UPDATED_Section_L_29Jul2016.pdf

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

L-I - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

NOTICE: Pursuant to FAR 52.252-1, "SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE," the following provisions are incorporated herein by reference:

A. FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (48 CFR CHAPTER 1) SOLICITATION PROVISIONS:

PARAGRAPH TITLE DATE

B. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION SUPPLEMENT

(48 CFR CHAPTER 2) SOLICITATION PROVISIONS:

C. AIR FORCE FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION SUPPLEMENT SOLICITATION

PROVISIONS:

L-II - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS IN FULL TEXT

NOTICE: The following provisions are hereby incorporated in full text:

A. FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (48 CFR CHAPTER 1) SOLICITATION

B. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION SUPPLEMENT

(48 CFR CHAPTER 2) SOLICITATION PROVISIONS:

C. AIR FORCE FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION SUPPLEMENT SOLICITATION

file://periwinkle_vnx/SAF_AQC_ORG/AQCP/5640%20-%20AFFARS/Templates%20Project%20--%20Sep%202013/5315/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR52.246.doc#b522521

D. ADMINISTRATIVE AND ONE-TIME USE PROVISIONS:

L-III - INFORMATION TO OFFERORS (ITO) AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL

PREPARATION

L-I - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE 1

L-II - SOLICITATION PROVISIONS IN FULL TEXT 1

L-III - INFORMATION TO OFFERORS (ITO) AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION 2

