Attachment_17_SectionsLandM.doc

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

ATTACHMENT 17

SECTIONS L AND M

SECTION L PROVISION (Jan 2017)

L-900. Proposal Requirements

I. Proposal Format

A. General: The following instructions cover the preparation and submittal of the offeror’s proposal for this solicitation. To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, 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 Noise Suppressor Acquisition as the Government will review only one proposal per offeror. Proposals must be received by AFLCMC/WNKAC, Attn: Crystal Crawford, 235 Byron St, Ste 19A, Robins AFB, GA 31098-1813 no later than the date and time specified in Block 8 on the face page of the RFP. 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.

B. Communications: Exchanges of source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the Contracting Officer. 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. Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via direct mailing or AMRDEC SAFE at https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/guide.aspx. 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 Contract Specialist or Contracting Officer indicated on the face page of the solicitation prior to your 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). 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 Crystal.Crawford.1@us.af.mil and/or Travis.Simmons.3@us.af.mil Please clearly identify the email as a “test email for Noise Suppressor Acquisition RFP FA8534-17-R-0007.”

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

(3) The contracting officer will send a digitally signed reply to the sender’s e-mail address

(4) The sender must open the contracting officer’s digitally signed reply and add (or update) the contracting officer’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.

(6) Before you can exchange encrypted email with anyone not on our Global Address List (GAL), you first need to swap certificates one time. To do this, send a digitally signed message to each other. Each recipient then adds the e-mail name to “Contacts” and in doing so, also adds the certificate used for encryption. See instructions below.

(7) Open a digitally signed message from the recipient. 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. To ensure the process is working correctly, the offeror needs to send a test encrypted message first (without including any source selection information).

(8) 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.

II. Volume Organization

A. General: Proposals shall be submitted to the Government in five (5) separate volumes as set forth below:

PAGE

NUMBER

VOLUME

LIMITS

OF COPIES

DESCRIPTION

I N/A 1 paper/1 electronic Completed RFP (excluding Section B of the Schedule) (Including RFP Checklist, Attachment 2, RFP Attachment 1 (Pricing Exhibits), Cross Reference Matrix, Attachment 8, and copy of Joint Venture Agreement, if applicable)

II

2 paper/2 electronic Written Technical Proposal (page count excludes

ATP, PWS, BOMs)

III

N/A 2 paper/2 electronic Past Performance (submitted through Past Performance Information (PPI Tool)

IV

N/A

1 paper/1 electronic Small Business Concern Utilization Plan V N/A

2 paper/2 electronic Cost/Price Proposal

(with RFP Attachment 3, Microsoft Excel Price Model, and RFP Attachment 4, Microsoft Excel Cost Model) Electronic copies shall be submitted in accordance with RFP Attachment 5, Electronic Format for All Proposal Volumes. Proposals shall be submitted in written form and CD-R or DVD-R (write once/read only) 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. Electronic media shall be accessible by a computer running Microsoft Windows 10 and above and Adobe Acrobat Portable Document (PDF) format documents must be fully searchable in Adobe. Additionally, file suppression utilities, to include, but not limited to zip files, will not be accepted. For each electronic media copies, indicate the volume number and title. Each volume must be stored on a separate CD-R or DVD-R.

Offerors shall use the instructions set forth in the RFP Attachment 6, Past Performance Information (PPI) for Offerors, to electronically submit the Past Performance information into the PPI Tool The link to the PPI Tool is attached, as a link, to the solicitation posting.

” The offeror is also required to submit a hardcopy Past Performance Volume III, that includes an RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment.

Cost/Price Proposal information (completed Microsoft Excel Price Model, RFP Attachment 3) shall be submitted in written form (2 copies) and CDR-R or DVD-R (write once/read only) (2 copies). Completed Microsoft Excel Cost Model (RFP Attachment 4) shall be submitted in CD-R or DVD-R (write once/read only)(2 copies). The information submitted via CD-R or DVD-R shall be in .xls file format; other file formats will not be accepted.

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

1. The sealed package used to submit the proposal package must show the time and date specified for receipt. Each volume shall be marked with the RFP number 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.

