C-17_ROCC_Section_L__(31_May).docx

Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

C-17 ROLL-ON CONFERENCE CAPSULE (ROCC) PROGRAM

31 May 2018

1.0 PROGRAM INFORMATION

1.1 Program Structure and Objectives

The Roll-On Conference Capsule (ROCC) program is for the design, manufacture, test, and delivery of up to two (2) certified airworthy roll-on/roll-off command and control capsules capable of being loaded into the C-17A Globemaster III aircraft for the transport of, and use by, personnel during flight operations. The ROCC program will be managed by the C-17 Systems Program Office (SPO), an integrated acquisition/sustainment activity with personnel at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (AFB), Ohio and Robins AFB, Georgia. After contract award, the contractor will become a member of the ROCC Integrated Product Team (IPT) to produce and deliver mission- ready production ROCCs to the Air Mobility Command (AMC). The First Article (FA) capsule set will be used by the contractor to conduct all testing required for airworthiness certification and all integration testing. If airworthiness of the ROCC configuration is approved by the U.S. Government (USG), contract options may be exercised to turn the FA ROCC into a Production Configuration ROCC and procure one (1) additional production ROCC based on the approved airworthy configuration. In addition, heavy maintenance bench equipment, spares, training, and three years of Contractor Operations and Maintenance Support (CO&MS) for each production capsule may be procured through contract options. In accordance with (IAW) the model contract, the USG estimates the completed FA ROCC will be delivered to the USG at the integration testing location approximately 18 months after contract award. The FA ROCC will then undergo integration testing for approximately two (2) months to complete the planned developmental testing. The FA ROCC will then be returned to the contractor, as Government-Furnished Property, for any work necessary to become production configuration ROCC P-1. ROCC P-1 is estimated to be delivered approximately two (2) months after the FA ROCC has been returned to the contractor's facility. The USG estimates the additional production ROCC (P-2) will be delivered approximately seven (7) months after the Production ROCC option is exercised.

1.2 Small Business Set-Aside

This acquisition is a total small business set-aside in accordance with FAR 19.502-2. In order to qualify as a small business concern for a small business set-aside an offeror must either: 1) Be the manufacturer or producer of the end item being procured (and the end item must be manufactured or produced in the United States); or 2) comply with the specified requirements to qualify as a non-manufacturer.

1.3 Budget/Funding Information

The USG will fund the FA and airworthiness testing portions of the ROCC program with research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) funds. Procurement funding will be used for the production ROCCs, heavy maintenance bench equipment, spares, training, and drawings described in the Statement of Work (SOW), Paragraph 3.4.2.6. Operations and Maintenance funding will be used for the CO&MS portion of the effort.

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

2.0.1 The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by this Instructions to Offerors (ITO) and must be submitted IAW these instructions. The offeror shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the SOW, Systems Requirement Document (SRD), Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), and Model Contract. Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this ITO may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

2.0.2 The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. 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 that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities or experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal.

2.0.3 Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed art work, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

2.0.4 The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the model contract/solicitation. The offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid through this date.

2.0.5 In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one (1) paper copy of all unsuccessful proposals. The Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals, unless the offeror requests otherwise within 10 days of contract award.

2.1 Point of Contact

The Contracting Officer (CO) is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the CO. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the CO at the address located in Section 3.9 below.

2.2 Debriefings

The CO will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range; whereupon, they may request and receive a debriefing IAW FAR 15.505. Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a pre-award debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post-award debriefing.

However, offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The CO will notify unsuccessful offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision IAW FAR 15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request IAW the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

2.3 Discrepancies

If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing with supporting rationale, as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the CO to consider as related to the omission or error.

2.4 Electronic Reference Documents

All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website at https://www.fbo.gov/. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time email notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

2.5 Communications

Exchanges of source selection information between Government and offerors will be controlled by the CO. Email may be used to transmit such information to offerors only if the email can be sent and received encrypted and includes “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line. Otherwise, source selection information will be transmitted via mail or AMRDEC Safe Access File Exchange (https://safe.amrdec.army.mil/safe/Welcome.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 source selection information via encrypted email, you will need to contact the Buyer/CO indicated on the face page of the solicitation prior to that first submittal in order to exchange Public PKI key credentials. See Attachment 7 to this Section L for instructions to Exchange Encrypted and Signed E-Mail With External Contractors. To ensure the process is working correctly, send a test encrypted message first (without including any source selection information).