1.0 BUDGET/FUNDING INFORMATION 5

2.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 5

2.1 GENERAL INFORMATION 6

2.1.1. POINT OF CONTACT 6

2.1.2. DEBRIEFINGS 6

2.1.3. DISCREPANCIES 6

2.1.4. ELECTRONIC REFERENCE DOCUMENTS 7

2.1.5. COMMUNICATIONS 7

2.1.6 OCI MITIGATION PLAN 7

2.2 ORGANIZATION/NUMBER OF COPIES/PAGE LIMITS 7

2.2.1 PAGE LIMITATIONS 8

2.2.1.1 PAGE SIZE AND FORMAT 8

2.2.2 COST OR PRICING RELATED DATA 8

2.2.3 CROSS-REFERENCING 8

2.2.4 INDEXING 9

2.2.5 GLOSSARY OF ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 9

2.2.6 BINDING AND LABELING 9

2.2.7 ELECTRONIC OFFERS 9

2.2.8 DISTRIBUTION 9

3.0 VOLUME I - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 10

3.1 NARRATIVE SUMMARY 10

3.2 TABLE OF CONTENTS AND CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX 10

4.0 VOLUME II – TECHNICAL “MISSION CAPABILITY” VOLUME 10

4.1 GENERAL 10

4.2 FORMAT AND SPECIFIC CONTENT 10

4.2.1 TECHNICAL 11

4.2.1.1 TECHNICAL RISK 11

4.2.2 VOLUME II “MISSION CAPABILITY” ORGANIZATION 11

4.2.3 MISSION CAPABILITY; SUBFACTOR 1: DOMAIN KNOWLEDGE 11

4.2.4 MISSION CAPABILITY; SUBFACTOR 2: PRODUCTS AND INTEGRATION WITH CYBERSECURITY 12

4.2.5 SUBFACTOR 3: TRANSITION PLAN AND PROGRAM EXECUTION 13

4.2.6 SUBFACTOR 4: BUILD-ON-DEMAND TOOLSET 15

5.0 VOLUME III - PAST PERFORMANCE 15

5.1 GENERAL 15

5.2 LETTERS OF CONSENT 16

5.3 RELEVANT CONTRACTS 16

5.3.1 SPECIFIC CONTENT 16

5.3.2 ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE CHANGE HISTORY 16

6.0 VOLUME IV – SMALL BUSINESS 17

6.1 SMALL BUSINESS PLAN 17

7.0 VOLUME V – COST/PRICE 17

7.1 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 17

7.1.1 PRELIMINARY DETERMINATION OF ADEQUATE PRICE COMPETITION 17

7.1.2 GROUND RULES AND ASSUMPTIONS 17

7.1.3 ESTIMATING TECHNIQUES AND METHODS 18

7.1.4 SUBCONTRACTOR/INTERDIVISIONAL TRANSFER (IDT) COST PROPOSALS 18

7.1.5 DELIVERY OF COST PROPOSALS 18

7.1.6 ROUNDING 18

7.1.7 COST/PRICE USING FISCAL YEARS 18

7.2 COST/PRICE VOLUME(S) 18

7.2.1 SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 19

7.2.1.1 Estimating System Summary 19

7.2.1.2 Purchasing System Summary 19

7.2.1.3 Accounting System Summary 19

7.2.1.3.1 Approved System for Performing Cost Type Contracts 19

7.2.1.4 Adequate Disclosure Statements 20

7.2.1.5 Earned Value Management (EVM) System Summary 20

7.2.1.6 Explanation of Estimating Methods Used for Cost Type Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) 20

7.2.1.6.1 Analogous/Historical Data 20

7.2.1.6.2 Cost Tools 20

7.2.1.6.3 Learning Curve Estimates 20

7.2.1.6.4 Labor Hours 20

7.2.1.6.5 Labor Skill Mix 21

7.2.2 SECTION 2: SUBCONTRACTS/IDT 21

7.2.2.1 Major Subcontractor/Interdivisional Transfer (IDT) Analysis 21

7.2.2.2 Subcontractor/IDT Summary 21

7.2.3 SECTION 3: BASIS OF ESTIMATE (BOE) 21

7.2.3.1 BOE Methodology 22

7.2.3.2 BOE Content 22

7.2.4 SECTION 4: OTHER INFORMATION 23

7.2.4.1 Cost Reductions 23

7.2.4.1.1 Management Reduction 23

7.2.4.1.2 Commonality with Other Programs 23

7.2.4.2 Administrative Information 23

7.2.4.3 Direct and Indirect Rates 24

7.2.4.4 Government-Owned Facilities 24

7.2.4.5 Government Furnished Equipment/Property (GFE/P) 24

7.2.4.6 Government Support 24

7.2.4.7 Supporting Rationale for Fee 25

7.2.4.8 Escalation Rates 25

7.2.4.9 Contractor Work Breakdown Structure and CWBS Dictionary 25

7.2.5 SECTION 5: COST FORMAT INSTRUCTIONS – SUBMISSION OF COST FORMATS 25

7.2.5.1 Cost Format Instructions - Delivery Order 0001 25

7.2.5.1.1 CLIN Summary, Delivery Order 0001 25

7.2.5.1.2 Cost Element Summary, Delivery Order 0001 26

7.2.5.1.3 CLINs 1001, 2001, 3001, 4001, 5001, and 3101 Cost Element Summary, Delivery Order 000126

7.2.5.1.4 Bill of Material (BOM), Delivery Order 0001 26

7.2.5.1.5 Labor Hours, Delivery Order 0001 26

7.2.5.1.6 Rates, Delivery Order 0001 27

7.2.5.1.7 GFY Summary, Delivery Order 0001 27

7.2.5.1.8 Price Track, Delivery Order 0001 27

7.2.5.1.9 Cost Plus Incentive Fee Arrangement, Delivery Order 0001 27

7.2.5.2 Cost Format Instructions - Delivery Order 0002 27

7.2.5.2.1 CLIN Summary, Delivery Order 0002 27

7.2.5.2.2 Cost Element Summary, Delivery Order 0002 27

7.2.5.2.3 CLINs 6001 and 7001 Cost Element Summary, Delivery Order 0002 28

7.2.5.2.4 CLIN 8001 Cost Element Summary, Delivery Order 0002 28

7.2.5.2.5 Bill of Material (BOM), Delivery Order 0002 28

7.2.5.2.6 Labor Hours, Delivery Order 0002 28

7.2.5.2.7 Rates, Delivery Order 0002 28

7.2.5.2.8 GFY Summary, Delivery Order 0002 28

7.2.5.2.9 Price Track, Delivery Order 0002 29

7.2.5.3 IDIQ Total Effort 29

7.2.5.3.1 IDIQ Total Proposed Effort 29

7.2.5.3.2 B-Table 29

7.2.5.3.3 Labor Category Descriptions 29

8.0 VOLUME VI - CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION 29

1.0 Budget/Funding Information

**NO BUDGET WILL BE PROVIDED**

The table below is a representation of the hourly amount of Budgeted Cost of Work Performed (BCWP) for each year. The Delta (∆) column represents the change in hours between the years. The table shows a Government estimate totaling the number of hours annually for SEIC in the last four years, which is inclusive of subcontractor hours and some Bill of Materials. This is for informational purposes only;

please use your best judgement and engineering estimates when developing your proposal.

Year cumBCWP (hrs) ∆BCWP (hrs)

2012 51,892.80 ∆2012 -1,267.60

2013 50,625.20 ∆2013 7,935.20

2014 58,560.40 ∆2014 17,028.00

2015 75,588.40 ∆2015 -12,251.20

2016 63,337.20

2.0 General Instructions

(a) This section provides general guidance for preparing the proposal as well as specific instructions on the format and content of this proposal. The Offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested and must be submitted in accordance with (IAW) these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with all RFP requirements to include the Statement of Work (SOW), Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), Security Classification Guide (SCG), DD Form 254 and the Solicitation Sections A-K. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation or a determination that the proposal is non-responsive. All claimed technical, management, performance, and schedule capabilities to meet RFP requirements shall be realistic and are subject to verification by the Government.