2. Print shall be no smaller than a font size of 12. Paper size shall be 8 1/2” X 11,” excluding any drawings, diagrams, and/or supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc. Charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets shall not be greater than 11” x 17.” Each volume within the proposal notebook shall be separately tabbed and identified. Margins shall be no smaller than 1 inch and each page within a volume shall be numbered consecutively. Elaborate formats, bindings, color presentations are not desired or required.

3. The page limitation for Volume II, Written Technical Proposal is one hundred and fifty (150) pages (not including the ATP referenced in 2.a.2 and 2.b.2, PWS, and BOMs). The page limitations include any cover page, charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, spreadsheets, etc., but excludes any table of contents or list of acronyms (if utilized). A “page” is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Offerors are cautioned that any pages that exceed the page 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.

4. Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), if issued. The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to offerors or on the EN form itself.

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

7. Submission of the initial proposal packages via electronic mail will not be accepted. Initial proposal packages shall either be mailed or hand-delivered. Offerors are cautioned that Warner Robins Air Logistics Complex has visitor control procedures requiring individuals not affiliated with the installation to obtain a visitor pass prior to entrance. Some delay should be anticipated when hand-delivering proposal packages. Offerors should allow for sufficient time to obtain a visitor pass and arrive at the specified office PRIOR to the time specified for receipt of proposals.

B. Volume I, Completed RFP with clauses to include RFP Checklist, Attachment 2, Cross Reference Matrix, Attachment 8, and Joint Venture Agreement (if applicable)

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. 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 Section B of the Schedule of the RFP to be submitted with Volume V, Cost/Price Proposal.

2. Cross Reference Matrix: The offeror shall fill out the cross reference matrix at RFP Attachment 8 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 Performance-Based Work Statement (PWS), Sample Tasks 1 and 2 as defined in Section L paragraph C.2.a and C.2.b), 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 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, to the extent the matrix discloses details as to the manner by which the Government intends to evaluate the offeror’s proposals for award, Section M references in the matrix are for informational purposes only, and the Government shall be obligated to evaluate proposals solely in conformance with Section M of the solicitation.

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 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 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. See Attachment 9, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Sample Task 1, and Attachment 10, Statement of Objectives (SOO) for Sample Task 2. Based on the Performance Based Work Statement (PWS), Attachment 11, for the Noise Suppressor Repair, Refurbishment, and Relocation dated x x xxx xx, the offeror shall provide a technical approach with supporting rationale and assumptions to meet the requirements of the sample tasks (RFP Attachments 9 and 10). Excluding those assumptions already identified in the sample tasks, the offeror will identify their assumptions including any perceived omitted, conflicting, and/or incomplete information. The offeror shall not assume government services or equipment are available unless otherwise stated in the sample task. It is understood that the offeror’s proposal is based on the offeror’s assumptions. The proposed technical approach to the sample task shall also address the following subfactors. For each subfactor, the offeror shall identify any risks associated with the proposed approach to the sample task and actions to be taken to mitigate that risk

SUBFACTOR 1: TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF SAMPLE TASK 1 – RELOCATION CAPABILITY

(a.) Sample Task 1: Relocation (disassembly and reassembly) Capability: Provide a comprehensive plan, to include a list of all applicable drawings and specifications, to disassemble, package, transport, reassemble, repair and test a T-10 Noise Suppressor, in a systematic, constructive and safe method, to another base in terms of form, fit, function, performance, workmanship, quality, and condition. The following assumptions shall be made: Delaminating corrosion is present in the lower intake and exhaust baffle sections (contained within 2 feet of floor), requiring repair/replacement of affected components. The T-10 is already equipped with a current configuration (Gold Plate PLC) Facility Control System. The following ECPs will need to be implemented: 166, 167, 168, and 172. The T-10 is equipped with a Halon-based FSS; removal of the FSS and disposal of Halon shall be included, but relocation and installation of the FSS shall not be included.

1. Propose in detail a Performance-Based Work Statement (PWS), in accordance with Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) A004 developed in accordance with and addressing all requirements of Sample Task 1. Identify all parts to be repaired, replaced and/or refurbished as detailed in drawings, ECPs, and Technical Orders (T.O.s) 33D4-6-645-1 and 33D4-6-645-4 by national stock number (NSN) and/or part number (P/N).

