Section L-Instructions to Offerors_Amd 3.pdf

Source Selection Information -- See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

CONTROLLED UNCLASSIFIED INFORMATION

Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

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 Request for Proposal (RFP) may cause their proposal to be determined to be unacceptable/non-compliant and therefore not eligible for award. No cost or price information will be included in the transmittal cover letter. 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 for Volume I. Offerors shall submit only one (1) proposal for the F-15 Foreign Military Sales Repair and Return (RRS) as the Government will review only one (1) proposal per Offeror. No additional proposals (i.e., one (1) offeror submitting two (2) proposals based on differing approaches) shall be submitted. Proposals must be received by AFLCMC/WAQKA, Attn: Shiela Hodges and Brenton Gibson, 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 30 calendar days prior to submittal of Volume II, Volume IV, and Volume V.

B. Communications: Exchanges of source selection information between Government and Offerors will be controlled by the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO). Email may be used to transmit such information only if the email can be sent encrypted and must include “Source Selection Information – See Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 2.101 and 3.104” in the subject line of the email.

Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via direct mailing, or Department of Defense (DoD) Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) at https://safe.apps.mil. When submitting source selection information electronically, file suppression utilities, to include but not limited to zip files, will not be accepted.

In order to facilitate the sending and receiving of encrypted emails, Offerors must use MS Outlook email 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 PCO 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 Shiela.Hodges@us.af.mil and/or Brenton.Gibson@us.af.mil.

Please clearly identify the email as a “test email for Repair and Return Services RFP:

FA8575-25-R-0002.

2) The PCO/Buyer 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:Shiela.Hodges@us.af.mil mailto:Brenton.Gibson@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” form 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.

When submitting source selection documentation, offerors shall contact the Contracting Officer Shiela Hodges at Shiela.Hodges@us.af.mil and the Contracting Specialist Brenton Gibson at Brenton.Gibson@us.af.mil via email to advise of information submittal and obtain acknowledgement of receipt.

NOTE: If an Offer’s computer system cannot support encryption technology, the Offeror shall send the PCO correspondence at the time that it submits its proposal stating that it accepts the risk of sending and receiving unencrypted electronic mail if it chooses to utilize unencrypted email as a channel of communication.

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.

II. Volume Organization

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

Volume Page Number of Hard Copies

Number of Soft Copies* Limits Description

I N/A 0 1 Completed RFP with Clauses to Include Joint Venture Agreement, RFP Attachment 8, Cross Reference Matrix & RFP Attachment 2, RFP Checklist

II 35 0 1 Written Technical Proposal III N/A 0 1 Past Performance

IV

N/A

Cost/Price Proposal to Include Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model & Attachment 12, Pre-award Accounting System Adequacy Checklist

V 5 0 1 Small Business Participation

*Electronic copies shall be submitted in accordance with Instructions to Offerors via encrypted email or DoD SAFE.

Cost/Price Proposal information to include the completed RFP Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model shall be submitted in electronic version only (no hard/written copies). The Cost/Price Proposal supporting information submitted shall be in either Word or PDF format with the RFP Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model submitted in .xlsx/Excel file format; other file formats will not be accepted.

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

1. The sealed package used to submit the proposal must show the time and date specified for receipt.

Each volume shall be in separate binders and marked with the RFP number and the Offeror’s name and address, and the number of the Volume, i.e. I, II, III, IV, V. Proposals shall be in the English language and all dollar values shall be proposed in United States dollars.

2. Print shall be no smaller than a font size of 12. Paper size shall be 8 ½” X 11”, excluding any drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, charts, or spreadsheets which shall not be greater than 11” X 17” paper. Double-sided printing shall count as two (2) pages. Each volume within the proposal notebook shall be clearly labeled to distinguish the volumes. Margins shall be no smaller than 1 inch and each page within a volume (written and electronic) shall be numbered consecutively.

Elaborate formats, bindings, and 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 and small business participation proposal in Word format.

3. The page limitation for Volume II, Written Technical Proposal, is thirty-five (35) pages. The page limitation includes any charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets, but excludes any cover page, 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 (2) pages. Offerors are cautioned that any pages that exceed the page limitation shall not be read but shall be removed and retained in the contract file without being considered in the evaluation.