(b) 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; rather, it shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet the Government's requirements. The Offeror shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal. Such information may include but is not limited to; responses to evaluation notices and responses to other question and answer sessions conducted by the Government during the evaluation process. In the event such information is provided orally, the Government reserves the right to ask the Offeror to provide written confirmation (either by letter or by E-mail) of the information.

(c) Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

(d) The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the Solicitation. The proposal shall be valid for a period of not less than 365 days from the required submission date. The Offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid for this time period.

(e) IAW FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the Offeror requests otherwise, the Government will destroy the extra copies of unsuccessful proposals.

(f) Offerors are instructed to insert their Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) in Section G, clause G015, titled "Implementation of Taxpayer Identification Number” (APR 1998).

2.1 General Information

2.1.1. Point of Contact

Ms. Lisa Barone, the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), is the primary point of contact (POC) for this acquisition. Mr. Shawn Walles is the alternate POC for this acquisition. The Offeror shall address in writing any questions or concerns he may have to both the PCO and the alternate POC. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the PCO, with a copy to the alternate POC, at the address located in Section A of the Solicitation and as listed below:

PCO: Ms. Lisa Barone, lisa.barone@us.af.mil Alternate POC: Mr. Shawn Walles, shawn.walles@us.af.mil

Address: Hanscom AFB, MA (AFLCMC/HBM) Attn: Ms. Lisa Barone, PCO 11 Barksdale St, Bldg 1614, Phase 1 Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-1700

2.1.2. Debriefings

The PCO will promptly notify Offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range;

whereupon, they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with 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. The PCO will notify unsuccessful Offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR

15.506. Upon such notification, unsuccessful Offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

2.1.3. 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 PCO in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Offeror is asking the PCO to consider as related to the omission or error. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received without discussion. This reservation includes matters of additional or substitute pages of the initial proposal.

2.1.4. Electronic Reference Documents

A reference document repository has been established at Hanscom AFB, MA. A request form and a list of referenced documents for this solicitation will be provided on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website at http://www.fedbizopps.gov. Electronic Reference Documents must be requested via the request form on the FBO site. Files will subsequently be sent via AMRDEC SAFE where the potential Offeror will receive a system generated email with a link and password. AMRDEC SAFE is a method of secure file exchange for restricted documents. Separately, each request will be followed up with an email from the Program Office with a password for access to the individual files sent via AMRDEC. The Government, while trying to ensure document applicability and currency, does not guarantee the accuracy or compliance of the information contained in the repository documents. All documents are subject to revisions and changes without further notice. If documents are added, a notice will be posted to FBO along with an updated list of documents. The document requests will be accepted until one day prior to the proposal due date.

2.1.5. Communications

Exchanges of source selection information between Government and Offerors will be controlled by the PCO. 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 AMRDEC SAFE File Exchange.

2.1.6 OCI Mitigation Plan

The offeror shall submit an Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan if applicable to mitigate any potential OCIs resulting from the Offeror or its subcontractor teammate’s participation in this acquisition. This plan will be evaluated to determine if an actual OCI exists and whether sufficient safeguards are in place to render the offeror eligible for contract award. Under some circumstances, an OCI mitigation plan may not be sufficient to correct an OCI. Submitting an OCI Mitigation Plan does not guarantee that an Offeror will be successful in mitigating an OCI. Failure to submit such a plan when a potential OCI exists will render the Offeror ineligible for award. Similarly, failure to mitigate a potential OCI will also render an Offeror ineligible for award. The OCI Mitigation Plan does not account against the page limitations in the Offer.

2.2 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table 2.2 below. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table. All volumes shall be provided within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table 2.2. Three copies of electronic media shall include the volumes identified in the table. Electronic media for the purposes of this solicitation is defined as single layer DVDs. Blu-ray discs will not be accepted. Two physical copies of what is provided on the DVD should be included in the submittal. Physical copies shall be placed in bound three-ring, loose-leaf binders (see paragraph 2.2.6 Binding and Labeling. The contents of each proposal volume are described in Table 2.2 as noted below.

Table 2.2 - Proposal Organization

VOLUME ITO Paragraph Number

VOLUME TITLE PAGE LIMIT

http://www.fedbizopps.gov/

I Executive Summary 15 II Mission Capability 75

II A Transition Plan 20 II B Risk Matrix 5 III Past Performance (3) 20 IV Small Business Unlimited V Cost/Price Unlimited VI Contract Documentation Unlimited

2.2.1 Page Limitations

Page limitations shall be treated as maximums (see paragraph 2.2.1.1 for page size and format details).