3.0 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

3.1 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization, Table 1. The number of hardcopies and electronic copies (CD ROM, DVD, etc.) required for submittal are described below. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table 1. The attachments identified in the table shall be separately bound in three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the ITO paragraph and noted in Table 1 below:

TABLE 1 - PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

Paragraph Number

and Electronic (E)-COPIES

PAGE LIMIT

3.2 Page Limitations

Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal and excess paper copies will be returned to the offeror as soon as practicable. Page limitations may be placed on responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs). The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the offerors. Each page shall be counted except the following: Cover pages, tables of contents, tabs, cross reference matrix, and glossaries.

3.2.1 Page Size and Format

3.2.1.1 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. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Pages shall be single spaced. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the font shall be Times New Roman and the text size shall be no less than 12 point. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software. Use at least 1-inch margins on the top and bottom and ¾-inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. These page size and format restrictions shall also apply to responses to ENs. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals. For Past Performance Information Tool printouts, use the default page size and format from the tool.

3.2.1.2 Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and each 8.5 x 11 surface of a foldout shall be counted as a separate page. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics not for pages of text. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 10 point. These limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals.

3.3 Pricing Related Data

All pricing information shall be addressed in the Cost/Price volume, and Section B of the Schedule of the RFP. Information shall be limited to Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) level pricing, including unit and extended pricing, as specified in Section B of the RFP.

3.4 Cross-Referencing

To the greatest extent possible, each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with a minimum of cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. The offeror shall provide a Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix. See Attachment 8 for a Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix.

3.5 Indexing

Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

3.6 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

3.7 Binding and Labeling

Each volume of the proposal should be separately bound in a three-ring, loose leaf binder permitting the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked as to volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification, and the offeror's name. The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder. One copy of the proposal shall be printed double-sided with pages flipped on the short end. At the top center of each page shall be two-hole punches (2 ¾ inches apart). All unclassified document binders shall have a color other than red or other applicable security designation colors. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed IAW FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

3.8 Electronic Offers

The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. For electronic copies, indicate on each CD ROM, DVD, and etc., the volume number and title. Use separate files to permit rapid location of all portions, including subfactors, exhibits, annexes, and attachments, if any. The offeror shall submit Volumes I through V in electronic format, using recordable CDs (CD ROM, DVD, etc.). Each volume shall be in a different directory on a CD. If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included. 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 hard copies will be used for evaluation. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in accordance with Section L, Attachment 6, Electronic Format for All Proposal Volumes.

3.9 Distribution

The "original" proposal shall be identified. Proposals shall be addressed to the CO and mailed or hand carried to:

Office Symbol: AFLCMC/AZA Attn: Georgia Larson, Contracting Officer C-17 ROCC Source Selection 1755 ELEVENTH STREET, Bldg 570, Room 115

WRIGHT-PATTERSON AFB, OH 45433-7404

Solicitation Number: FA8614-17-R-0001

4.0 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

4.1 Volume I - Executive Summary

In the executive summary volume, the offeror shall provide the following information.

4.1.1 Narrative Summary

The narrative summary of the entire proposal should be concise, to include addressing the significant risks, and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding price. The salient features should tie in with Section M evaluation factors/subfactors. Offerors will be required to describe in detail compliance with the small business size requirements of 13 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 121.406. Further, offerors that intend to subcontract part of this requirement must perform the primary and vital requirements of this contract and explain how the offeror will comply with 13 CFR Section 121.103, which details affiliation and ostensible subcontractor restrictions. Reference: https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/affiliation_ver_03.pdf. Any summary material presented in the Narrative Summary shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal.