2. Provide an Acceptance Test Plan (ATP), in accordance with CDRL A005, developed to conduct a full functional/operational test of the T-10 Noise Suppressor upon completion of relocation and repairs. Submit a concise description of the extent of repair, replace and/or refurbishment actions required to bring the T-10 to proper operation. The description shall include all alignments or adjustments made. Include quantitative details stating all electrical and physical test requirements and parameters which the T-10 must meet upon completion of repairs. Describe in detail the electrical (voltage, amperage, etc.) and mechanical (thermal, alignment, etc.) tests to be conducted in order to ensure and demonstrate that all components, systems, and sub-systems consistently operate correctly.

3. Provide an integrated master schedule (IMS), in accordance with CDRL A015, to accomplish the scope of the sample task in the required time (10 months). Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the offeror and sub-contractors as applicable to meet defined requirements.

4. Describe an approach for Systems Engineering and Operational, Safety, Suitability and Effectiveness (OSS&E). Include the processes, procedures, and quality controls for creating and updating engineering drawings and other Technical Data Package (TDP) contents including obsolete data to maintain conformance to the existing hardware/software configuration and technical data during all phases of Sample Task 1.

SUBFACTOR 2: TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF SAMPLE TASK 2 – NOVEC FSS CONVERSION CAPABILITY (b.) Sample Task 2: Novec FSS Conversion Capability: Provide a comprehensive plan, to include a list of all applicable drawings and specifications, to remove a Halon FSS from a T-10 and install a Novec FSS that meets all requirements and is functionally equivalent to the Novec FSSs already installed in USAF T-10s, to include packaging and return of Halon to DLA. The system must be pneumatically actuated, and must interface with the current-configuration Gold Plate PLC facility control system to control doors, sirens, and fire department notifications. The following assumptions shall be made: 1. Rooms 5 and 6 are already in the -30 configuration (tool rooms are present).

If the contractor proposes a new configuration of Novec FSS, the following requirements must be met:

· The Novec FSS must operate on the same principles, and meet the same performance targets, as the currently approved Novec FSS configuration. These targets include delivering minimum design volumetric concentration of 5.9% to the enclosure within ten seconds; and maintaining the minimum design concentration in accordance with the requirements of the 2012 edition of NFPA 2001 5.6, that is, 85% of the adjusted minimum design concentration at the highest level of combustibles for at least 10 minutes. The Novec FSS must be compliant with all relevant NFPA, EPA, and other applicable regulatory codes.

· Any alternative pneumatic actuation system shall be of equivalent form, fit, and function to the existing pneumatic actuation system.

· The discharge nozzle locations in the test bay shall not be moved.

· The system shall utilize a Siemens Pyrotronics System 3 control panel and shall provide required input/output signal to local Fire Department (eg via Monaco control panel as supplied to most T-10/11 locations).

· Novec containers shall be stored in the tool rooms, with adequate climate control provisions to ensure usability throughout CONUS and OCONUS fleet. No operating temperature range is defined for the T-10/11 noise suppressors. Engine testing occurs in ambient temperatures ranging from -30°F to 120°F; the Novec storage tanks must be kept at an appropriate temperature range to ensure long term stability and system protection during temperature extremes when system is not in use, and efficacy in the event of a discharge regardless of ambient temperature in the test bay.

· A full scale concentration test, including a Novec discharge, shall be performed at the offeror’s expense prior to approval. The system will be activated and the agent will be released into the hush house with constant monitoring of volumetric concentration. A successful test was considered an initial concentration at or above the design concentration and above 85% of the design concentration after ten (10) minutes.

1. Propose in detail a Performance-Based Work Statement (PWS), in accordance with CDRL A004 developed in accordance with and addressing all requirements of Sample Task 2. Identify all parts to be repaired, replaced and/or refurbished as detailed in drawings, ECPs, and Technical Orders (T.O.s) 33D4-6-645-1 and 33D4-6-645-4 by national stock number (NSN) and/or part number (P/N).

2. Provide Acceptance Test Plan (ATP), in accordance with CDRL A005, developed to conduct a full functional/operational test of the Fire Suppression System upon completion of installation. Include quantitative details stating all electrical and physical test requirements and parameters which the T-10 FSS must meet upon completion of repairs.

3. Provide an integrated master schedule (IMS), in accordance with CDRL A015, to accomplish the scope of the sample task in the required time (2 months). Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the offeror and sub-contractors as applicable to meet defined requirements.

