cited purchasing system deficiencies and identify any deviations from the Offeror’s established/standard purchasing procedures used in preparing this proposal. For known/cited purchasing system or methods non-compliances, provide a schedule and description of corrective actions the Offeror is taking to eliminate the non-compliance issues.

In accordance with FAR 16.301-3(a) (3) and 9.104-1(e), the Offeror shall utilize an accounting system that is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. The Offeror shall provide a summary description of the Offeror’s accounting system and state whether it is compliant with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The Offeror shall also state whether the accounting system has been reviewed and approved by the Government and provide evidence of the review and approval by DCAA / DCMA. The Offeror shall provide any known/cited accounting system deficiencies and identify any deviations from the Offeror’s standard procedures in preparing this proposal. For known/cited accounting system or methods non- compliances, provide a schedule and description of corrective actions the Offeror is taking to eliminate the non-compliance issues. In the event the Offeror’s accounting system has not been reviewed and approved by DCAA/DCMA, the Offeror shall complete the enclosed ‘Pre-Award Survey’ (RFP Attachment XX) and submit the completed document as part of Volume V: Cost/Price Proposal submission. The Government will forward the document to DCAA in order to initiate their review of the Offeror’s accounting system(s) to determine if it is adequate for a cost-reimbursement contract.

The Offeror shall provide a summary description of the Offeror’s current Cost Accounting Standards disclosure statement. The Offeror shall state whether the current Cost Accounting Standards disclosure statement has been reviewed by the Government and provide evidence of review and/or Administrative Contracting Officer approval. The Offeror shall provide any currently known/cited Cost Accounting Standards non-compliances and identify any deviations from the Offeror’s Cost Accounting Standards disclosure statement used in preparing this proposal. For known/cited Cost Accounting Standards non-compliances provide a schedule and description of corrective actions the Offeror is taking to eliminate the non-compliance issues.

9. Cost or Pricing Data Requirements

It is anticipated that pricing of this action will be based on adequate price competition; therefore, Offerors are not required to submit certified cost or pricing data. However, if after receipt of proposals it is determined that adequate price competition does not exist, certified cost or pricing data (see FAR 15.406-2, Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data) shall be required.

Elemental Cost Breakouts

Irrespective of the presence of adequate price competition, breakouts by individual cost elements shall be provided for proposed costs and add-on factors applicable to cost-type CLIN(s) X001, X002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006, 0014, 0015, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1011, 1012, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2013, 2014, 3003, 3004, 3012, 3013, 4008, and 4009 for the Prime offeror and all major subcontractors, to assist in the determination of realism. Elemental cost breakouts shall be provided as part of the offeror’s proposal, and shall be in .xls file format (with live working formulas) as provided in the “Format A” and “Format D” worksheets contained within RFP Attachment XX. Any other type of file format will not be accepted. Offerors should refer to the format indicated in Table 15-2 of FAR

15.408 for instructions on submitting acceptable elemental cost breakouts.

NOTE: Certified Cost or Pricing Data is Not Required unless it is determined that adequate price competition does not exist.

In support of the elemental cost breakouts, all offerors (Prime and major subcontractors) who have neither a FPRA nor a FPRR shall submit the following items/information as part of their proposal. If any of the items/information is not available for a particular offeror, it shall be noted in the offeror’s response to the RFP.

1. Previous three years’ actual historical rates for each individual cost element used in developing the proposed unit costs

2. Breakout of actual expenses included in the indirect cost pools and respective bases, from the previous three years

3.Breakout of the budgeted forecasts for the indirect pools and bases used in developing the proposed unit costs, covering the entire contract period (Basic and Options)

4. Certified payroll verification with current labor rates, cross-referenced to the respective proposed labor categories shall be provided in support of the proposed direct labor rates for year one. If year one proposed rates are not supported by current labor, offeror shall provide assumptions for hiring individuals, and labor rates that will be offered.

All information submitted in support of items 1-3 above shall be in .xls file format with live working formulas. Any other type of file format will not be accepted for items 1-3, but is acceptable for item

4. It is the offeror’s/joint venture member’s responsibility to review all proposals submitted by any major subcontractor for accuracy and format. It is also the offeror’s/joint venture member’s responsibility to submit all major subcontractor proposed unit costs, major subcontractor elemental cost breakouts, and major subcontractor documentation in support of the elemental cost breakouts, as part of the offeror’s/joint venture member’s proposal. For any of the above referenced information that a major subcontractor may not be willing to provide directly to the offeror/joint venture member, the offeror/joint venture member shall instruct the major subcontractor to provide that information directly to the Government in accordance with the terms and conditions of this solicitation.