4.1.2 High Level Operational Concept Graphic

Include a preliminary High Level Operational Concept Graphic (OV-1) that shows the ROCC in its planned operational environment. The High Level Operational Concept Graphic shall feature a graphical display of ROCC interfaces with Air Force material handling equipment (MHE), the C-17 aircraft, Steel Eagle, and servicing vehicles.

4.1.3 Table of Contents

Include a master table of contents of the entire proposal.

4.2 Volume II - Technical Volume

4.2.1 General

The Technical Volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. The responses will be evaluated against the Technical subfactors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology the offeror would use for accomplishing/ satisfying these subfactors. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By submitting a proposal submission the offeror is representing that it will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation.

4.2.2 Technical

In the technical volume, address the proposed technical solution for meeting the Government’s minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor.

4.2.2.1 Technical Risk Address Technical Risk associated with those aspects of the proposed technical approach the offeror considers to have the potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Classify each risk in accordance with DoD Source Selection Procedures Table 2B (Table 3 in Section M), Technical Risk Rating Method. Provide the rationale for each risk and its rating, including quantitative estimates of the impact on cost, schedule, and performance. Describe the impact of each identified risk in terms of its potential to interfere with or prevent the successful accomplishment of other contract requirements (for example: SOW or specification requirements), whether or not those requirements are identified as subfactors. Propose a realistic "risk handling strategy" or risk mitigator for identified risks that will eliminate or reduce risk to an acceptable level. Identify and classify any new risks introduced by such risk mitigation.

4.2.3 Volume Organization

The Technical volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

(1) Table of Contents

(2) List of Tables and Drawings

(3) Glossary

(4) Cross Reference Matrix

(5) Subfactor One

(6) Subfactor Two

(7) Subfactor Three

(8) Risk Matrix

4.2.4 Subfactor 1: System Engineering and Program Management The offeror shall provide:

4.2.4.1 A preliminary ROCC design based on the SRD requirements in Sections 3.8.1, 3.8.4, 3.8.6, 3.8.7, 3.10.5 and 3.10.6 and SOW Section 3.4.2, including: technical capability being provided, necessary preliminary engineering drawings, layouts, schematics, sketches, and proposed materials to best depict the design concept being proposed. Preliminary drawings, layouts, schematics, and sketches shall be in PDF format in the electronic copies.

4.2.4.2 An approach for accomplishing the required seat integration and structural analysis of the ROCC, to include the offeror's internal processes detailing the development process, showing how the technical aspects of the integration and analysis will be managed and completed.

4.2.4.3 An approach for the management of the ROCC program IAW SOW Section 3.4.1, using the proposed contract work breakdown structure. Include a preliminary integrated management plan and schedule for accomplishing all requirements in the RFP. Describe the number of months to deliver the FA ROCC after contract award (Government acceptance via DD Form 250), with appropriate detail to justify the offeror’s estimate.

4.2.4.4 For offerors that, at the time of RFP, hold certifications for ISO 9001:2008 or later or AS9100, it is sufficient to present copies of their certification documentation. Offerors which do not currently hold certification in ISO 9001:2008 or later or AS9100, or whose certifications have lapsed at the time of RFP, shall describe, within the number of pages allotted, the quality management system used by the offeror. In their description, the offerors shall use references from their process manuals and/or quality management manual for quality management activities, provision of resources, product realization, measurement, analysis and improvement. The offeror shall provide their quality management manual as an appendix, not to be applied against their page count.

4.2.4.5 A list of positions of the team members and major subcontracted partner team members that are critical to the design and development of the ROCC. The list of positions should include the qualifications (e.g., educational background and/or apprenticeships), professional certifications, and years of experience for each position in the respective fields. Do not submit résumés of personnel.

4.2.5 Subfactor 2: Testing and Airworthiness The offeror shall provide:

4.2.5.1 A test and verification management methodology defining the methods, capabilities, and strategic schedule showing how the offeror intends to manage and meet all verification requirements, as defined in SRD Section 4.0, SOW Sections 3.4.7 and 3.4.2.11 and the CDRLs called out in these sections of the SOW. Describe your approach to accomplishing the following:

4.2.5.1.1 Notifying the SPO when a test or verification is ready to be accomplished and witnessed by the Government representative (as required).