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

5. In the event that hard copies and electronic copies of a proposal are submitted and if there are any discrepancies between the hard copies and the electronic copies of the proposal, the electronic copies will be used for evaluation.

6. Each page containing proprietary information shall be so marked and each page should contain the following legend at the bottom of each sheet:

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104

CUI

7. Submission of the initial proposal packages via electronic mail will be accepted. Initial proposal packages shall either be delivered electronically via encrypted email or DoD SAFE.

Offerors should allow for sufficient time to obtain a DoD SAFE drop-off link PRIOR to the time specified for receipt of proposals.

B. Volume I, Completed RFP

1. General: Volume I, Completed RFP shall consist of the completed and signed RFP (excluding Schedule B of the Schedule), 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. The Offeror shall fill out the RFP Checklist at Attachment 2, RFP Checklist, that has been provided and must be completed, signed and turned in with Volume I of their proposal. Each Offeror’s proposal will be validated for compliance utilizing the RFP Checklist, RFP Attachment 2. Any proposal failing to complete all items referenced on the checklist or complete the checklist itself may result in that Offeror’s proposal being deemed noncompliant with the RFP terms and conditions, therefore ineligible for award. Offerors shall ensure that all clauses and provisions that require “fill-in” information are appropriately completed IAW RFP Attachment 3, Clauses and Provisions Checklist, as well as the proposed prices associated with RFP Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model, which can be found in Volume IV, Cost/Price Proposal.

Schedule B is not to be filled in. All pricing information shall be submitted in Volume IV only.

2. Cross Reference Matrix: The Offeror shall fill out the cross-reference matrix at RFP Attachment 8, Cross Reference Matrix, 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 PWS, RFP Attachment 1, the Contract Line-Item Number (CLIN), the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), Section L (Instructions, Notices, and Conditions to Offerors), and Section M (Evaluation Factors 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 of 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.

3. Small Business Subcontracting Plan: The small business subcontracting plan required by FAR 52.219-9, as supplemented by the DFARS, 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. The small business subcontracting plan shall include the information required by FAR 19.7, DFARS 219.7 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 technical proposal and will be evaluated to assess technical acceptability (which includes the consideration of technical risk) in accordance with Section M-900, Evaluation Basis for Award. The technical proposal shall address each of the following subfactors to describe the Offeror’s proposed approach to performing the requirements set forth in the PWS, RFP Attachment 1, and Contract Security Classification Specification. 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 each of the subfactors and PWS paragraph numbers and subparagraphs listed below, RFP Attachment 1. Offerors shall address only one subfactor per section in the technical proposal. Avoid including subfactor discussions in multiple sections. Offerors must outline their ability to meet the PWS requirements listed in the subparagraphs below. Offerors must use the same subfactor numbers/headings/PWS paragraph numbers listed below.

2.1 Subfactor One - Management of Repair Sources

a) PWS paragraph 4.18, Qualified Source of Repair (SOR) Utilization: The offeror’s proposal shall provide a detailed description of the processes that will be employed to identify and utilize qualified SORs and integrate them into the established supply chain.

b) PWS paragraph 4.7, 4.11 and 4.28, Supply Chain Tracking and Analytics: The offeror’s proposal shall provide a detailed description of the Management Information System(s) and procedure(s) utilized to track supply chain status and perform analytics to evaluate supply chain performance.

c) PWS paragraph 4.11 and 4.15, Mission Impaired Capability Awaiting Parts (MICAP) Management: The offeror’s proposal shall provide a detailed description of the strategies that will be utilized for managing MICAP items to minimize their impact on repair timelines.

d) PWS paragraph 4.12.3 and 4.14, Work in Progress (WIP) Time Management: The offeror’s proposal shall provide a detailed description of the methods that will be utilized to https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/reference.htm manage, report, and analyze average aggregate WIP time to optimize repair efficiency.

e) PWS paragraph 4.4, Staffing and Retention: The offeror’s proposal shall provide a comprehensive staffing, recruiting, and retention strategy that demonstrates their ability to meet the requirements of the PWS including position(s), function(s), and number of personnel that aligns the offeror's workforce with the PWS requirements. The proposal shall address the offeror’s use of subcontractors if applicable.