4. Describe an approach for Systems Engineering and Operational, Safety, Suitability and Effectiveness (OSS&E). Include the processes, procedures, and quality controls for creating and updating engineering drawings and other Technical Data Package (TDP) contents including obsolete data to maintain conformance to the existing hardware/software configuration and technical data during all phases of Sample Task 2.

SUBFACTOR 3: RESOURCE PLANNING AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CAPABILITY:

(c.) In addition to the sample tasks listed above in paragraphs C.2.a and C.2.b, the contractor shall address the Resource Planning and Program Management capability in the following areas:

1. Processes, procedures, and controls proposed to obtain and maintain a qualified workforce, parts, and materials, as well as plans to meet surge requirements or unforeseen personnel shortages, in support of eight (8) total concurrent task orders at USAF locations (6 in CONUS and 2 in OCONUS).

2. Methodology to ensure employees are qualified to manage problem tracking and corrective action measures.

3. Procedures for internal communications and monitoring of sub-contracted activities.

D. Volume III, Past Performance

1. General: The offeror shall utilize the Past Performance Information (PPI) Tool in order to submit Volume III, Past Performance (See RFP Attachment 6, Past Performance Information for Offerors). The offeror shall submit past performance information for itself and any joint venture member, as well as each proposed critical subcontractor. A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor and/or teaming contractor), other than the offeror itself that will A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor and/or teaming contractor) other than the offeror itself that will perform 20% or more of the total effort OR perform the majority (51% or more) of work in the following categories: fire suppression systems, paint/coatings/corrosion control, or facility control systems.

2. Past Performance Format: In addition to PPI Tool submission, past performance information shall be provided in a separate, hard copy volume (i.e., 3-ring binder) labeled "Volume III - Past Performance" that includes an RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment. A summary, not to exceed ten (10) pages, shall be provided for this acquisition, describing the proposed role of the offeror, any joint venture member and critical subcontractor (nature of work, criticality of work, and percentage of overall work). The Summary information must clearly communicate that proposed critical subcontractor(s) meet the definition of a critical subcontractor established above. Efforts submitted for proposed critical subcontractors not meeting the established definition will not be evaluated. Each offeror/joint venture member shall complete a separate FACTS Sheet for four (4) active or completed contract (with at least one year of performance history) in the past five (5) years from the issuance date of the RFP, that the offeror/joint venture member considers relevant in demonstrating its ability to perform the proposed effort. If the total number of such contracts exceeds four (4) each offeror/joint venture member shall address its 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. The offeror's/joint venture member’s or critical subcontractor’s present and past performance information may include data on efforts performed by other predecessor companies, affiliates, other divisions or corporate management if such was provided for evaluation and if the offeror’s past performance volume demonstrates the company, affiliate, or division will provide the offeror with resources for the instant proposed effort, such as workforce, management, facilities, or other capabilities demonstrating direct and meaningful involvement in the performance of the instant proposed effort. The FACTS Sheet shall clearly indicate the division or corporate organization that performed or is presently performing the contract. Contracts listed may include those with the Federal Government, state and local governments or their agencies, and commercial customers.

3. Ordering Type Contracts Submission: If the contract you are submitting is an ordering type contractual vehicle (Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity), only after issuance of a delivery/task order does performance occur. Given this, an individual order (or series of orders) under the basic ordering contract shall be submitted, in lieu of just the basic ordering contract itself. All information provided to the Government, for an ordering type contractual vehicle, shall be at the order level (i.e. a delivery/task order).

When submitting an individual order (or series of orders) under an ordering type contractual vehicle, it is important that the offeror’s past performance information be submitted correctly in the PPI Tool (see RFP Attachment 6, Past Performance Information for Offerors). Please ensure the information submitted is for each order (or series of orders), in lieu of just the basic ordering contract itself. This includes but is not limited to information such as the Dollar Value and Period of Performance.

When determining what order (or series of orders) to submit for evaluation, please reference Section M, section II Paragraph D for details on how the Government will evaluate each effort for recency, relevancy, and quality. If the information is not submitted in the correct format, the Government will not be able to evaluate the recency, relevancy, and quality for the effort. Recency is defined as active or completed efforts performed within the past five (5) years from the issuance date of this solicitation.

