Atch_9-WS3_SLEP_Section_L-25Mar16.pdf

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

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

PREPARATION

1.0 Program Structure and Objectives

The WS3 Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) will perform sustainment upgrades to the WS3 system to extend its service life. The SLEP will implement a refresh, replacement or update to many of the aging and/or unsustainable components/subsystems on the WS3 system, including the Alarm

Communication and Display (AC&D) system, the Crypto system, and the cable infrastructure. SLEP will be installed at the First Article test site at Ramstein AB, Germany and six WS3 sites throughout

Europe. This competition is 100% small business set-aside.

1.1 Project Estimate

For consideration in developing your proposal, the estimated value of this contract is as follows:

The AFNWC intends to use entirely Procurement funds for this effort. The Government’s objective is for the offeror to design, develop and deliver a consistently high quality product (installations at

7 Sites) no later than 30 September 2020 within the estimated contract value range. The threshold completion date is 30 September 2021. The Government anticipates the value of this contract will range between $33M and $38M for the entire SLEP acquisition (inclusive of all CLINs). Proposals that are not within the budgetary range and that are in excess of the budgetary range shall not be further evaluated and shall not be eligible for any resultant award. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate reasonableness. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs/prices rests with the offeror.

2.0 General Instructions

(a) The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by this ITO and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offer shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the Statement of Work (SOW), System Requirements Document (SRD), Contract Data

Requirements List (CDRL), and Technical Manual Contract Requirements (TMCR). Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this ITO shall result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

(b) The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on initial proposal, as received, without discussion. This reservation includes matters of additional or substitute pages of the initial proposal.

(c) 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 and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal.

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

(e) The proposal acceptance period is specified in Section A of the model contract/solicitation is 180 days. The offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid for 180 days from the proposal submission date.

(f) In accordance with 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 extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

2.1 General Information

2.1.1 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 A of the model contract/solicitation.

2.1.2 Debriefings

The CO will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range. The

CO will notify unsuccessful offerors in the competitive range of the source selection decision in accordance with FAR 15.503. 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. Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a preaward debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a postaward debriefing. However, offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal.

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 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.

2.1.4 Electronic Reference Documents

Intial documents for this solicitation are available on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website at http://www.fbo.gov. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation. Specific SLEP program documentation and technical requirements will be provided to authorized potential offerors by the Government upon request.

https://cs1.eis.af.mil/sites/afcc/Pages/Default.aspx http://www.fbo.gov/

2.1.5 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 and includes “Source Selection

Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line. In addition, Source Selection information may also be transmitted via standard mail or email to the following addresses:

ATTN: Ms. Honey Smalls

8500 Gibson Blvd. SE, Bldg. 20202

Kirtland AFB, NM 87117

505/846-4579

Or honey.smalls.1@us.af.mil

2.2 Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits

The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table (Table 2.1 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 2.1. The page count begins on the first page of the volume following the exemptions listed below in paragraph 2.2.1.

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 as noted in the table below:

Table 2.1 - Proposal Organization

VOLUME ITO Paragraph

Number

VOLUME

TITLE

COPIES ELECTRONIC

COPIES

PAGE LIMIT

I 3.0 Executive

Summary

1 Original &

2 Copies

1 3

II 4.0 Technical Volume II is comprised of the below sub-volumes:

IIa-IIed

II.a 4.2.3 Systems

Engineering

(Design)

1 Original &

2 Copies

1 25

II.b 4.2.4 Installation Plan 1 Original &

2 Copies

1 25

II.c 4.2.5 Life Cycle

System

Management

1 Original &

2 Copies

1 1520

II.d 4.2.6 Management

Approach https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5315/templates/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/Far02.doc#T2101 https://cs.eis.af.mil/airforcecontracting/knowledge_center/Documents/AFFARS_Library/5315/templates/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20Internet%20Files/AFAC%20Working%20Folders%20--%20PM/far/FAR03.DOC#b3104 mailto:honey.smalls.1@us.af.mil

II.d1 4.2.6.1 Systems

Engineering

(SE)