f) PWS paragraph 4.1.2, 4.37, Local Compliance within Kingdom: The offeror’s proposal shall provide a detailed description of their understanding of and compliance with local laws, traditions, licenses, and security processes within the Kingdom. The offeror shall include a copy of their current Saudi Business license.

g) PWS paragraph 4.3, 4.3.1, 4.39, Transition of Services: The offeror’s proposal shall provide a detailed description of their approach to transitioning services, including the necessary activities, anticipated timelines, and dependencies. An integrated master schedule that outlines the transition approach shall be included, along with a thorough assessment of assumptions and potential risks that could impact the successful execution of the proposed transition of services. The detailed narrative shall include the demobilization strategy to affect the transfer of all assumed and/or acquired consumable material inventories on hand or due into the RSAF or a third party, and the cessation of all contractual activities.

2.2. Subfactor Two - Management of Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS)

PWS paragraph 4.25, Obsolescence Management Plan: Offeror’s proposal must provide their approach to management of DMSMS.

2.3. Subfactor Three - Manage Turn Around Time (TAT) at various Sources of Repair (SOR) PWS paragraph 4.12, Management of Turn-Around Time (TAT):

The offeror’s proposal shall provide a detailed description of their plan for managing TAT with key metrics including repair cycle time, rework rates, and equipment downtime.

D. Volume III, Past Performance

1. General: The Offeror shall submit Present and Past Performance Information (PPI) for itself and any joint venture member, as well as each proposed critical subcontractor in accordance with the format contained in the PPI Tool, RFP Attachment 6, Past Performance Information for Offerors, RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment, and the following paragraphs. A critical subcontractor is defined as an entity (subcontractor and/or teaming member), other than the Offeror itself, that will perform more than 30 percent of the overall effort, based on the sum of the price proposed for each contract line item; or possesses the Saudi Business license the prime contractor is relying on to perform the efforts of the PWS. If critical subcontractor experience is submitted for consideration as part of the proposal, the offeror shall include a commitment signed by offeror and subcontractor certifying that if a contract is awarded resulting from the proposal, the parties commit to joint performance as proposed. If the signed commitment is not fully executed by both parties and provided with the Past Performance Proposal, subcontractor references will not be evaluated or considered. The evaluation of the offeror’s/joint venture member’s present/past performance WILL NOT include the present/past performance of any other subcontractor(s) or vendor(s), even though they may perform major or critical aspects of this requirement.

2. Past Performance Format: In addition to the PPI Tool submission, PPI shall be provided in a separate volume (i.e., 3-ring binder) labeled “Volume III – Past Performance” that includes an RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment. A summary page shall be provided describing the proposed role of the offeror, any joint venture member, and critical subcontractor (nature of work and percentage of overall work). Summary page information must clearly communicate how each proposed critical subcontractor meets the definition of a critical subcontractor established above.

Efforts submitted for critical subcontractors not meeting the established definition will not be evaluated. Efforts submitted for proposed critical subcontractors in which a signed commitment is not fully executed by both parties or is not provided with the proposal will not be evaluated. Each Offeror/Joint Venture member and critical subcontractor shall utilize the PPI Tool to complete information for three (3) active or completed efforts in the past three (3) years from the issuance date of the RFP (with at least one year of performance history) that the Offeror/Joint Venture member and critical subcontractor considers relevant in demonstrating its ability to perform the proposed effort. No more than three (3) efforts for Volume III should be submitted.

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 information provided in the PPI Tool shall clearly indicate the division or corporate organization that performed or is presently performing the contract.

Efforts listed may include those with the Federal Government, state and local governments or their agencies, and commercial customers. Offerors/joint venture members/critical subcontractors shall furnish all available CPARS for the efforts submitted for evaluation, as applicable. Submittal of any CPARS for the efforts submitted for evaluation are not included in the page limitations.

3. Ordering Type Contracts Submission: If the contract you are submitting is an ordering type contractual vehicle (for example, including but not limited to an Indefinite Delivery “D” type contract per FAR 16.5), only after issuance of a delivery/task order does performance occur. Given this, an individual order (or 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). Offerors are hereby cautioned that the Government will not evaluate basic ordering contracts without associated orders identified.