4. Key Personnel: 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 the past performance information in the PPI Tool for four (4) of their most recent and relevant contracts under which such key personnel performed the same role currently being proposed on the instant 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 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; a letter of intent to hire does not constitute employment.

5. Subcontractor/Teaming Member Consent Form: In addition to the information provided in the PPI Tool (see RFP Attachment 6, Past Performance Information for Offerors) for each entity as required above, the offeror must submit a consent letter executed by each of its proposed teaming member(s) and/or critical subcontractors authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the prime offeror to allow the prime offeror an opportunity to respond. A sample Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Form is attached to this RFP (see RFP Attachment 12). The consent form should be completed by the team member(s) and/or critical subcontractors identified in your proposal. The completed consent forms should be submitted as part of your Past Performance Volume III.

6. Small Business Compliance in Past Performance Efforts: On the four (4) contracts submitted in Volume III, Past Performance, include relevant information in the PPI Tool concerning the offeror’s/joint venture member’s and critical subcontractor’s compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns 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 large businesses.) 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, HUBZone 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 subcontractor’s policy to utilize small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance.

7. Past Performance Questionnaire: The Present/Past Performance Questionnaire (see RFP Attachment #13) will be one means used by the Government to obtain present/past 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 Present/Past Performance Questionnaires (see RFP Attachment #13) to each of the offeror’s, joint venture member’s and/or critical subcontractors’ (i.e., each entity’s) Points of Contact (POCs) identified in the PPI Tool. The responsibility to send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror - i.e., it shall not be delegated to any other entity. The Transmittal Letter (see RFP Attachment #14) shall be used by the offeror in sending out the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires. Exert your best effort to ensure that at least two POCs per relevant contract submit a completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaire directly to the Government not later than the date established in the RFP for receipt of proposals. POCs may submit their completed Present/Past Performance Questionnaire either electronically or by mail. If sending electronically, follow the procedures outlined in paragraph I.B. Communications above, and email to: Crystal.Crawford.1@us.af.mil and/or Travis.Simmons.3@us.af.mil. If mailing, the POCs may return the completed questionnaires via mail directly to:

AFLCMC/WNKAC

ATTN: Crystal Crawford or Travis Simmons 235 Byron Street, Suite 19A Robins AFB, GA 31098-1813 Reference: RFP: (FA8534-17-R-0007) 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 email and/or AMRDEC. Please have your POCs call Crystal Crawford at (478)222-1895 or Travis Simmons at (478)222-1754 before emailing their response.

Once the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires are completed by your POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered source selection sensitive and shall not be released to you, the offeror. Therefore, any exchange/contact between the offeror/joint venture member and/or critical subcontractor and its own POCs in regards to comments made on the questionnaire is not permitted.

8. Client Authorization Letter: In the event that commercial contracts are presented as present/past performance sources of information, a client authorization letter shall be issued to those commercial POCs requesting/authorizing them to complete a Present/Past Performance Questionnaire. A sample client authorization letter is attached to this RFP (see RFP Attachment #15). The offeror is required to send the client authorization letter(s) with the Present/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 Present/Past Performance submission for the Government’s use in case additional questionnaires need to be sent by the Government after the RFP due date.

9. Follow-up Discussions: The Government may conduct follow-up discussions with any of the people identified in the FACTS Sheets or in the offeror’s Present/Past Performance Volume. The Government may obtain other information by sending out additional questionnaires and/or through other sources, other than those listed within the FACTS Sheets (i.e., from successor personnel, such as a new Program Manager that took the program over, etc.)

10. RFP Attachment Legend: RFP Attachments #13, Present/Past Performance Questionnaire must include the following legend at the top and bottom of each page:

“SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY”

E. Volume IV, Small Business Concern Utilization Plan

1. General: The Small Business Concern 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.

2. Format and Specific Content: The offeror shall submit a Small Business Concern Utilization Plan for itself and any joint venture member, as well as each proposed critical subcontractor in a separate volume (i.e., 3-ring binder) labeled “Volume IV – Small Business Concern Utilization Plan”. The Small Business Concern Utilization Plan shall address each of the following elements in the proposed performance of this resultant contract:

(a) 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,

(b) The description of the subcontracted work these proposed firms are to perform; and,

(c) The associated goals expressed in terms of percentages of the total planned subcontracted dollars. 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 Concern Utilization information.