Management

Approach

1 Original &

2 Copies

1 15

II.d2 4.2.6.1.1.2 Integrated

Master Plan

(IMP) Schedule

(IMS)

1 Original &

2 Copies

1 10 pages in

MS Project

II.d3 4.2.6.1.1.2 Integrated

Master Plan

(IMP) Schedule

(IMS)

1 Original &

2 Copies

1 1510 pages in

MS Project

II.d4 4.2.6.1.2 Staffing

Approach

1 Original &

2 Copies

1 5 pages

(Resumes &

Subcontract

Plan not included in page limit)

II.ed5 4.2.6.2 Technical Risk 1 Original &

2 Copies

1 10

III.a 5.1.1 Past

Performance for

Prime

Contractor

1 Original &

2 Copies

1 No more than

3 citations (5 pages per citation)

III.b 5.1.1 Past

Performance for

Critical

Subcontractors, Teaming

Partners, and/or

Joint Venture

Partners (as applicable).

(Not required for host nation cable installation subcontractor)

1 Original &

2 Copies

1 No more than

3 citations (5 pages per citation)

IV 6.0 Cost/Price 1 Original &

2 Copies

1 unlimited

V 7.1 Contract

Documentation

1 Original 1 unlimited

2.2.1 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, Table of Contents, tabs, glossaries, resumes, past performance questionnaires, consent forms and client authorization letters.

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 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Pages shall be typed single-spaced. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, 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 apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals as well as responses to ENs.

(b) Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, and plans. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 by 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume, and each 8.5 by 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 restrictions shall apply to both electronic and hard copy proposals as well as responses to ENs.

2.2.2 Cost or Pricing Related Information

All cost or pricing information shall be addressed ONLY in the Cost/Price Proposal and Contract

Documentation Volumes.

2.2.3 Cross-Referencing

Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. The offeror shall fill out the proposal reference column of the Solicitation Cross

Reference Matrix located at Section L, Attachment 1, to indicate proposal reference information as it relates to the ITO, SOW, SRD, CLIN numbers, and CDRL references found therein. The cross reference matrix is not included in the page count.

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.

2.2.4 Indexing

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

2.2.5 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.

2.2.6 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. However, please note offerors may place Volume I in with the

Volume II binder and Volume III.a and III.b may be combined into a single Volume III binder.

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. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with 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.

2.3 Electronic Offers

The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. For electronic copies, indicate on each CD/DVD 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 all volumes in electronic format, using recordable CDs/DVDs. Each volume shall be in a different directory on a CD/DVD. If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by

Microsoft (MS) Office Word 2007/2010, MS Office Excel 2007/2010, MS Office Project 2007/2010, and MS Office Power Point 2007/2010, as applicable. In the event there are any discrepancies between the hard copies and the electronic copies of the proposal, the hard copies will be used for evaluation.

2.4 Distribution

The deadline for the Government’s receipt of proposals is found on the SF 33, Block 9 in Section A of the RFP. The "original" proposal shall be identified. Proposals shall be mailed or hand carried to following addressed and shall include the following markings/information:

Ms. Honey Smalls, AFNWC/PZNK

8500 Gibson Blvd. SE

Building 20202

Kirtland AFB, NM 87117

505-846-4579

RFP FA9422-16-R-8036

To be delivered unopened to the Contracting Officer Honey Smalls http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/af_afmc/far/FAR52.215.doc#b522151 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/af_afmc/far/FAR03.DOC#b31044

Proposals received after the date and time specified shall be treated in accordance with FAR 52.215-1.

Ensure proposals are properly marked "For Official Use Only" and "Source Selection Information--See

FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104".

2.5 Technical Library

To provide fair and equal opportunity to SLEP offerors, the WS3 System Program Office (SPO) will provide access to a technical library of additional information for proposal purposes. Offerors may be provided this information upon request. The request must include: Company name, mailing address, point of contact and email address, list of personnel viewing the documents and validation of their US secret security clearance. Once requested, the Government will conduct a clearance check and once an offeror is cleared, the Government will provide access to the technical library.