If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. The specified page limits for Evaluation Notice (EN) responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the Offerors. Each side of an EN response sheet displaying printed material constitutes a page.

Each page shall be counted except the following: cover pages, tables of contents, Cross-Reference Matrix, tabs, and glossaries.

2.2.1.1 Page Size and Format

a) 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 inches by 11 inches, not including foldouts. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 10 point font in Times New Roman. For all the textual volumes, pages shall be single spaced. Tracking, kerning, and leading values shall not be changed from the default values of the word processing or page layout software. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume (ex. “Page 1 of 26”) with at least 1-inch margins on the top and bottom along with at least 3/4-inch side margins. These page size and format limitations shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals. These page size and format restrictions shall also apply to responses to ENs. NO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

SHALL BE SUBMITTED.

b) 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 and legible; they shall not exceed 11 inches by 17 inches in size, and the text size shall be no smaller than 10 point. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and count as one page. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics, not for pages of text. Tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, and plans.

2.2.2 Cost or Pricing Related Data

Each Offeror's cost/price will be evaluated in accordance with Section M. All cost or pricing data shall be addressed ONLY in the Cost/Price Proposal and Contract Documentation Volumes. Cost trade-off information, work hour estimates, and material kinds and quantities may be used in other volumes only as appropriate for presenting rationale for alternatives or design and trade-off decisions.

2.2.3 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 conserves space without impairing clarity. The Offeror shall provide a proposal Cross-Reference Matrix as part of Volume I and Volume II. (See Attachment L-1)

2.2.4 Indexing

Each volume shall contain a detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume.

Tabs shall be used to identify sections in all volumes.

2.2.5 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

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

2.2.6 Binding and Labeling

For hard copies, the content and page size of hard copies must be identical to the electronic copies. Each volume of the proposal shall be separately bound in a three-ring, loose-leaf binder which shall permit the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. Each book shall contain a cover sheet which clearly states its 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. 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.

2.2.7 Electronic Offers

For electronic copies, indicate on each disc the company name, volume number and title. The contents shall be easily arranged to coincide with the binding and labeling of the physical copies, including a cover sheet which clearly states its volume number, title, copy number, solicitation identification and the Offeror's name. 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 Windows OS-compatible, virus-free, single layer DVDs (NO Blu-ray discs will be accepted). All volumes must each be stored on a separate DVD. NO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED. The same identifying data should be in duplicate order on each disc. If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included. For each submission, all discs shall be placed in plastic sleeves, in one separate binder or into a box. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format that can be read and edited by Microsoft Office 2010, Microsoft Project 2010, Microsoft Internet Explorer 11.0, and Adobe Acrobat Reader 11.0 or PDF compatible formats. All data files and electronic media delivered to the Government must be reviewed to ensure that they are virus-free. In the event material in the binders and electronic content conflict, ELECTRONIC COPIES will take precedence over hardcopies.

2.2.8 Distribution

The "original" proposal shall be identified as such. Proposals shall be mailed or delivered to:

Air Force Life Cycle Management Center, Battle Management Directorate, Airspace Mission Planning Division Hanscom AFB, MA (AFLCMC/HBM) Attn: Ms. Lisa Barone, PCO 11 Barksdale St, Bldg 1614, Phase 1 Hanscom AFB, MA 01731-1700

All proposal material must be received no later than 2:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time (EST) on the required submission date.

If proposals are to be hand-delivered, Offerors are cautioned that they will need to process through the Hanscom AFB visitors entrance in order to gain access to the base and should allow appropriate time.

For physical deliveries of proposals, Offerors must contact the PCO two business days in advance to arrange for receipt of proposals.

3.0 Volume I - Executive Summary

In the executive summary volume, the Offeror shall provide the following information:

3.1 Narrative Summary

Submit a narrative summary of the entire proposal, containing a clear and concise overview of the complete physical structure of your proposal, including significant risks, and a highlight of any key or unique features, excluding cost/price. The Offeror shall provide the name, title, address, and phone number of the person who the PCO should contact in the event the Offeror is selected for award. This person is usually an executive within the division or the company or someone else in a comparable position. The salient features should tie in with Section M evaluation factors/subfactors. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal.

3.2 Table of Contents and Cross Reference Matrix

The Offeror shall also provide a master table of contents of the entire proposal and a Cross- Reference Matrix, which are not included in the page limit.

4.0 Volume II – Technical “Mission Capability” Volume

4.1 General

The Mission Capability Volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. Your responses will be evaluated against the Mission Capability subfactors defined in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award. Using the instructions provided below, provide, as specifically as possible, the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying these subfactors. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By your proposal submission, you are representing that your firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. It is not necessary or desirable for you to tell us so in your proposal. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation.