In accordance with (IAW) FAR 15.404-1(d), cost realism analysis shall be performed on cost-reimbursement contracts. All offerors and subcontractors valued at equal to or greater than $2,000,000 (for the entire effort to include Options) shall provide data other than certified cost and pricing data using spreadsheet Cost Formats A, B, C, and D (see RFP Attachment XX) along with accompanying schedules, lists, and narratives to substantiate the cost realism for CLINs X001, X002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006, 0014, 0015, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1011, 1012, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2013, 2014, 3003, 3004, 3012, 3013, 4008, and 4009. Note for any subcontractors, to include minor subcontractors (with less than $2,000,000 in total costs), offerors shall include roll-up cost data on Cost Formats A and C. If necessary, the Contracting Officer may request additional minor subcontractor cost data during discussions.

The Offeror’s cost proposal shall contain the proposed cost to the Government for performing the work described in the offeror’s Statement of Work (SOW), the attached CDRLs, and additional CDRLs/data the offeror proposes and references from the SOW for effective management of the program as proposed in the offeror’s engineering volume. The Offeror’s proposal is presumed to represent its best effort in response to the solicitation. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between promised performance and cost shall be explained in the proposal. Any significant inconsistency, if unexplained, raises a fundamental issue with the Offeror’s understanding of the nature and scope of work required, and ability to perform the contract, and may be grounds for rejection of the proposal. The burden of proof as to the credibility of the cost proposal rests with the Offeror.

Price Reasonableness and Cost Realism

The Offeror shall provide sufficiently detailed proposals to demonstrate price reasonableness and cost realism. The burden of proof for cost realism of proposed costs rests with the Offeror. Offerors shall review all instructions contained within RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model, and shall ensure the information provided is compliant with the provided instructions.

Cost Formats A, B, C, and D

The Cost Format worksheets (see RFP Attachment XX) shall contain the required information to complete a cost realism analysis. “Format A” shall be linked to “Format B”, i.e., every cell in “Format A” containing a rate (to include fixed fee) or factor, shall pull that rate or factor directly from “Format B”. “Format A” shall be linked to “Format C”, i.e., the proposed unit cost and proposed fixed fee for CLINs X001, X002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006, 0014, 0015, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1011, 1012, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2013, 2014, 3003, 3004, 3012, 3013, 4008, and 4009 in “Format C” shall be pulled directly from the respective CLIN in “Format A” where possible. “Format A” shall be linked to “Format D”, i.e, the subcontractors’ proposed prices shall feed into the prime offerors cost roll up.

Cost Format A: “Format A” is a detailed cost breakdown by cost elements, showing the details of the proposed labor hours, labor rates, indirect rates and costs, and proposed fee by year. The offeror must show a summary of labor hours by labor categories, costs by each separate cost element, and proposed fee. The “Format A” worksheet shall be linked to the “Format B” and “Format C” worksheets.

Cost Format B: This worksheet, using the example format provided, shall be the source document for direct rates, indirect rates, material add-on factors, and fee. This worksheet shall be linked to the “Format A” worksheets. The “Format B_PRIME Rates” worksheet shall include all proposed direct and indirect rates, estimating factors, fee and etc. for each year. The purpose for linking the single “Format B_PRIME Rates” worksheet to the “Format A” worksheets is to facilitate the government’s evaluation of the proposed rates and to make Most Probable Cost (MPC) adjustments more straightforward. If the prime offeror has a major subcontractor, the major subcontractor’s rates shall be input in the “Format B_SUB Rates” worksheet; if there is more than one major subcontractor, the prime offeror shall create additional “Format B_SUB Rates” worksheets to accommodate proposed rates and factors. There shall be a separate “Format B_SUB Rates” worksheet for each major subcontractor.

Cost Format C: “Format C” shall be used to roll up all proposed prices, including the CLINs subject to cost realism and those not subject to cost realism. “Format C” will calculate the Total Proposed Price as referenced in Section M-900. The “Format C” worksheet shall be linked to the “FFP CLINs” and “Format A” worksheets.