3.0 Volume I - Executive Summary

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

3.1 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 cost/price. 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

Include a master table of contents of the entire proposal.

4.0 Volume II - Technical Volume

4.1 General

The Technical Volume should be specific and complete. Legibility, clarity, and coherence are very important. The offeror’s 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 used for accomplishing/satisfying these subfactors. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By submitting a proposal, the offeror is representing that its firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. It is not necessary or desirable for the offeror to tell the Government so in your proposal. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation. Within the proposal, the offeror should specifically address the SLEP program priorities of: meeting technical requirements, integrating the SLEP system with the legacy WS3 system, completing installation no later than 30 September 2020 (the threshold completion date is 30 September 2021), and integrating

COTS into the SLEP design in an effort to enhance system supportability and maintainability throughout the life of the system.

http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/af_afmc/far/Far02.doc#T2101 http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/af_afmc/far/FAR03.DOC#b3104

4.2 Format and Specific Content

4.2.1 Technical

In the technical volume, the offeror shall address its technical solution for meeting or exceeding the

Government’s minimum performance or capability requirements of each technical subfactor.

4.2.2 Volume Organization

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

(1) Table of Contents

(2) List of Table and Drawings

(3) Glossary

(4) Cross Reference Matrix

(5) Subfactor 1.1: Systems Engineering (Design)

(6) Subfactor 1.2: Installation Plan

(7) Subfactor 1.3: Life Cycle System Management

(8) Subfactor 1.4: Management Approach

(9) Risk Matrix

4.2.3 Subfactor 1.1: Systems Engineering (Design)

The offeror shall provide an approach describing their design strategy that details a sound plan to ensure that WS3 SLEP meets SOW and SRD requirements. This description will include specific methodology on integrating the existing system & communication infrastructure, inclusive of

COMSEC requirements with the new AC&D system, utilizing TCP/IP communication protocols. This description will also include a plan to achieve Air Force Information Assurance and approval from

AFLCMC/HBU IBDSS Program Office, Cybersecurity Group, for the SLEP key management system and obtaining a COMSEC account. This description shall address the overall approach to systems engineering, to include risk management, which will be involved in the planning, designing, production, purchase, installation, and sustainment planning efforts.

4.2.3.1 Hardware Design Methodology

The offeror shall provide an approach to address their methodology/strategy for designing an interface to the existing system using a data translation function that will enable the WS3 system to communicate over a stand-alone Internet Protocol (IP) network and thoroughly describes the tradeoffs considered when using legacy or new components.

4.2.3.2 Software Design Methodology

The offeror shall provide an approach for the AC&D software using well-established processes and metrics:

a. Utilizing, integrating, and documenting non-proprietary, open architecture software.

b. Designing and modeling software architecture prior to development or modification.

c. Integrating the video management system with the software.

d. Replacing the functionality within the existing Graphical User Interface (GUI) MPADS v3.3.1 for the software.

4.2.3.3 Network Implementation Approach

The offeror shall provide an approach for designing a redundant cable infrastructure at the six WS3 sites that incorporates redundant and diverse paths to prevent any single act/event/failure from degrading operational capability. Proposal shall address the approach to design and configure an effective and secure network architecture that also enables the rerouting of alarm, video and voice data should one of the diverse and redundant paths fail.

4.2.3.4 Key Management System Approach

The offeror shall provide an approach to integrating a cryptographic key management system, including key management software, to a stand-alone network with the capability to remotely rekey

HAIPEs, while maintaining a single software configuration across the WS3 installation sites and the

First Article. Proposal shall address the approach to design and document the integration of the existing AF key receiving/distribution system for use in the SLEP system.

4.2.3.5 Test Methodology

The offeror shall provide an approach addressing the contractor testing strategy to the integrated hardware and software SLEP system.

a. Offeror’s internal qualification and acceptance test approach to verify functionality of hardware and software, to include production units of components, designed specifically for WS3 (non-

COTS).

b. Offeror’s test approach that verifies the installed system at the First PAS, First Article site, all

WS3 Sites and WS3 Schoolhouse satisfies the requirements in the SRD and SOW.