4.2 Format and Specific Content

Track changes should be used when submitting modified versions of Government-provided documents or Offeror-created documents previously delivered to the Government, when applicable, to allow the Government easier visibility into the changes made to the associated documents. Original document submissions are acceptable in cases where the Government does not provide a document for modification or mandate modification of a previously delivered document.

4.2.1 Technical

In the Mission Capability Volume, address your technical solution for meeting or exceeding the Government’s minimum performance or capability requirements of each Mission Capability Subfactor and the evaluation question.

4.2.1.1 Technical Risk

Address Technical Risk associated with those aspects of your proposed technical approach you consider 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 2 - Technical Risk Ratings, excerpted in Section M). 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 "work-around" or risk mitigators for identified risks that will eliminate or reduce risk to an acceptable level. Identify and classify any new risks introduced by such risk mitigation.

4.2.2 Volume II “Mission Capability” Organization

The Mission Capability Volume shall be organized according to the following general outline:

(1) Table of Contents

(2) List of Tables and Drawings

(3) Subfactor 1; Domain Knowledge, (see Paragraph 4.2.3)

(4) Subfactor 2: Products and Integration with Cybersecurity (see Paragraph 4.2.4)

(5) Subfactor 3: Transition Plan and Program Execution (see Paragraph 4.2.5)

(6) Subfactor 4: Build-on-Demand Toolset (see Paragraph 4.2.6)

(7) Cross Reference Matrix

(8) Risk Matrix

(9) Glossary

4.2.3 Mission Capability; Subfactor 1: Domain Knowledge

Demonstrated understanding of the Mission Planning Domain Knowledge as evidenced by a thorough explanation of the distribution of staff with Domain Knowledge across the Enterprise, knowledge management, tasks, and how it is critical to the execution of SEIC.

The Government will evaluate how well the Offeror understands the Mission Planning processes and knowledge necessary to accomplish the requirements of the solicitation.

INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:

• Explain how Domain Expertise is to be distributed across the organization.

• Explain why Mission Planning Domain Knowledge is important in the execution of the

SEIC II contract, to include the following:

o Description of what tasks would require Mission Planning Domain Knowledge.

o Description of how you would increase the Mission Planning Domain Knowledge or maintain acceptable Mission Planning Domain Knowledge.

o Provide workforce attributes demonstrating Domain Knowledge that may cover the various facets of Mission Planning.

• Explain your process for hiring staff with Mission Planning Domain Knowledge.

The Government will evaluate Offeror responses to the evaluation question. The evaluation question will focus on the Offeror’s understating of the technical effort involved in the SEIC Domain Knowledge requirements. The evaluation of the question will be integrated with the evaluation of Subfactor 1. The Government does not plan to conduct discussions regarding the evaluation question submissions and no revisions to the evaluation question will be requested.

INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:

• Address the following evaluation question:

o We have a new notional aircraft that has the capability to significantly modify its physical shape during flight. This physical modification affects performance, flight profile, and tactics of the aircraft. Use your domain knowledge and experience in the mission planning processes to answer the following questions:

▪ What changes to existing capabilities and components within the architecture need to be made to support this new capability?

▪ What new capabilities need to be developed?

▪ Define use cases to inform requirements development

▪ Define test cases for the new capability and how you would execute it

▪ What process would you use to refine the requirements for this capability?

▪ What are the end users going to have to do differently to plan their mission?

4.2.4 Mission Capability; Subfactor 2: Products and Integration with Cybersecurity

Provide an achievable and sustainable plan that satisfies the SEIC II Goals and Objectives identified in the SEIC II SOW, and fulfills the required JMPS Horizontal and Vertical integration with the warfighter mission in mind, while remaining compliant with the latest cybersecurity policies and standards described in this solicitation.

The Government will evaluate how well the Offeror, in the plan, satisfies technical requirements in the SOW to accomplish SEIC II goals and objectives through proposed design solutions, new technology, processes and personnel necessary to continue compliance of cybersecurity policies and standards while improving JMPS products.

INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:

• Provide an achievable and sustainable plan that satisfies SEIC II Statement of Work requirements, goals, and objectives.

• Provide a comprehensive plan to develop and maintain a JMPS Enterprise Architecture Plan that presents an achievable strategy to incorporate current technology into the Enterprise in a timely manner. The plan must include how to inject new technologies, as well as the methods proposed to remain aware of the new technologies, standards, interfaces, and requirements to be considered as part of the Architecture Plan.

o Provide proposed improvements to the architecture.

o Provide analyses showing the benefits of proposed technology improvements.

o Describe the processes used to continue the horizontal and vertical integration of the Mission Planning Enterprise products to support the Enterprise needs. Include the type and projected frequency of detailed component analysis, of new and/or modified integrated products, and the methods used to support/analyze the injection of new technologies into the Enterprise in the proposed processes.