Cost Format D: “Format D” is for subcontractor/sub-tier vendor cost/price summary information.

This information shall be provided by the Prime and any major subcontractor (both hereinafter referred to as “Offeror” in the remainder of this paragraph) in the format provided. If there are differences between costs/prices quoted by subcontractors/sub-tier vendors to the Offeror and costs/prices proposed by the Offeror, the Offeror shall provide a complete justification and explanation of the amount proposed by the Offeror. Specifically address why the Offeror’s amount should be considered by the Contracting Officer to be more realistic than the amount of the subcontractor/sub-tier vendor quote. Major subcontractors are required to provide RFP Attachment XX as part of their proposal. RFP Attachment XX Format D worksheets for a major subcontractor shall be duplicated by the Prime Offeror to accommodate multiple major subcontractors, if necessary.

To substantiate the Cost Formats the offeror shall, in an accompanying narrative (Word Document), provide supporting data and contractor rationale for the costs proposed, including subcontractor/vendor costs. The information should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate the realism (CPFF and CRNF CLINs) and reasonableness of proposed costs. This information shall at a minimum:

• State whether proposed direct labor rates and indirect rates are covered by a Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA). If covered by a FPRA, provide the date of the agreement.

• If a FPRA is not in place, provide the date of the applicable Forward Pricing Rate Proposal (FPRP), with supporting rationale addressing the basis for the proposed rates with your proposal. If there is no FPRA or FPRP applicable, provide the complete rationale addressing the basis for all proposed rates, to include time sheets for each labor category bid and how the average rate is calculated, and pool and base costs for each indirect rate or Cost Estimating Relationship (CER), showing how the rate was calculated. Each of these items shall be provided for the past three years and the forward projected average labor rates and pools/bases for FY25 – FY31. This information shall also be provided for any major subcontractors that do not have a FPRA or FPRP.

• Address the rationale and approach to subcontracting and teaming arrangements.

10. Total Resources Volume

Total Resources General This submission shall fully support all hours proposed in support of CLINs X001, X002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006, 0014, 0015, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1011, 1012, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2013, 2014, 3003, 3004, 3012, 3013, 4008, and 4009. It will be available to support the evaluations of proposals by the Technical and Cost/Price evaluators. This submission shall provide a clear depiction of all hours proposed regardless of whether these hours are provided by the Prime Offeror or any tier of subcontractor. The Prime Offeror is responsible for demonstrating in this submission that the appropriate hours are being proposed to meet the RFP requirements.

The electronic copy of this volume shall be in Microsoft Excel in the offeror’s format to aid in the evaluation. PDF or other format is NOT acceptable. All formulas used in the worksheets shall be clearly visible in the individual cells and verifiable. The use of external links of any kind is prohibited. This submission shall not contain macros or hidden cells. The BOE Summary shall not be locked/protected or secured by passwords.

Total Resources BOE Labor Summary

The prime shall provide a BOE Labor Summary in the offeror’s format. This Exhibit shall provide a clear depiction of all hours proposed on CLINs X001, X002, 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006, 0014, 0015, 1003, 1004, 1005, 1006, 1011, 1012, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2013, 2014, 3003, 3004, 3012, 3013, 4008, and 4009 regardless of whether these resources are provided by the Prime or any tier of subcontractor. The Prime Offeror is responsible for demonstrating that the appropriate resources are being proposed to meet the RFP requirements. At a minimum offerors shall describe the approach for proposing all labor hours. The result will be a narrative basis of estimates. Each of these narratives shall explain the proposed Labor, including the methodology for developing the BOEs, including but not limited to:

• Analogies

• Cost Estimating Relationships

• Commercial models or company bidding systems

• Sub-tier vendor estimates

• Engineering judgment

• Ground rules and assumptions

• Escalation rates used

• Learning curve

Contractor Labor Categories

Offerors are required to provide a table of Labor Category descriptions that clearly lists the duties and qualifications of the proposed labor categories regardless of source (prime and subcontractors). This list shall be provided in RFP Attachment XX in the identified “Rate Desc” worksheets.