4.2.5.1.2 Supporting the Lead Development Test Organization (LDTO) during ROCC integration testing (described in SOW paragraph 3.4.7.6).

4.2.5.1.3 Involvement in pre-test safety activities (described in SOW paragraph 3.4.7.8), including participation in the Technical Review Board (TRB) and System Review Board (SRB).

4.2.5.1.4 Supporting the USAF airworthiness certification process with test reports and artifacts, IAW SOW paragraph 3.4.2.11, SRD 4.0 and CDRL A016 Data Accession List (DAL).

4.2.6 Subfactor 3: Integrated Logistics Support The offeror shall provide:

4.2.6.1 An approach for providing required technical manuals for field operators and maintainers as defined in SOW para 3.4.9.2, and for meeting the integrated logistics support requirements defined in SOW paragraph 3.4.9 for spare parts and packaging, handling, storage, and transportation (PHS&T).

4.2.6.2 A plan for providing the ILS elements necessary for the Air Force to accomplish operational level maintenance IAW SOW paragraphs 3.4.9. Describe how all CO&MS support will be provided IAW SOW 3.4.11, to include depot maintenance, refurbishment, and unique bench equipment.

4.2.6.3 An approach and conceptual schedule for training the ROCC maintainers, operators, and flight attendants as defined in the SOW paragraph 3.4.10. Include a preliminary plan for developing the training material to include the computer based training (CBT).

5.0 Volume III - Past Performance

5.1 Past Performance Information (PPI) Tool

Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format in Attachment 1, which contains instructions for use of the PPI Tool. The Government must be able to verify past performance information contained in the past performance volume. Past performance for subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners will not be evaluated. Past performance information which cannot be verified or is not from the prime offeror/contractor will not be evaluated or considered. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance.

5.2 Authorization Letter and Past Performance Questionnaire

For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter (Attachment 2) and Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3), authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror's performance.

5.3 Early Proposal Information

Each offeror is requested to submit the information shown in Attachment 1 for each relevant contract 15 days prior to the date set for receipt of proposals. Failure to submit early proposal information will not result in offeror disqualification.

5.4 Recent and Relevant Contracts

Submit information in accordance with Attachment 1, Past Performance Information Tool, on up to four (4) contracts the offeror considers most relevant in demonstrating ability to produce and/or perform the proposed effort. Past performance from key teaming partner/subcontractors will not be considered. Include rationale supporting the assertion of relevance. For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining recency and relevance, see Section M, section 3.2.

5.5 Specific Content

Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to an unacceptable rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The offeror is required to clearly demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. This may allow the offeror to be considered more favorably than without evidence of problem resolution. For example, submittal of quality performance indicators or other management indicators that clearly support that an offeror has overcome past problems is required. Categorize the relevant information into the specific Technical Subfactors and Cost/Price Factor used to evaluate the proposal.

5.6 Organizational Structure Change History

Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. A pamphlet or other commercial document describing such reorganizations may suffice. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts identified for past performance evaluation/performance assessment. Since the Government intends to consider past performance information provided by other sources, as well as that provided by the offeror, the "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts the offeror identified and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

6.0 Volume IV – Cost/Price Volume

6.1 General Instructions

These instructions are to assist Offerors in submitting information for the Cost/Price proposal. Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the proposal. Data submitted in the proposal should be information only essential to document or support the Cost/Price position. No pricing information shall be included in any other volume, including cover letters, unless specifically requested in the respective volume. All costs/prices shall be provided in US currency and rounded to the nearest dollar unless otherwise noted. Labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny. Proposed cost/price information shall be submitted in then-year dollars phased by the Government’s fiscal year (1 October – 30 September) unless otherwise noted.

6.1.1 Price Reasonableness: The CO has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in the acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the CO will review this determination and if, in the CO’s opinion, adequate price competition exists, no additional data will be requested. However, if at any time during this competition, the CO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, Offerors may be required to submit cost data to the extent necessary for the CO to determine the reasonableness of the price.