• Provide an achievable and sustainable plan to manage and execute Cybersecurity and Cyber Resiliency across the Mission Planning Enterprise. The plan will address all aspects of Cybersecurity from establishment of requirements/processes through the security testing, and submission of all documentation necessary to meet the Risk Management Framework.

o Provide an achievable and sustainable plan to have Certified Information System Security Professional (CISSP) personnel filling applicable positions required for the SEIC II contract by contract award.

o Provide an analysis of the differences between DIACAP and Risk Management Framework (DoDI 8510.01).

o Provide an analysis of the differences between Joint Air Force-Army-Navy (JAFAN) Special Access Program (SAP) security manual and Joint SAP Implementation Guide (JSIG).

o Explain how you would perform the continuous monitoring required by Risk Management Framework.

o Provide how you would evolve or change the Mission Planning Enterprise Cybersecurity strategy.

4.2.5 Subfactor 3: Transition Plan and Program Execution

Provide a comprehensive and executable plan to collaborate with the development community and establish, maintain, and use an Enterprise Integrated Master Schedule (EIMS) to manage all aspects of the Enterprise, while executing the Mission Planning battle rhythm of meetings and events. Develop and provide a sound and achievable plan to fully transition all SEIC activities within 90 days of contract award without detrimental impact to the Mission Planning Enterprise.

The Government will evaluate how well the Offer understands the need for collaboration across the Enterprise, while being responsive to dynamic development schedules with asynchronous execution; how well the Offeror can measure performance on this contract and across the Enterprise; and the adequacy of the plan to transition SEIC activities within 90 days of contract award.

INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:

• Identify the Program Manager and other key positions and their qualifications, identified by location.

• Provide a detailed Transition Plan, to include:

o Transition schedule o Staffing plan o Training approach o Understanding of ongoing work o Facilities (in-place) o Facility Accreditation (SAP/SAR/TS and applicable schedule for accreditation) o Communications and technologies for SAP/SAR programs o Needed Government Furnished Property/Equipment o Interaction with Government and Development contractors o Communication with Incumbent Contractor o Metrics to achieving a transition within 90 days of contract award

• Provide the Offeror’s plan to provide the Government with periodic progress reports, status updates, and actionable information for the transition and program execution. Include a description of the depth and currency of the information to be provided.

• Provide an overall integrated approach for planning and executing the program.

• Provide a time-phased plan for implementing your recommended improvements program.

execution, and include a logical, realistic schedule that supports the successful execution of the program.

• Provide an achievable plan to develop and maintain the JIBEs (Type I, Type II and Custom), installation, scripts, and support tools for the development community. The plan will consider methods used to produce the Type I and Type II JIBEs, and also the methods that will be used to determine what, if any, other types of integration products would be useful.

• Provide a plan to create an Enterprise Integrated Master Schedule to manage interrelated activities, identifying areas for potential schedule risks or opportunities.

• Provide a sound and complete approach to executing the Configuration Management activities across the Mission Planning Enterprise to include the timely and accurate updating of the Product Catalog to support all Enterprise activities.

• Provide a sound and complete approach to support the creation, recording, processing, and managing the Deficiency Reports for the Enterprise. The successful offeror will also identify what processes, characteristics of the DR, and frequency will be used in the analysis of the DR database.

• Provide a communication plan that includes:

o A user friendly, Government-accessible information sharing system to include contract deliverables as well as how and when it will be implemented.

o Coordination across the contractor’s multiple sites.

o Explanation of how you would interface with the Mission Planning Enterprise across multiple sites.

o Method of collaboration with prime developers of Mission Planning Products

(MPEC, organic or other).

• Provide achievable overall, complete staffing structure that follows the transition period, to include locations, and schedule of Mission Planning Enterprise events. The staffing structure proposed following the transition shall be expected to be sustained for at least the first 6 months after the transition is complete and shall allow for the constant flow of information throughout the Enterprise and continued participation in Enterprise Activities.

• Present a complete subcontract management plan and how collaboration will be transparent between subcontractors and different performance locations for the duration of the effort.

• Provide an EVM Rolling Wave Plan specifically for the first 6 months after contract award, using your basis of estimates and proposed CWBS and its dictionary, to include (at a minimum):

o Schedule Risk Assessment or IMS Monte Carlo output (histogram and sensitivity analysis) / Technical risk register and specific risk sheets with mitigation plans, as well as opportunities. [Risk Assessment] o Headcount Graphic per CAM. [Org chart]

• Provide the metrics used to track the efficient and effective accomplishments of the requirements of the SEIC II solicitation (If awarded, these metrics will be placed on contract).