Proposal shall address the approach to design and document a Software/System Integration Lab (SIL) for use as a test bed to verify the system capabilities. The proposal shall also address the level of documentation needed to support government sustainment of the SIL. Proposal shall address the approach to design and document a Monitoring Facility Operator (MFO) Trainer for training and certifying new MFOs. The proposal shall address options to provide remote updating of software.

4.2.3.6 Design and First Article Installation/Test Schedule

The offeror shall provide an approach to:

a. Describe a methodology and schedule to design the SLEP system;

b. Demonstrate a realistic design and First Article Installation/Test schedule to achieve WS3

SLEP milestones and objectives. The schedule will include a realistic approach to installing and testing SLEP at the First PAS and the First Article at Ramstein AB, Germany.

4.2.3.7 Information Assurance (IA) Certification Plan

The offeror shall provide an approach to achieve Air Force Information Assurance and approval from

AFLCMC/HBU IBDSS Program Office, Cybersecurity Group, for the SLEP key management system.

4.2.4 Subfactor 1.2: Installation Plan

The offeror shall provide an approach to install the SLEP at Ramstein AB, Germany first Article test site and the six WS3 Sites to meet the Government’s SLEP schedule requirement. This approach will include a strategy to achieve digging permits at each location, as well as to keep the existing AC&D system fully or partially operational as long as possible at each of the six installation sites, while installing WS3 SLEP. The approach shall describe an installation approach and schedule (cable and

AC&D) at each site, and provide a detailed discussion supporting their approach to minimizing the time between terminating operations of the legacy WS3 AC&D system and reaching full operational capability of the SLEP system.

The offeror shall provide an approach for installing the SLEP system at Ramstein AB, Germany, first

Article test site, and the six WS3 Sites, meeting Government’s SLEP installation requirements. The offeror’s approach shall be detailed in a plan thoroughly describing the following:

a. Installation approach and schedule for installing cabling and AC&Ds at each site.

b. Strategy for obtaining digging permits at each location.

c. Strategy for minimizing WS3 AC&D system downtime between terminating operations of the legacy WS3 AC&D system and reaching full operational capability of the SLEP system.

4.2.5 Subfactor 1.3: Life Cycle System Management

The offeror shall provide an approach to include a complete and specific life cycle system management strategy for improving maintainability and documenting the WS3 SLEP configuration baseline, discussing their plan to enhance long-term maintainability, reliability, and sustainability. At a minimum, the approach shall include a detailed discussion, thoroughly substantiating the following:

a. A plan that describes tradeoffs between system design and maintainability;

b. A plan for developing complete and accurate system documentation (e.g. TO’s (maintenance and operator) and engineering drawings). This plan should include an approach for developing and validating the TO’s and engineering drawings (prime vs subcontract);

c. A plan for mitigating Supply Chain Risk Management (SCRM) describing the approach to overall risk management process to ensure that the delivered system, equipment, components, software, maintenance equipment, and supplies do not incorporate counterfeit parts, malicious code, or any other elements that would allow adversaries to gain unauthorized access to data and critical program information, alter data, interrupt communications, or otherwise disrupt operations.

d. A plan for maximizing system reliability and minimizing the Government’s long-term maintenance costs through the selection of high quality/industrial grade components; and how component reliability will continue to be verified throughout SLEP design, test, and installation.

4.2.6 Subfactor 1.4: Management Approach

4.2.6.1 Systems Engineering (SE) Management Approach.

The offeror shall provide an approach to SE management describing the offeror’s internal procedures including critical subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners. The SE management approach shall provide a complete and thorough description of the offeror’s proposed SE process with direct explanation of how the process will address a sound approach for controlling cost, maintaining quality and schedule, while designing and installing SLEP that will meet the mission capability needs as described in the SOW, SRD, and Systems Engineering Plan (SEP). The SE management approach shall also include a description of the offeror’s software development processes and whether the offeror or critical subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners has ISO 9001 certification. At a minimum, the SE management approach shall include the following elements:

4.2.6.1.1 Program Planning and Control

The SE management approach shall identify the program organization, planning and monitoring activities proposed by the offeror. The information provided is intended to show the details of the offeror’s product-oriented program structure and management approach to SLEP design and installation. Key elements of program planning and control include:

4.2.6.1.1.1 Program Organization

The SE management approach shall discuss the planned organization, lines of authority, roles and responsibilities of Integrated Product Teams (IPTs) and team members (as applicable) to provide timely insight to the Government on cost, schedule, and performance issues. The roles and responsibilities of the IPTs and team members shall include detail on the planned interactions between the offeror, Government System Program Office (SPO), the Defense Contract Management Agency

(DCMA) and critical subcontractors. The offeror shall discuss how their proposed program organization structure will effectively support the product architecture with integrated multi-disciplined teams allocated to key product elements (e.g., an Integrated Product Team (IPT)-type structure).

4.2.6.1.1.2 Integrated Master Plan (IMP) and Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

The SE management approach shall include an IMP that shall be an event-driven plan that identifies key activities, program milestones, resources for accomplishing the SOW, SRD, and SEP requirements, and critical program events for contracted activities. The plan shall also identify accomplishments and entry and exit criteria that will be tracked to assess the contractor’s ability to meet the key events identified in the IMP. The offeror shall discuss how their proposed IMP will establish the program’s baseline and shall also discuss a list of the standards and processes to be used for all critical systems engineering functions including quality assurance, configuration management, parts, material and process control, safety, design, and testing.

In addition, the offeror shall submit an event-based IMS which includes technical tasks, reviews, audits and activities necessary to complete both the development and installation work effort described in the SOW and SRD. Program critical path items shall be clearly identified in the IMS. Activities within the IMS should also be coded so that if the activity is subcontracted, the responsible subcontractor is identified. The IMS shall include the need dates for Government and subcontractor inputs and shall be structured to support monitoring of all critical program activities and key supporting activities. The offeror shall discuss how their proposed IMS will monitor and control the program schedule and their understanding of how the document might be used by all IPTs to develop supporting schedules to implement program tasks.

The IMP and IMS should be structured to support monitoring of all critical program activities and key supporting activities. The IMP and IMS should go to at least a WBS level 4 (WS3 SLEP will be WBS level 1).

4.2.6.1.1.2.1 IMP Considerations

The SE management approach shall include the following IMP considerations identifying specific areas of Government interest with narratives in the IMP (not listed in order of importance):

a. Specialty Engineering Disciplines, (e.g. – Reliability & Maintainability, System Safety, Human

Engineering, etc.)

b. Integrated Logistics Support, such as training, tech order publications, and Non-Developmental

Item/Commercial-off-the-Shelf utilization and support

c. Configuration Management Planning and Transition Configuration Management Planning

d. Software development/integration plan that identifies:

(1) Integration between systems engineering processes and software development/integration processes

(2) Assurance of software quality

(3) Developmental Test (DT) and Operational Test (OT) planning, including completion of the Verification Cross Reference Matrix and participation in DT/OT

(4) Internal and external interface implementation, control planning and support

(5) Development change control planning

(6) A plan for phase-in from predecessor to SLEP (if required)

(7) Planning for reduction of life cycle costs

Additionally, the offeror shall consider the following when preparing the IMP:

a. Failure and Deficiency Reporting, Analysis, and Corrective Action

b. Government-Furnished Property Utilization

c. System Security Engineering Management Planning

d. System Safety/Health Risk Engineering, Environmental and Hazardous Materials Management, and Hazard Status Reporting

e. Quality program planning

f. Planning for handling deviations and waivers

g. Planning for information data exchange with Government

h. Planning for subcontractor and associate contractor relationships

The offeror shall also submit a resource-loaded Gantt chart for all high risk areas in the program, including separate charts for critical subcontract efforts. In addition, the offeror shall provide resource-loaded schedules for other risk areas that are unique to their proposal based on offeror’s analysis.