6.1.2 Cost or Pricing Data Requirements: In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support a determination of price reasonableness. If after receipt of proposals, the CO determines that there is insufficient data available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the Offeror shall be required to submit additional cost or pricing data in accordance with FAR 15.403-5.

6.1.3 Unbalanced Pricing: Unbalanced pricing may increase performance risk and could result in payment of unreasonably high prices. An offer may be rejected if the CO determines a lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

6.1.4 Cost Realism (CLINs 0002, 0006, 0009, 0010, and 0011):

6.1.4.1 The offeror shall prepare and submit the cost proposal in MS Office Word 2010 and Excel 2010 native formats. Files received in a format other than requested are unacceptable. The offeror is encouraged to provide narrative substantiation and rationale in MS Word and any numerical source data, cost summaries, tables, calculations, or similar detailed information in MS Excel. For information submitted in MS Excel, the offeror should use formulas and functions to the maximum extent practical and avoid using output type “value only” cells. If links are utilized, the offeror shall provide those reference files. Spreadsheets and cells within spreadsheets shall not be protected. Worksheets within spreadsheets shall not be hidden. Scanned documents in PDF files are not acceptable for the Cost/Price Volume.

6.1.4.2 Numerical data presented in the MS Word narrative that corresponds to a MS Excel submission shall be clearly referenced. Numerical data pasted into MS Word as a picture out of another file is discouraged unless it is clearly referenced to a corresponding MS Excel file or its derivation is unambiguous. The offeror is responsible for ensuring that the information provided, whether in MS Word, MS Excel, or hard copy, is traceable throughout the Cost/Price Volume and the remainder of the proposal, as applicable.

6.1.4.3 The Government will evaluate the realism of each Offeror's proposed costs on cost-plus type CLINs only. Cost Realism Analysis will only be performed on CLINs 0002, 0006, 0009, 0010, and 0011 in accordance with FAR 15.404-1(d). The Government will compute the Probable Cost (PC) for CLINs 0002, 0006, 0009, 0010, and 0011. The probable cost of performance is determined by adjusting each offeror’s proposed cost, and fee when appropriate, to reflect any additions or reductions in cost elements to realistic levels based on the results of the cost realism analysis. The probable cost may differ from the proposed cost and should reflect the Government’s best estimate of the cost of any contract that is most likely to result from the offeror’s proposal. The probable cost as determined by the Government will be used for purposes of evaluation to determine the best value. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed Cost/Prices rests with the offeror. Proper presentation and adequate supporting documentation are necessary to ensure the cost/price proposal is efficiently evaluated and all assumptions are understood. If the offeror does not, in the Government’s judgment, substantiate its cost proposal in part or as a whole, the Government may consider other data and the judgment of the members of the source selection evaluation team in determining the most likely cost. All of the Cost Realism instructions below also apply to all subcontractors who perform 15% or more effort related to any CPFF CLIN.

6.1.4.4 The Cost/Price Volume in support of the Cost Realism evaluation of the cost-plus CLINs shall be arranged into primary sections as follows:

6.1.4.4.1 General Information

6.1.4.4.1.1 The offeror shall provide an overview of the process used to develop the proposal. This shall include, at a minimum, a summary of the approach used to estimate labor hours, labor rates and material costs, including a description of the process to obtain any vendor quotes.

6.1.4.4.1.2 Indicate any deviations from the offeror’s standard estimating, purchasing, and accounting procedures in preparing this proposal volume. Also indicate whether the offeror has Government approval of its systems and if so, provide evidence of such approval.

6.1.4.4.1.3 Any accounting changes in the offeror’s estimating or accounting practices that impact the proposal’s historical data or basic assumptions shall be fully explained. General information shall be provided in this section, with specifics provided in the appropriate Basis of Estimate. The offeror shall also identify any changes to its accounting system that are planned or which are required to comply with this program’s requirements.