• Provide a set of metrics (Technical Performance Measures (TPMs)) measuring the improvements of Mission Planning over time.

4.2.6 Subfactor 4: Build-on-Demand Toolset

Demonstrate the ability to complete development of a Build-on-Demand (BOD) toolset capability with a timely and effective delivery method to support the Mission Planning Enterprise based on this solicitation.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s plan to develop a BOD toolset capability for the Mission Planning Enterprise and its plan for implementation.

INFORMATION TO BE PROVIDED:

• Describe how building the BOD toolset helps the entire Enterprise process work better;

keeping in mind that the toolset should be able to run tests on the package of components while individual component testing is still accomplished in a separate environment

• How would you use the BOD toolset to improve Enterprise integration and collaboration between SEIC and Mission Planning developers?

• Provide a comprehensive plan outlining the schedule and resources to develop a Build on Demand (BoD) toolset.

• Describe the delivery method. Include how the users will access the information needed to continue development of the MPE and its components.

• Describe how and when to transition from the manual MASTER JIBE generation process where the JIBE must be built in the IVV&E Lab to the virtual Build on Demand toolset where the JIBE can be assembled virtually by the user (Mission Planning developers), based on risk reduction and acceptability analysis by the Government for each development effort, program of record or platform (as applicable). Include a prioritized list of which products

(ex. components) categorized by platform/groups of platforms will be provided for builds using the BOD toolset and justify your prioritization of the products.

5.0 Volume III - Past Performance

5.1 General

The Offeror shall submit a Past Performance volume with its proposal, containing relevant present and past performance information in accordance with the instructions contained in Attachment L-3. This information is required for the Offeror and all subcontractors at any tier, inter-divisional transfers, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform 25% or more of the effort based on the total proposed cost/price, or proposed to perform aspects of the effort the Offeror considers critical to overall successful performance. Offerors are cautioned that the Government will use data provided by each Offeror in this volume and data obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past performance.

The Offeror shall solicit for Past Performance information IAW the Past Performance Letter and

Questionnaire in Attachment L-2 (COMPLETED QUESTIONNAIRE SHALL BE SUBMITTED

TO THE CONTRACTING OFFICER WITHIN 15 CALENDAR DAYS FROM THE DATE OF

THE SOLICITATION). Additionally, in the Past Performance Volume, the Offeror shall provide a list identifying to whom the Past Performance Questionnaires were submitted indicating their Name, POC’s email and phone number.

5.2 Letters of Consent

The Offeror shall submit, along with the information required in this paragraph, a consent letter executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the Offeror so the Offeror can respond to such information. For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the Offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter, authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror's performance.

5.3 Relevant Contracts

The Offeror shall submit information IAW Attachment L-3. Include Past Performance information on no more than three (3) recent contracts that you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort, up to five (5) years from date of solicitation. Also, the Offeror shall include information on no more than two (2) recent contracts performed by each key teaming partners, inter-divisional transfer, and significant subcontractors that you consider the most relevant in demonstrating ability to perform the proposed effort. Include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance.

For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining recency and relevance, see Section M. Note that the Government generally will not consider performance on a newly awarded contract without a performance history.

Each rating is cumulative, that is, to receive a rating a proposal must meet each element of the rating. For example, to receive a "Good" rating a proposal indicate a thorough approach and have at least one strength and have no deficiencies. A proposal that has one or more strengths but otherwise reflects an adequate but not thorough approach will receive an "Acceptable" rating.

5.3.1 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 a limited or no confidence 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. 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.

5.3.2 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 you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the Offeror(s), your "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

6.0 Volume IV – Small Business

6.1 Small Business Plan

If the Offeror(s) is other than a small business, the Offeror's Small Business Subcontracting Plan submitted in accordance with FAR 52.219-9, or Comprehensive Subcontracting Plan submitted in accordance with DFARS 219.702.1 will also be reviewed to determine the extent to which the offeror identifies and commits to the participation of Small Businesses (SB), Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU), and Minority Institutions (MI) whether as joint venture members, teaming arrangement, or subcontractor. Failure to submit such a plan will render the offeror ineligible for award.

7.0 VOLUME V – Cost/Price

7.1 General Instructions

These instructions are to assist the Offeror in preparing and submitting Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data required in accordance with FAR 15.403-3. The Government needs this information in order to properly evaluate the reasonableness and balance of the Offeror's proposed Cost/Price.

Additionally, this information will be used to properly evaluate the realism of the Cost Type CLINs.

Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to do so could result in the rejection of the proposal. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness, realism, and balance. The burden of proof for credibility rests with the Offeror. Information beyond that required by these instructions shall not be submitted, unless the Offeror considers it essential to support their proposed Cost/Price.