Total Resources BOE Material Summary

The Offeror shall complete this Exhibit using RFP Attachment XX, Total Resources Volume (WBS Breakdown). Offerors are required to provide a BOE Material Summary that clearly lists the Types and

Quantities of Material resources proposed regardless of source (prime and subcontractors) by the SOW and CWBS time-phased by contract period. Clearly list the types & quantities of materials proposed. This summary should be an unburdened version of the Priced Bill of Material, which offerors shall provide separately in Volume V Cost/Price. This summary shall be provided in .xls file format to facilitate manipulation of the data during evaluation; otherwise, contractor format is acceptable.

11. CLIN Structure and Fee Structure

The Offeror shall complete the CLINs cost/price Excel spreadsheet as provided in the Cost Format worksheets (referenced above), and the fill-in blanks on the RFP Schedule B in accordance with the CLIN and Fee structure in Schedule B as summarized below. Offerors shall only enter information in the yellow highlighted cells.

All proposed unit costs/prices shall be in whole dollar amounts. If any proposed unit cost/price does not meet this criteria, the Government will round that unit cost/price to whole dollars. The Government adjusted unit cost/price will become the offeror’s proposed unit cost/price, as applicable. Failure to follow these instructions, or any alteration of RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model, may result in rejection of the offeror’s proposal.

Table 1- CLIN and Fee Structure

Basic Period

CLIN Type Description

0001 CPFF F-16 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester Prototype Design and Digital Development: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

0002 CPFF F-15 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester Prototype Design and Digital Development: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

0003 CPFF A-10 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester Prototype Design and Digital Development: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

0004 CPFF F-16 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester Design and Digital Development: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model.

Fixed fee shall be proposed.

0005 CPFF F-15 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester Design and Digital Development: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model.

Fixed fee shall be proposed.

0006 CPFF A-10 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester Design and Digital Development: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model.

Fixed fee shall be proposed.

0007 FFP Deliver F-16 O-Level Handheld Tester Prototype: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

0008 FFP Deliver F-15 O-Level Handheld Tester Prototype: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

0009 FFP Deliver A-10 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester Digital Design: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

0010 FFP Deliver F-16 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester Digital Design: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

0011 FFP Deliver F-15 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester Digital Design: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

0012 FFP Deliver A-10 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester Digital Design: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

0013 FFP Program Management: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

0014 CPFF Design Demonstration: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

0015 CRNF Travel: Offerors shall propose their estimated travel costs as Other Direct Costs and add-on factors as applicable.

0016 FFP Government Data Rights: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

0017 NSP CDRLs (Data)

Option I

1001 CPFF F-16 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD): Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

1002 CPFF F-15 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

1003 CPFF A-10 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

1004 CPFF F-16 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

1005 CPFF F-15 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

1006 CPFF A-10 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

1007 FFP F-16 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester Logistical Support: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

1008 FFP F-16 O-Level Handheld Tester LRIP: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

1009 FFP Deliver F-16 O-Level Handheld Tester Kits: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

1010 FFP Program Management: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

1011 CPFF Support Government Testing: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model. Fixed fee shall be proposed.

1012 CRNF Travel: Offerors shall propose their estimated travel costs as Other Direct Costs and add-on factors as applicable.

1013 FFP Government Data Rights: Offerors shall propose a fully burdened unit price inclusive of profit.

1014 NSP CDRLs (Data)

Option II

2001 CPIF F-15 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model.

Share ratio below and above Target Cost: 75%/25% (Government/Contractor)

Target fee shall be proposed.

Min fee = 4.5%. Max fee = 8.0%

2002 CPIF A-10 O-Level Handheld/Pre-load Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model.

Share ratio below and above Target Cost: 75%/25% (Government/Contractor)

Target fee shall be proposed.

Min fee = 4.5%. Max fee = 8.0%

2003 CPIF F-16 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model.

Share ratio below and above Target Cost: 75%/25% (Government/Contractor)

Target fee shall be proposed.

Min fee = 4.5%. Max fee = 8.0%

2004 CPIF F-15 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors as identified in RFP Attachment XX, Excel Cost Model.

Share ratio below and above Target Cost: 75%/25% (Government/Contractor)

Target fee shall be proposed.

Min fee = 4.5%. Max fee = 8.0%

2005 CPIF A-10 I-Level Fault Isolation Tester EMD: Offerors shall propose labor categories, direct and indirect labor rates, material costs, and/or add-on factors…