4.2.6.1.2 Staffing Approach

The offeror shall provide an approach addressing the requisite staffing requirements (including recruitment and personnel retention for the contract’s duration), identification of key positions, and personnel qualifications and experience. The offeror shall ensure they have the requisite skill mix required to successfully complete both the design and installation aspects contained within the SOW and SRD. Demonstrate, through resumes, adequate expertise in the key positions. (Note: Resumes are not included in the page count.) Contractor format is acceptable for resumes, but each resume must include at least the following:

a. Name

b. Title

c. Job Category/Level: Current and Proposed Category/Level

d. Security Clearance

e. Education

f. Professional Experience Summary: Number of years’ experience in a particular field or area.

g. Specific Experience: Job Assignment—Present, Job Assignment—Past

If any of the key personnel are not currently employed by the offeror, a letter of intent to accept employment signed by each individual shall be furnished with the resume. At a minimum, the

Government expects key personnel to include a Program Manager (PM), Deputy PM, Information

Assurance (IA) Lead, Lead Network Design/Integration Engineer, Lead Installation Manager, Lead

Systems Engineer, Lead Test LeadManager, and Lead Life Cycle System Manager.

In addition, the offeror must demonstrate the capacity to have available at contract initiation contract personnel that have the following critical skills and experiences including, but not limited to, the areas of design engineering, installation capability, management, maintenance, and technical writing.

Offeror’s shall also discuss their approach to retaining personnel with the requisite support functions.

The offeror must meet the security clearance requirements in accordance with SOW section 3.2 and the DD Form 254 no later than the contract award date.

4.2.6.2 Technical Risk

The offeror shall address Technical Risk associated with those aspects of its proposed technical approach it considers to have a high or moderate potential for disruption of schedule, increases to price or 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 3, Technical Risk Rating. 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. Offerors shall detail the final risk assessment, including any new risks introduced by their risk mitigation solution.

5.0 Volume III - Past Performance

5.1 General

5.1.1 Each offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in Section L, Attachment 2. This information is also required for the offeror and any subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture that the offeror considers to be critical to the overall successful performance of the contract. Critical subcontractors are those subcontracts where failure would seriously jeopardize the successful completion of a program within cost, quality, schedule, and technical performance specifications. Submit up to three (3) recent contracts that you consider most relevant in demonstrating your ability to perform the proposed effort.

Include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance. Offerors shall also provide information on no more than three (3) recent contracts performed by each of your critical subcontractors, teaming partners, http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CB0QFjAAahUKEwiLzcGc26vIAhWSlIgKHf4mD6U&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.acq.osd.mil%2Fdpap%2Fpolicy%2Fpolicyvault%2FUSA007183-10-DPAP.pdf&usg=AFQjCNFzzCcHAlwyaxSKozA00snaFD8zBw&bvm=bv.104317490,d.cGU and/or joint venture partners that you consider most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort. Note: Host Nation cable installation subcontractors are excluded from this requirement.

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.

5.1.2 Along with the information required in this paragraph, the offeror shall submit 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.

5.2 Recent and Relevant Contracts

For purposes of this solicitation, recent contracts are defined as that where work is on-going or was performed during the last five (5) years from the RFP release date. The Government will not consider performance on a newly awarded contract (i.e. awarded within six months of the date of issuance of this solicitation). For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining relevancy, see Section M, paragraph 3.3.2.2.

Relevancy, as it pertains to performance information for this effort, shall measure the extent of similarity between the provided past performance references and cited service/support effort, complexity of the reference, dollar value, contract type, and subcontracting/teaming or other comparable attributes of the submitted past performance references. The relevancy assessment will consider information relating to systems engineering, management approach, interface design, network design, software modification/development, AC&D and cable installation, Key Management System integration, and life cycle systems management (to include technical order generation and use of

COTS) and will be used as a measure of the likelihood that the submitted past performance references are an indicator of future performance.