6.1.4.4.1.4 The offeror shall provide an explanation of ground rules and assumptions that affect the cost estimates. Topics to be addressed should include, but are not limited to: technical and programmatic requirements, business base, labor and overhead rates, investments, cost-sharing arrangements, make or buy decisions, prime-subcontractor relationships, and price escalation. General information shall be provided in this section, with specifics addressed in the appropriate Basis of Estimate or Additional Information section.

6.1.4.4.1.5 The offeror shall assume the following in the cost estimate per the noted SOW Paragraphs:

• 3.4.10.4 – 12 calls requiring reach-back support are anticipated over a 12 month period, following contractor conducted training

• 3.4.11.2 – 15 calls requiring reach-back support are anticipated per each year of CO&MS

• 3.4.11.3 – Two on-site maintenance visits are anticipated per each year of CO&MS

• 3.4.11.6 – One out-of-cycle depot maintenance event is anticipated per each year of CO&MS

6.1.4.4.2 Basis of Estimate (BOE)

6.1.4.4.2.1 Content - Provide the following information, at a minimum for each BOE:

• SOW requirement being addressed

• Technical activities required to meet the SOW requirement

• Task description including the disciplines required to perform the work. Description of tasks and technical approach shall be consistent with other parts of the proposal

• Risks and planned mitigations, as applicable

• Total costs and labor hours, as applicable, proposed by Government Fiscal Year

• Methods and calculations used to develop the estimate (see below)

• Source data, assumptions, and normalization (see below)

• Crosschecks and supporting data, if any, used to validate the realism of the estimate

6.1.4.4.2.2 The offeror shall include each of the above items in the BOE but may reference other parts of the proposal as the source of additional detail rather than repeating significant amounts of information in the Cost/Price volume. For example, if a particular risk applies to a particular BOE and the mitigation of that risk is covered in detail as part of the Technical Volume, the offeror may identify the particular risk in the BOE and refer to the Technical Volume for insight into its mitigation.

6.1.4.4.3 Methods

6.1.4.4.3.1 This section shall provide the estimating methodologies of the labor hours, labor costs, and material costs and address why the offeror’s proposed cost is realistic. Individual BOEs should be written in a clear, concise manner with enough information to allow the evaluator to easily read and understand the basis of estimate and judge its credibility. The offeror shall describe the BOE in sufficient detail to enable the Government to replicate the offeror’s estimate.

6.1.4.4.3.2 The offeror may use any generally accepted estimating techniques to develop its estimates, including, but not limited to, cost-to-cost and cost-to-non-cost estimating relationships, commercially available parametric cost models, in-house developed parametric cost models, and adjusted or unadjusted historical performance on analogous tasks. Historical data from comparable or analogous systems or subsystems should be used to substantiate the offeror’s estimate where possible; multiple comparisons or cross-checks are preferred and generally enhance (but do not guarantee) estimate credibility.

6.1.4.4.4 Source Data

6.1.4.4.4.1 When using historical data, a summary programmatic and technical description of the analogous system should be provided along with the actual cost data for the analogous system and a comparison to the proposed system. This information is required in order to identify parameters that are likely to influence the cost of the proposed system, and to establish the relationship between the proposed system and the analogous system. Historical data used in the BOEs should trace to total program costs reported in auditable reports (e.g., prior cost and technical CDRL items). The cost data should be provided in terms of total hours and dollars actually spent by fiscal year and per unit as applicable. Also include an explanation of the relationship between the analogous element cost and its total program cost.

6.1.4.4.4.2 The offeror should describe how the historical effort is comparable to the proposed program. This includes an explanation of the technical and programmatic similarities and differences between the historical and proposed systems. The offeror should provide a technical description including the performance and physical aspects of the historical system. This describes the systems in terms of the number of parts, physical configuration, type of material, technology, as well as physical and performance parameters. The offeror should also provide a programmatic description related to the acquisition aspects of the historical system. This includes, for example, the years the item was procured, production rates, quantities procured by year and definition of system composition, sole source or competitive procurement, and the development time period.