When determining what order (or series of orders) to submit for evaluation, please reference Section M, Paragraph II.D. for details on how the Government will evaluate each submitted effort for recency, relevancy, and quality. In order to achieve optimal scope and magnitude of effort and complexities, as described in Section M paragraph II.D.4 Note, the offeror should consider submitting a series of orders, if possible, to provide the longest length and the highest dollar value orders that are relevant to this instant acquisition. However, a series of orders should only be submitted if the series of orders is for continuous technical scope demonstrating relevancy to the instant acquisition. Not all ordering type contractual vehicles will have series of orders that meet these criteria. In this instance, only the single order demonstrating relevant technical scope should be submitted for evaluation.

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 accurate, complete, and in the correct format. If the information is not submitted in the correct format, the Government will not be able to evaluate the effort for recency, relevancy, and quality. There are specific places for submission of this information in the PPI Tool, RFP Attachment 6, and RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment. Please ensure the information submitted, in the PPI Tool, RFP Attachment 6, and RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment, 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, period of performance, and type and complexity of data deliverables, for each order or series of orders. See paragraph 3.1 below for further information on how to submit series of orders.

3.1 Series of Orders: When submitting a series of orders for evaluation, the offeror should list the orders under the basic ordering type contractual vehicle that demonstrate relevancy, as defined in the Relevancy Definitions in Section M paragraph II.D.4. Per the Note in Section M paragraph II.D.4, Relevancy consists of not only scope and magnitude (i.e. dollar value and period of performance) and the complexities (body of work), but also the programmatic and logistical considerations. The programmatic/logistical considerations include dollar value, length of effort, type and complexity of data deliverables. If an offeror submits a series of orders for evaluation, the total dollar value of each order, the period of performance dates of each order, and the type and complexity of data deliverables for each order shall be submitted. The total dollar value of each order (in the series of orders) shall be added up to calculate the Total Dollar Value to be used in the evaluation, for the submitted effort.

The total period of performance of each order (in the series of orders) shall be added up to calculate the Total Period of Performance to be used in the evaluation, for the submitted effort. The type and complexity of data deliverables provided on each order (in the series of orders) shall be evaluated as a whole for the series of orders.

Caution: All orders within the series of orders, being submitted, should be for the same continuous technical scope demonstrating relevancy to the instant acquisition. The Government reserves the right to request additional information from the offeror or Points of Contacts provided to verify that the series of orders is for the same continuous technical scope.

4. Key Personnel: The evaluation of the offeror’s/joint venture member’s present/past performance WILL NOT include the present/past performance of any key personnel, even though they may perform major or critical aspects of this requirement.

5. Subcontractor/Teaming Member Consent Form: In addition to the information provided in the PPI Tool and RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment, for each entity as required above, the offeror must submit a consent letter executed by each of its proposed teaming member(s) or critical subcontractor(s) authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the prime offeror to allow the prime offeror an opportunity to respond. A sample Subcontractor/Teaming Member Consent Form is attached to this RFP (see RFP Attachment 5, Joint Venture/Critical Subcontractor/Teaming Member Consent Form). The consent form shall be completed by the teaming member(s) and/or critical subcontractor(s) identified in the proposal. The completed consent forms shall be submitted as part of the Past Performance Volume.

6. Small Business Compliance in Past Performance Efforts: On the three (3) efforts 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/or critical subcontractor, address whether or not the Offeror/Joint Venture member and/or critical subcontractor awarded subcontracts to 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’s/joint venture member’s and/or critical subcontractor’s policy to utilize small business concerns** to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance.

* Small business offerors shall not simply identify themselves as a small business, as that does not address how the offeror utilized small business concerns** in the performance of the submitted effort.