F. Volume V, Cost/Price Proposal

1. General Submission Instructions: These instructions are to assist Offerors in submitting cost/price information that is required to evaluate Volume V - Cost/Price Factor. Offerors are cautioned that compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to comply may cause their proposal to be determined unacceptable. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness and balance. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs/prices rests with the offeror. Data beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted. All data relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation, must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Cost/Price volume. Under no circumstances shall this data and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal. If pricing information is included elsewhere in the documentation, the proposal may be deemed unacceptable. All prices shall be in “then-year dollars, that is, not constant (base year) dollars. All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar.

NOTE: See the “Instructions” tab within the Attachment 3, Noise Suppression Cost/Price Spreadsheet, for instructions on proposing within the RFP Attachment 3.

Offerors shall insert unit prices/rates as part of Volume V of the proposal in the Noise Suppression Requirement Cost/Price Spreadsheet in accordance with the following instructions:

(a) Offerors shall propose a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) in relation to the recurring tasks (CLINs X001 thru X017 and X019, see Exhibits in Attachment 3). Prices shall be proposed within the corresponding tab titled “Exhibits” in RFP Attachment #3, Noise Suppression Requirement Cost/Price Spreadsheet.

(b) Offerors shall propose FFP Labor Rates within the RFP Attachment #3, Noise Suppression Requirement Cost/Price Spreadsheet tabs titled “FFP Labor Rates”. All labor rates shall be fully burdened. All labor rates will be no-to-exceed rates.

(c) Offerors shall propose Cost Reimbursable No Fee (CRNF) Tavel (CLINwithin the RFP Attachment #3, Noise Suppression Requirement Cost/Price Spreadsheet tabs titled “Travel”.

(d) Each Offeror shall submit Volume V-Cost/Price Proposal in hard copy format and in electronic (Microsoft Excel) format. The Microsoft Excel worksheets provided shall contain mathematical formulas. Do not provide limit/protect the files to “read only” format. Scanned PDF or any other type of file are not acceptable. Electronic submittals shall comply with the following:

(1) They shall be submitted on a CD-R (Write once/read only. CR-R/W and DVD-R/W are not acceptable. All media must be virus scanned by the offeror prior to submittal.)

(2) Data files/CD-Rs should be accessible by a computer running Windows 7 or higher.

(3) Data files should be .xls or .xlsx file format (Microsoft Excel 2007 or later).

MEDIA MUST BE VIRUS SCANNED BY THE OFFEROR PRIOR TO SUBMITTING TO THE GOVERNMENT.

SECTION M PROVISION

M-900. EVALUATION BASIS FOR AWARD

I. Basis for Contract Award A. Source Selection Methodology: This acquisition will utilize the Tradeoff source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-2 and 15.3 as supplemented by the DoD Source Selection Procedures referenced in DFARS 215.300 and the AFFARS Mandatory Procedures 5315.3 to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. The Government intends to award one 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 and have acceptable Small Business Concern Utilization, tradeoffs may be made between technical risk, past performance and cost/price. Technically acceptable proposals with a High or Unacceptable technical risk rating will not be considered for award. Past Performance is slightly more important than Technical. When combined, technical risk and past performance are considered significantly more important than cost/price. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) reasonably determines that the lower technical risk and/or superior past and present performance of the higher priced offeror outweighs the cost difference. To arrive at a best value decision, the SSA will integrate the source selection team’s evaluations of the factors and subfactors described in this provision. 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. Offerors are reminded that the Government will only evaluate one proposal from each offeror. Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to all required terms and conditions, includes all required representations and certifications, meets all requirements set forth in the RFP and also provides the best value to the Government based on the results of the evaluation as described in paragraph II below.

II. Proposal Evaluation: The evaluation process will be accomplished as follows (Organized by volume):

A. General

1. Discussions: The Government intends to award this contract after discussions, which will be held in accordance with FAR 15.306. If the Contracting Officer determines that 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.

B. Volume I, Completed RFP

1. Cross Reference Matrix: The cross reference matrix will be utilized as a tool to show critical interrelationships and dependencies among the technical requirements documents (Performance-Based Work Statement (PWS)), 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 informational purposes only, and the Government shall be obligated to evaluate proposals solely in conformance with the provisions of Section M of the solicitation.