All information regarding cost or pricing documentation must be included in the Cost/Price Volume and/or the Contract Documentation Volume. Under no circumstances shall any cost or pricing documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

7.1.1 Preliminary Determination of Adequate Price Competition The PCO has made a preliminary determination of adequate price competition for this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the PCO will review this determination. If, in the PCO’s opinion, adequate price competition exists no additional data will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this competition the PCO determines that adequate price competition no longer exists; Offerors may be required to submit Certified Cost or Pricing Data in accordance with FAR 15.4.

7.1.2 Ground Rules and Assumptions

The Offeror shall include a general discussion of the ground rules and assumptions (e.g., contract type, contract items, delivery schedule, GFI/GFE/GFP, etc.) used to develop the proposed prices. All assumptions, scope limitations and/or qualifications of the cost/price proposal shall be addressed and explained. The Offeror shall list each exception to the instructions provided in the solicitation and each qualification of the Cost/Price Volumes, if any. The Offeror shall provide complete rationale for any file://periwinkle_vnx/SAF_AQC_ORG/AQCP/5640%20-%20AFFARS/Templates%20Project%20--%20Sep%202013/5315/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.Outlook/far/FAR15.DOC#b154062 file://periwinkle_vnx/SAF_AQC_ORG/AQCP/5640%20-%20AFFARS/Templates%20Project%20--%20Sep%202013/5315/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/Content.Outlook/far/FAR15.DOC#b154062 exceptions. Other ground rules and assumptions of the prospective contract should be provided in the appropriate sections of the proposal.

7.1.3 Estimating Techniques and Methods

When responding to the Cost/Price Volume requirements in the solicitation, the Offeror and major Subcontractors/IDTs may use any generally accepted estimating technique, including contemporary estimating methods (such as Cost-to-Cost and Cost-to-Non-Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs), commercially available parametric cost models, in-house developed parametric cost models, etc.), to develop their estimates. Estimating techniques/methods must be in accordance with their Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Disclosure Statement, if applicable. If necessary, reasonable and supportable allocation techniques may be used to spread hours and/or cost to lower levels of the Offeror’s CWBS.

7.1.4 Subcontractor/Interdivisional Transfer (IDT) Cost Proposals Any Subcontractor/IDT that will be responsible for 10% or more of the Cost Type effort shall be referred to as a “major Subcontractor/IDT” and must submit separate Cost/Price Volumes in accordance with the guidelines given to the Offeror. All other Subcontractor/IDT proposals should be integrated into the overall proposal by CLIN and CWBS. If a Subcontractor/IDT considers any portion of cost documentation “proprietary”, preventing that portion from being fully integrated, that documentation shall be submitted under separate cover directly to the PCO. This documentation must be submitted by the same date and time the Offeror’s proposal is due to the PCO. This shall include a complete separate Cost/Price Volume, to include Cost Formats. The Offeror is responsible for the consistency of the cost data between the Offeror’s submission and the Subcontractor/IDT submission. Note: If the BOEs for an IDT or Subcontractor over the 10% threshold are included in the Offeror’s consolidated BOEs, the Subcontractor/IDT’s proposal is not required to include a separate BOE submission as long as there is a one-to-one match between BOEs and the Subcontractor/IDT’s proposal.

7.1.5 Delivery of Cost Proposals

In addition to submitting the cost proposal to the PCO, the Prime, major Subcontractors/IDTs shall deliver copies of each proposal to the cognizant Defense Contract Management Agency/Contract Administrative Office (DCMA/CAO) and the cognizant Defense Contracting Audit Agency (DCAA) office by the date and time specified in Section L, Paragraph 2.2.8.

7.1.6 Rounding

All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar, except that all labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny.

7.1.7 Cost/Price using Fiscal Years

Proposals shall be based on the Contractor Fiscal Year (CFY). The Contractors shall identify their Contractor Fiscal Year.

7.2 Cost/Price Volume(s)

The Cost/Price volume(s) shall be prefaced by a table of contents and shall specify, by page number, where each cost format and each piece of narrative data is located. The Cost/Price Volumes shall provide comprehensive narrative support for the cost/price proposal(s). In addition, the Offeror shall provide a CLIN summary. The Cost/Price Volume(s) shall consist of the following sections:

SECTION 1: Introduction (see paragraph 7.2.1) SECTION 2: Subcontracts/IDT Summary (see paragraph 7.2.2) SECTION 3: Basis of Estimate (BOE) (see paragraph 7.2.3) SECTION 4: Other Information (see paragraph 7.2.4) SECTION 5: Cost Format Instructions - Submission of Cost Formats (see paragraph 7.2.5)

7.2.1 SECTION 1: Introduction

The Offeror shall prepare a proposal summary that includes an introduction, overview,…