5.3 Specific Content

Offerors are required to explain what aspects of their performance referenced contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. Offerors should categorize their past performance referenced contract information into the specific Technical subfactors (Systems

Engineering (Design), Installation Plan and Life Cycle System Management, Management Approach) and

Cost/Price, the offeror considers demonstrate the most relevance.

5.3.1 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. This may allow the offeror to be considered a higher confidence candidate. For example, submittal of quality performance indicators or other management indicators that clearly support that an offeror has overcome past problems.

5.3.2 Offerors shall furnish the following information for each contract listed in accordance with the format contained in Section L, Attachment 2, Past Performance Information:

1) Contract Number

2) Total dollar value (original and final)

3) Contracting Agency/Customer

4) Title of Contract

5) Government program manager (name, address, phone number)

6) Description of program/project

7) Verified, up-to-date name, address, fax & telephone number of the PCO and ACO

8) Period of Performance

9) Type of Contract (FFP, FPI, CPFF, CPAF, etc.)

5.4 Questionnaires

5.4.1 The Government requests the offeror send out past and present performance questionnaires (see

Section L Attachment 3) to each of the points of contact (POCs) identified in the past performance volume. Once the past and present performance questionnaires are completed by the POCs, the information contained therein shall be considered sensitive and shall not be released to the offeror.

However, adverse past performance information will be released to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information. A cover letter for transmitting the questionnaire to each POC is included at Attachment 4. You may include your own cover letter requesting completion of the questionnaire in addition to the cover letter provided.

5.4.2 Provide a list of questionnaire recipients to include two current POCs and phone numbers for each contract reference provided. The offeror is solely responsible for the accuracy of the contact information provided.

5.4.3 The completed past/present performance questionnaire may be emailed to:

honey.smalls.1@us.af.mil. Questionnaire(s) may also be mailed to the address listed below. If mailing (through contracted courier providers), the outside envelope must be marked as follows:

NOTE: TO BE OPENED BY ADDRESSEE ONLY

AFNWC/PZNK

Attn: Ms. Honey Smalls, Contracting Officer

8500 Gibson Blvd SE, Building 20202

Kirtland AFB, NM 87117-5773

Note: Electronic submission is preferred.

6.0 Volume IV - Cost/Price

6.1 General Instructions

Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal. Proposals that are not within the budgetary range and that are in excess of the budgetary range shall not be further evaluated and shall not be eligible for any resultant award.

6.1.1 Cost/Price Reasonableness and Unbalanced Pricing

This section is to assist the offeror in submitting data other than certified cost or pricing data that is required to evaluate the reasonableness of the offeror’s proposed cost/price. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the offeror’s proposal. Note that unreasonably high proposed costs or prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may be a reason to reject an offeror’s proposal. Offers should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate reasonableness. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed costs/prices rests with the offeror. Reasonableness and unbalanced pricing applies to all priced CLINs.

6.1.2 Estimating Techniques and Methods

When responding to the Cost/Price Volume requirements in the solicitation, the offeror and associated subcontractors may use any generally accepted estimating technique to develop their estimates.

6.1.3 Cost/Price Data

Data beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless the offeror considers it essential to document or support its cost/price position. All data relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation, must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Cost/Price volume. Under no circumstances shall this data and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

6.1.4 Cost or Pricing Data Requirements

In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a), data other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support a determination of price reasonableness. Data shall be provided in accordance with FAR 15.403-5. 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.

6.1.5 Rounding

All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar. All loaded labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny.

6.2 Volume Organization

The Cost/Price volume shall consist of the following sections:

SECTION 1 - Table of Contents; summary descriptions of estimating, purchasing, and accounting systems; changes to estimating, accounting practices.

SECTION 2 – Data other than certified cost or pricing data, to include estimating methodology.

6.3 Estimating Methodology

6.3.1 Estimating System

The offeror shall provide a summary description of its standard estimating system or methods. Also, the offeror shall identify any deviations from its standard estimating procedures in preparing this proposal volume. The offeror shall indicate whether it has a Government approved system and if so, provide evidence of such approval.