**Small business concerns include small business categories of 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.

7. PPI Tool and Relevancy Assessment Attachment: The offeror/joint venture member or critical subcontractor (if applicable) must submit information for each past performance effort in the PPI Tool, RFP Attachment 6, and RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment. The offeror/joint venture member or critical subcontractor (if applicable) shall focus its responses on the PPI Tool, RFP Attachment 6, and RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment, so that they clearly correlate present and past performance with the requirements of this RFP. The information must clearly describe the relevance of the effort to the work proposed. Provide the most current information for the Points of Contact (POCs) identified in the PPI Tool. At least two of the following (in descending order of availability) should be identified as current POCs in the PPI Tool:

(a) Procuring Contracting Officer/Contract Negotiator or equivalent

(b) Program/Project Manager, or equivalent

(c) Administrative Contracting Officer/Contract Administrator or equivalent

(d) Other (As specified in the PPI Tool)

If problems were encountered during the performance of the identified contracts, provide evidence of the ability to isolate the root causes of problems and actions taken to resolve those causes in the information provided in the PPI Tool for each contract identified for evaluation. Problems not addressed in the PPI Tool but found by the Government during the evaluation of the information in this volume, will be assumed to still exist.

Note: In the case of Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS), if input has already been provided and the rationale/circumstance have not changed, DO NOT repeat them here.

8. Past Performance Questionnaire: RFP Attachment 9, Present/Past Performance Questionnaire Sheet, will be one (1) means used by the Government to obtain 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 Questionnaire (See RFP Attachment 9) to each of the Offeror’s, Joint Venture member(s)’ and/or critical subcontractor(s)’ (i.e., each entity’s) 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. RFP Attachment 10, Transmittal Letter, 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 outline in paragraph I.B. Communications above, and email to Shiela.Hodges@us.af.mil and/or Brenton.Gibson@us.af.mil. If mailing, mail directly to:

AFLCMC/WAQKA

ATTN: Shiela Hodges or Brenton Gibson 235 Byron Street, Suite 19A Robins AFB, 31098-1067 Reference: RFP: (FA8575-26-RB-002)

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

CUI

POCs may send the completed questionnaires via email and/or DoD SAFE site. Please have your PCs email Shiela Hodges or Brenton Gibson before emailing their response.

Once the 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 regard to comments made on the questionnaire is not permitted.

9. Client Authorization Letter: In the event 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 Past Performance Questionnaire. A sample client authorization letter is attached to this RFP (see RFP Attachment 11). 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 to indicate the commercial client has been notified of the requested/authorized interview and is for the Government’s use in case additional questionnaires need to be sent by the Government after RFP due date.

10. Follow-up Discussions: The Government may conduct follow-up discussions with any of the people identified in the PPI Tool or in the offeror’s Present/Past Performance Volume. Pursuant to FAR 15.305(a)(2)(ii), the Government may obtain other information by sending out additional questionnaires and through other sources, other than those listed in the PPI Tool.

11. RFP Attachment Legend: RFP Attachment 7, Relevancy Assessment, and RFP Attachment 9, 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 CUI”

E. Volume IV, Cost/Price Proposal

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

a) 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). Format for Cost/Price Model is supplied in RFP Attachment 4. Offerors shall review all instructions contained within RFP Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model, and shall ensure the information provided is compliant with the provided instructions. Cost or Pricing Data Requirements can be found in Section 2 below.

b) Detailed table of contents.

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

d) Definitions as necessary.

e) List identifying each major/minor subcontractors and vendors, reflecting the estimated total price, by CLIN, for each.

f) Date of current FPRA/FPRR for Prime, and all subcontractors with a proposed value equal to or greater than $2,500,000 (hereinafter referred to as major subcontractors) and proposing a cost-type arrangement with the Prime for CLINs 0002, X004, X005, X006, and 4008. Rates and factors shall be supplied for Prime, and all major subcontractors over $2.5M proposing a cost-type arrangement. If an FPRA/FPRR is not available, refer below to Section 2. Cost and Pricing Data Requirements.

g) 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.

h) 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 (IAW) 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. 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 12) and submit the completed document as part of Volume IV: 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 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.

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.

2. 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.

a. Elemental Cost Breakouts

Irrespective of the presence of adequate price competition, breakouts by individual cost elements shall be provided for proposed unit costs applicable to CLINs X002, X004, X005, X006, and 4008 for the Prime offeror to assist in the determination of cost realism. Elemental cost breakouts shall be provided as part of the offeror’s proposal and shall be in .xlsx file format (with live working formulas) as provided in the “Format A” and “Format D” worksheets contained within RFP Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model. 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, a prime offeror who has 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.