6.1.4.4.4.3 The offeror should explain how cost data available from past experiences was adapted to reach the estimate for the proposed system. The offeror should provide the basis and document any adjustments applied to the historical data in order to reach the proposal estimate. All relevant assumptions should be identified and justified.

6.1.4.4.4.4 General statements such as “estimates were derived from engineering analysis or judgments” are insufficient. Other approaches not considered sufficient include (not an exhaustive list): calculations without supporting rationale and data; CERs without providing an explanation of its application and merit to the proposed program and the historical data used in the derivation of the CER or documentation from the cognizant Administrative Contracting Officer supporting its established use within the company’s estimating system; and references to analogous systems without providing the historical data, an explanation of the similarities or differences to the proposed program, and justification for all adjustments made to the historical data in developing the proposal.

6.1.4.4.5 Rates, Cost to Sell Equations, and Escalation

6.1.4.4.5.1 The offeror shall provide labor rate information used in the proposal in this section. If providing rates over a different period of performance than the Government fiscal year (e.g. on a calendar year basis), include a trace between these rates and Government fiscal year rates used in developing the estimate.

6.1.4.4.5.2 The offeror shall identify the basis of labor rates used in the proposal, e.g. Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRAs), Forward Pricing Rate Proposals (FPRPs), Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs), Area Wage Determinations (AWDs), Government-recommended rates, or special rates analysis in support of the proposal. Submit a copy of any such document or agreement used as the basis for, or used as the starting point of special rates analysis in support of, proposed labor rates. If the offeror does have any of the above mentioned options, it must provide the most recent three (3) years of historical information for all direct and indirect rates along with rate explanations to support the proposed rates.

6.1.4.4.5.3 The offeror shall identify the indirect rates used in the proposal. The offeror should include a projection of indirect rates that assumes the award of this contract and options in its business base. Any deviation from the current FPRA (or current FPRP if there is no FPRA) or from historical company labor rate information (if the offeror does not negotiate rates with the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA)) due to the award, variation of the business base or other factors should be fully described and justified. Discuss the application of these rates in the proposal. In addition, provide summary-level definitions for each major indirect rate account, explaining what costs are included in each indirect pool. The indirect accounts may include, but are not limited to, engineering overhead, manufacturing overhead, G&A, material handling overhead, and FCCOM.

6.1.4.4.5.4 The offeror shall identify the direct labor rates used in the proposal. Any deviation from the current FPRA (or current FPRP if there is no FPRA) or from historical company labor rate information (if the offeror does not negotiate rates with DCMA) should be fully described and justified. Discuss the application of these rates in the proposal, including the build-up of any composite or aggregated direct labor rates. In addition, provide a complete list of the offeror’s direct labor categories, including definitions for each, and describe the mix of direct labor categories included in the proposal. Direct labor categories may include, but are not limited to, engineering, manufacturing, maintenance and support, tooling, quality control, manufacturing, and integration.

6.1.4.4.5.5 The offeror shall submit the methodology used to transfer foundational cost data (i.e. direct labor hours or material direct dollars) into a sell price to the Government (i.e. fully-burdened with fee). This includes the sequence in which indirect rates, profit, etc. were applied to direct costs to determine the sell price. Include the base against which each of the overhead or other factors is applied in this description.

6.1.4.4.5.6 The offeror shall provide all escalation-related assumptions used in the proposal. Information required in this section includes, but is not limited to, annual rates of escalation, source of escalation indices, rationale for its application, and the method of application.

6.1.5 Total Evaluated Price (TEP) Prices proposed for all CLINs (Basic and Option CLINs) will be used by the Government in calculating Total Evaluated Price (TEP) in accordance with Section M paragraph 4.4.

6.2 Other Information

6.2.1 Funding Profile The offeror shall submit a preliminary profile for the total proposed value by completing the Progress Payment Billing Forecast chart as found in Attachment 4.

7.0 Volume V - Contract Documentation

7.1 Model Contract/Representations and Certifications

The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file. The offeror's proposal shall include a signed copy of the Model Contract, and Sections A through K. This includes:

7.1.1 Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

Completion of blocks 15A, 15B, 15C, 16 and signature and date for blocks 17 and 18 of the Standard Form 33. Signature by the offeror on the Standard Form 33 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept. The "original" copy should be clearly marked under separate cover and should be provided without any punched holes.