6.3.2 Purchasing System

The offeror shall provide a summary description of its purchasing system or methods (e.g., how material requirements are determined, how sources are selected, when firm quotes are obtained, what provision is made to ensure quantity and other discounts). Also, the offeror shall identify any deviations from its standard procedures in preparing this proposal. The offeror shall indicate whether it has a Government approved system and if so, provide evidence of such approval.

6.3.3 Accounting System

The offeror shall indicate whether it has a Government approved accounting system and if so, provide evidence of such approval. Also, the offeror shall identify any deviations from its standard procedures in preparing this proposal.

6.4 Other Information

6.4.1 Cost Summary by Cost Elements

Provide a cost summary by major cost elements for each priced CLIN/SubCLIN (including options) using the sample format shown below:

6.4.2 Person-Loading Schedule and Basis of Estimate

As a separate attachment to the Cost/Price volume, submit a person-loading schedule to include (but separately identify) subcontractor(s) and inter-divisional transfer(s) hours. All hours shown in this attachment must agree with those reflected in the cost summary above. Also include the basis of estimate supporting the proposed hours, material/equipment, and any other direct costs in this attachment.

6.4.3 Probable Subcontractors

Submit a list of the proposed probable subcontractors and inter-divisional transfers showing (a) the supplier, (b) description of effort, (c) type of contract, (d) price and hours proposed by each, (e) price and hours included in prime’s proposal to the Government, and (f) commercial item/service determination support, if applicable. Provide the basis for establishing the source and reasonableness of proposed subcontracted effort. Provide an analysis of the proposed subcontract in accordance with

FAR 15.404-3(b) if applicable.

If an offeror proposes a subcontractor performing in excess of more than 10% of the prime contractor’s proposed price (or $13.5M) of the effort, the subcontractor’s cost/price proposal shall be included in the prime offeror’s cost volume and cost/price model, or shall be submitted directly to the Contracting

Officer by the specified proposal submission date and time.

6.4.4 Cost Reimbursement No Fee – NTE Travel CLINs

The not-to-exceed (NTE) amounts are inclusive of all burdens and taxes. Acknowledge that the offer complies with the CLIN descriptions of NTE Travel.

6.4.5 Submission of Cost Models

Submit an electronically encoded cost/price model in support of the proposed price. Any cost/price model submitted must be consistent with your approved estimating system and must duplicate the logic and mathematical formulas reflected in the paper copy of your proposal. Cost/price models submitted must comply with the following format requirements:

(a) Data file should be submitted on a CD.

(b) Data file should be .XLS file format (MS-Excel 2007 or earlier) compatible format.

7.0 Volume V - Contract Documentation

The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file.

7.1 Model Contract/Representations and Certifications

The RFP, Sections A through K, with applicable information within each section properly filled-in by the offeror, shall become the model contract. The offeror's proposal shall include a signed copy of the Standard Form 33 (with completed blocks 12 through 18) and Sections A through K with applicable information within each section properly filled-in by the offeror.

7.1.1 Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

Complete blocks 12 through 18 of the Standard Form 33. Signature by the offeror on the SF33 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept.

7.1.2 Section B - Supplies or Services and Costs/Prices

Complete pricing information in Section B of the model contract. Contract Type: Firm Fixed Price.

7.1.3 Section F - Installations or Performance

Propose Installation Schedule. The offeror shall propose the installation schedule by completing the blanks in Section F of the model contract. The proposed schedule is subject to a Fully Operational

Capability (FOC) deadline of 30 September 2020.

7.1.4 Section I - Contract Clauses

Complete the offeror supplied fill-in information for clause DFARS 252.211-7003. All companies submitting a proposal to this solicitation shall comply with FAR 52.204-7 System for Award

Management. Should the awardee not be located within the registry there will be a delay in contract award until there is compliance within the registry.

7.1.5 Section K - Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors

Complete 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, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format depicted below in Table 7.1.

Table 7.1 - Solicitation Exceptions

Solicitation

Document

Page/

Paragraph

Requirement/

Portion Rationale

SOW, SPEC, Model

Contract, ITO, etc.

Applicable

Page…