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

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

c) 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)

d) 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 .xlsx 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 IAW the terms and conditions of this solicitation.

IAW FAR 15.404-1(d), cost realism analysis shall be performed on cost-reimbursement contracts. All offerors valued at equal to or greater than $2,500,000 (for CLINs 0002, X004, X005, X006, and 4008) shall provide data other than certified cost and pricing data using spreadsheet Cost Formats A, B, C, and D (see RFP Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model) along with accompanying schedules, lists, and narratives to substantiate the cost realism for CLINs X002, X004, X005, X006, and 4008. This requirement also applies to major subcontractors over $2.5M who propose a cost-type arrangement with the Prime offeror. See section c. Proposed Subcontractor and/or Interdivisional Transfers below for additional information.

The Offeror’s cost proposal shall contain the proposed cost to the Government for performing the work described in the PWS, RFP Attachment 1, and the attached CDRLs. 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.

b. 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 4, Cost/Price Model, and shall ensure the information provided is compliant with the provided instructions.

c. Proposed Subcontractor and/or Interdivisional Transfers The Offeror shall submit a list of all proposed subcontractors and interdivisional transfers included in the proposal. For each entry, the Offeror shall identify:

(i) The supplier or vendor,

(ii) A description of the effort or item,

(iii) The type of subcontract or purchase agreement (i.e. fixed price, cost-type, etc.),

(iv) Whether the item was obtained competitively or sole source, and

(v) Commercial item determination support, if applicable.

Because this is a competitive procurement, certified cost or pricing data is not required from the Offeror or its subcontractors. However, the Offeror shall provide the same supporting documentation it relied upon to determine price reasonableness for any major subcontract, vendor quote, or material element. This may include competition results, catalog pricing, market research, historical pricing, or other price analysis support in accordance with FAR 15.404-3.

If a major subcontractor proposes a cost type arrangement, the subcontractor shall provide cost information at the same level of detail as required of the Offeror. This information is not considered certified cost or pricing data and will be used solely for cost realism evaluation. If a subcontractor declines to provide detailed information to the prime contractor, the subcontractor shall submit the required information directly to the Government under separate cover, and the Government will protect such information in accordance with applicable regulations.

d. Cost Formats A, B, C, and D The Cost Format worksheets (see RFP Attachment 4, Cost/Price Model) 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 X002, X004, X005, X006, and 4008 in “Format C” shall be pulled directly from the respective CLIN in “Format A” where possible. Offerors shall ensure that Columns Z-AA on worksheet “CLIN X002_Sample Repair Year” pull directly from the relevant “Format D” worksheet per subcontractor, i.e. the subcontractor’s proposed price shall feed into the prime offeror’s cost roll-up.

Cost Format A: “ Format A” is a detailed cost breakdown by cost elements, showing the details of the proposed labor rates, indirect rates and costs, and/or proposed fee by year. The offeror must show a summary of costs by each separate cost element, and proposed fee. The “Cost Format A” worksheets for CLINs X002, X004, X005, and X006 shall be entirely linked from the “Format B PRIME Rates” worksheet. The offeror should not enter any data directly into the “Cost Format A” worksheets.

Cost Format B: The “Cost Format B” worksheets, using the example format provided, shall be the source document for direct rates, indirect rates, material add-on factors, and fee for the prime and major subcontractors. The “Cost Format B” worksheets shall be linked to the “Format A” and “Format D” worksheets as applicable. The “Format B” worksheets shall include all proposed direct and indirect rates, estimating factors, fee and etc.

for each year. The purpose for linking the “Format B” worksheets 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.

Cost Format C: “ Format C” shall be used to roll up all proposed prices where possible, 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 during the Government’s evaluation, once all government estimate values have been entered. The “Format C” worksheet shall be linked to the “Format A” and “Format B” worksheets.

Cost Format D: “Format D” worksheets are for subcontractor/sub-tier vendor cost/price summary information, only for major subcontractors exceeding $2.5M that propose a cost-type arrangement. 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.