7.1.2 Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices

The offeror shall complete the pricing information and other fill-ins/blanks found in Section B of the model contract. This can be accomplished on the model contract itself or on a separate sheet of paper and an electronic file.

7.1.3 Section F - Deliveries or Performance

The offeror shall propose the delivery schedule by completing the fill-ins/blanks in Section F of the model contract. This can be accomplished on the model contract itself or on a separate sheet of paper and an electronic file.

7.1.4 Section I - Contract Clauses

The offeror shall provide the required information in accordance with Section I of the model contract.

7.1.5 Section K - Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors The offeror shall provide completed representations, certifications, acknowledgments and statements.

7.2 Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, price, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format and content of Table 2.

TABLE 2 - SOLICITATION EXCEPTIONS

can/will not be met

7.3 Other Information Required

7.3.1 Authorized Offeror Personnel Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to the proposal and who can obligate the company contractually.

7.3.2 Government Offices Provide the mailing address, telephone and fax numbers and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, DCAA, and Government Paying Office. Also, provide the name and telephone and fax number for the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO).

7.3.3 Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations Provide company/division's street address, county and facility code; CAGE code; DUNS code; TIN; size of business (large or small); and labor surplus area designation. This same information must be provided if the work for this contract will be performed at any other location(s). List all locations where work is to be performed and indicate whether such facility is a division, affiliate, or subcontractor, and the percentage of work to be performed at each location.

7.3.4 Non-Government Advisor Offerors are advised that a contractor will participate as a non-Government advisor in the evaluation of proposals. The advisor will be authorized access to only those portions of the proposal data and discussions that are necessary to enable them to provide specific advice on specialized matters or on particular problems. The non-Government advisor will not be allowed to establish initial or final assessments of risks, or actually rate or rank offerors proposals. The advisor will have access to offerors proprietary, confidential or privileged commercial or financial data. The advisor will sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement. Any objection to disclosure of information to the non-Government advisor should be provided in writing within 10 days of RFP issuance and shall include a detailed statement for the basis of the objection. The following company in Table 3 will provide a non-Government advisor to assist the C-17 ROCC Government team during the source selection process:

TABLE 3 – NON-GOVERNMENT ADVISORS

7.3.5 Attachments to the Model Contract The offeror shall provide the following as attachments to the model contract:

7.3.5.1 Data Rights List The offeror shall submit a data rights list IAW DFARS 252.227- 7013, -7014, -7015, -7016, -7017 and -7037. The list will be reviewed and attached to the model contract.

7.3.6 Required Attachments

7.3.6.1 Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) and CWBS Dictionary The offeror shall include a preliminary Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS), per MIL-STD-881D, and dictionary, which reflects the offeror’s view of the contract effort down to CWBS Level 3. The CWBS shall serve as the framework for organizing the ROCC program to include in-house, inter-divisional, and subcontractor activities. The CWBS shall be developed to a depth (level) and breadth sufficient to accurately describe the offeror's understanding of the effort required for the ROCC program as reflected in the SOW. The offeror’s final proposed CWBS and corresponding dictionary shall be provided as part of the model contract IAW CDRL A003. The mapping of CLINs to WBS elements shall be completely consistent with that shown in Section B of the Model Contract.

8.0 List of Attachments: Section L attachments are listed below:

Attachment 1: Past Performance Information Tool Attachment 2: Client Authorization Letter Template Attachment 3: Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment 4: Progress Payment Billing Forecast Attachment 5: Pricing Matrix Attachment 6: Electronic Format for All Proposal Volumes Attachment 7: Encryption Email Instructions Attachment 8: Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix

FA8614-17-R-0001

Section L Attachment 1 Instructions to Offerors Past Performance Information (PPI) for Offerors

Offerors must use the PPI Tool (Use latest version from FBO.gov) in order to electronically submit the PPI portion of the Past Performance Volume in accordance…