C. Volume II, Technical Factor

1. General: Each offeror’s written 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 Performance Based Work Statement for Noise Suppressor Repair, Refurbishment, and Relocation dated x x xxx xx , and demonstrates a thorough knowledge and understanding of those requirements and their associated risks. The technical proposal addresses each of the following subfactors in sufficient detail. For each subfactor, the offeror identifies 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.

SUBFACTOR 1: TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF SAMPLE TASK 1 – RELOCATION CAPABILITY

a.

This Subfactor is met when the Offeror’s proposal adequately describes a realistic, achievable, and viable approach to its repair process and technical ability to relocate the noise suppressor. At minimum, the Offeror’s proposal addresses the following:

1. A proposed Performance-Based Work Statement (PWS), developed in accordance with and meeting all requirements found in Appendix E of the basic contract PWS to solve the minimum requirements stated in the sample task. At a minimum, the PWS should include the expected outcome and a list of work tasks to be performed down to the 3rd work breakdown structure level.

2. An ATP including a list of testing/inspection requirement in sufficient detail to conduct a full functional/operational test of the T-10 Noise Suppressor.

3. An IMS including clearly defined roles and responsibilities of the offeror and sub-contractors as applicable to meet the requirement.

4. A description of the OSS&E approach including all data deliverables; processes, procedures and quality controls for creating and updating engineering drawings and other Technical Data Package (TDP) contents including obsolete data to maintain conformance to the existing hardware/software configuration; and technical data during all phases of the sample task. Included is the methodology for handling engineering evaluation of deviations from blueprint specifications/standards.

SUBFACTOR 2: TECHNICAL EVALUATION OF SAMPLE TASK 2 – NOVEC FSS CONVERSION CAPABILITY b.

This Subfactor is met when the Offeror’s proposal adequately describes a realistic, achievable, and viable approach to its conversion process and technical ability to convert the Fire Suppression System in a T-10 from Halon-based to Novec-based. At minimum, the Offeror’s proposal addresses the following:

1. A proposed Performance-Based Work Statement (PWS), developed in accordance with and meeting all requirements found in Appendix E of the basic contract PWS to solve the minimum requirements stated in the sample task. At a minimum, the PWS should include the expected outcome and a list of work tasks to be performed down to the 3rd work breakdown structure level.

2. An ATP including a list of testing/inspection requirement in sufficient detail to conduct a full functional/operational test of the T-10 Noise Suppressor.

3. An IMS including clearly defined roles and responsibilities of the offeror and sub-contractors as applicable to meet the requirement.

4. A description of the OSS&E approach including all data deliverables; processes, procedures and quality controls for creating and updating engineering drawings and other Technical Data Package (TDP) contents including obsolete data to maintain conformance to the existing hardware/software configuration; and technical data during all phases of the sample task. Included is the methodology for handling engineering evaluation of deviations from blueprint specifications/standards.

SUBFACTOR 3: RESOURCE PLANNING AND PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CAPABILITY

c.

This Subfactor is met when the Offeror’s proposal addresses Resource Planning and Program Management capabilities as described:

1. Processes, procedures, and controls proposed are detailed and sufficient to obtain and maintain a qualified workforce, parts, and materials, with a detailed plan describing how surge requirements or unforeseen personnel shortages will be met, in support of eight (8) total concurrent task orders at USAF locations (6 in CONUS and 2 in OCONUS).

2. Methodology proposed is sufficient to ensure employees are qualified to manage problem tracking (including detailed problem tracking methods) and corrective action measures.

3. Procedures proposed for internal communications and monitoring of sub-contracted activities are detailed and sufficient to ensure successful management of contract.

2. Technical Rating: The technical rating reflects the evaluation of the acceptability of the offeror’s technical approach for meeting the Government’s requirement. The offeror’s proposal shall be evaluated to determine whether the proposal is acceptable or unacceptable, using the ratings and descriptions outlined in the table 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:

3. Technical Risk Rating: 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, degradation of performance, the need for increased government oversight, and/or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. The evaluation shall address the Source Selection Team’s identification of any weaknesses and/or significant weaknesses, as well as the offeror’s identified risks and proposed mitigation (if applicable) and document why that is or is not manageable. Each technical subfactor will receive one of the Technical Risk ratings described in the DoD Source Selection Procedures, excerpted below.

Technical Risk Ratings: