Addendums 52.212-1 and 52.212-2 - Revised 19Jan22.pdf

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

Addendum to 52.212-1(b), Submission of Offers is tailored as follows:

(b) Submission of offers:

(12) Other Instructions

(A) Questions may be submitted via e-mail to the primary point of contact, contract specialist (CS) jon.d.higgins2.civ@mail.mil, no later than 11 January 2022, 0900 Hawaii Standard Time. Questions submitted after this date may not be answered.

• Question submission period has been extended to No Later Than (NLT) Friday, 21 January 2022, by 1400 HST.

(B) New Information has been currently updated and highlighted in “blue”.

(i) General Information

(A) Points of Contact: The contracting officer (KO) and contract specialist (CS) are the sole points of contact for this procurement. Address any questions or concerns you may have to the KO/CS. Written requests for clarification must be sent to the KO/CS at tanya.d.buttner.civ@mail.mil and jon.d.higgins2.civ@mail.mil.

(B) 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 KO in writing with supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussion.

(ii) Offerors are requested to submit a written technical proposal and a price proposal in response to the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS) and Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP). Information on submission of technical and price proposal is provided below. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of statements asserted in the proposal.

The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and capabilities and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal. The offeror's proposal must include all data and information requested by the RFP and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The proposal should sufficiently address the requirements as stated in the PWS.

(iii) IAW DISA Special Contract Requirement H1, each offeror shall specifically identify in its proposal whether or not any potential or actual Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest (OCCI), as described in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Subpart 9.5, exists for this instant procurement. If the offeror believes that no OCCI exists, the OCCI response shall set forth sufficient details to support such a position. If an offeror believes that an actual or perceived OCCI does exist on the instant procurement, the offeror shall submit an OCCI plan with the proposal, explaining in detail how the OCCI will be mitigated and/or avoided.

(iv) Page limitations, if applicable, are identified below and will be treated as maximums. 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. Page limitations are identified below under each evaluation factor and will be treated as maximums. If exceeded, excess pages will not be read or considered in evaluation of the proposal. The following items will not be considered when calculating page limits: cover page, table of contents, glossary, executive summary, generic resumes, past performances, OCCI mitigation plans, SCRM plans, GFP Attachment, Fixed Price Payment Plans, FAR/DFARS Provisions/Clauses attachment, and Section 508 compliance. In the event any evaluation notices are issued, page limitations may also be placed on those. Page limitations shall not be circumvented by including inserted text boxes/pop-ups or internet links to additional mailto:jon.d.higgins2.civ@mail.mil mailto:tanya.d.buttner.civ@mail.mil mailto:jon.d.higgins2.civ@mail.mil information; such inclusions are not acceptable and will not be considered part of a proposal. The Government reserves the right not to consider for award any proposal that does not adhere to the administrative requirements of this RFP.

(v) Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits. The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table 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. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the information to offerors paragraph as noted in the table below. To the greatest extent possible, each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with a minimum of cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. Each volume may contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing may be used to identify sections.

Additionally, each volume may 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.

Table 1 Proposal Organization

VOLUME 52.212-1

Paragraph Number

VOLUME TITLE COPIES PAGE LIMIT

I (b)(12)(vii)(A) Technical/Management 1 electronic 6 II (b)(12)(vii)(B) Price 1 electronic No page limit III (b)(12)(vii)(C) Contract Documentation 1 electronic No page limit

(vi) Electronic Offers. The offeror shall submit volumes I through III in electronic format via email and must include “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 & 3.104” in the Subject line. Each volume shall be a separate file. If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included. Proposals shall be submitted to the KO/CS identified below:

Jon Higgins, Jr. (Contract Specialist) – jon.d.higgins2.civ@mail.mil Tanya Buttner (Contracting Officer [KO]) – tanya.d.buttner.civ@mail.mil

(vii) Proposal Organization:

(A) Volume I – Technical/Management. The technical/management volume should be specific and complete and will be evaluated against the technical/management subfactors defined in FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation – Commercial Items. The technical portion of the proposal is to be submitted as a Microsoft (MS) Word 2007 or PDF document. The page format shall have a 1-inch margin using no smaller than an 11-point Ariel, Times New Roman, or Courier New font for all text to include any text contained in a table. The file size of each document shall not exceed 2MB. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology you would use for accomplishing/satisfying the factors/subfactors.

In the Technical/Management volume, address your proposed approach to meeting or exceeding the minimum performance or capability requirements of all aspects of the PWS, as well as any risks in your proposed approach in terms of technical/performance, price, and/or schedule. Address any technical/management risk by identifying those aspects of the proposal you consider having the potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost, poor performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and/or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract 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 (e.g., PWS or specification requirements), whether or not those requirements are identified as subfactors. Propose a realistic "work-around" or risk mitigation for identified risks that will eliminate or reduce risk to an acceptable level. Identify any new risks introduced by such risk mitigation.

mailto:jon.d.higgins2.civ@mail.mil mailto:tanya.d.buttner.civ@mail.mil

(B) Volume II – Price. The price proposal will be evaluated using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR Part 15.404 to determine if they are reasonable and complete. Reasonableness is established through cost and price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404. For a price/cost proposal/quotation to be complete, all solicitation requirements must be priced, figures correctly calculated, and prices/costs presented in in a clear and useful format. You shall submit pricing for the base period and all option periods. The price proposal spreadsheet shall be submitted in MSExcel 2007 format or newer. All formulas shall remain present in the spreadsheet for verification. The file size of each document shall not exceed 20MB. Information beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted unless you consider it essential to document or support your price.

All information relating to the proposed price, including all required supporting documentation must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Price Volume. The Offeror shall propose a fixed price payment plan as a separate document commensurate with the value of the deliverables and/or significant milestones in the PWS for this requirement. A firm fixed price payment plan with the total dollar amount divided into equal monthly payments will not be accepted unless the offeror provides justification for this plan that the Government subsequently deems adequate. The eventual awardee will be authorized to invoice monthly for all approved travel costs incurred and approved by the COR.

Price submissions should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate their reasonableness. Offerors should ensure price proposals include detailed information regarding the resources required to accomplish the task (e.g., labor categories, labor hours, number of employees for each labor category, rates, materials, etc.). Data other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support the price reasonableness of your proposal in accordance with FAR 15.403.

FAR 12.504(a) The following laws are not applicable to subcontracts at any tier for the acquisition of commercial items or commercial components at any tier:

(7) 41 U.S.C. 4706(d) and 10 U.S.C. 2313(c),Examination of Records of Contractor, when a subcontractor is not required to provide certified cost or pricing data (see 15.209(b)), unless using funds appropriated or otherwise made available by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Pub. L. 111-5).

(C) Volume III - Contract Documentation. The purpose of this volume is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file.

1. You must complete blocks 30 a, b, and c of the SF Form 1449 and return this form with your proposal. Signature by the offeror on the SF1449 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept.

2. You must provide completed, detailed pricing information in the CLIN spreadsheet or your pricing spreadsheet.

3. You must provide FAR 52.212-3 Alt I (completed representations, certifications, acknowledgments, and statements).

4. OCCI Mitigation Plan or a statement that OCCI does not exist.

5. Authorized Offeror Personnel. Provide the name, title, and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

Contractor Point of Contract information will be used for the Contract Administration Data Item G1, Points of Contact.

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

(End of provision revisions) http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/15.htm#P195_32714

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2(a)

Addendum to 52.212-2(a), Evaluation-Commercial Items is tailored as follows:

a. Basis for Contract Award

Award will be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal is determined to represent the overall best value to the Government using a best value tradeoff evaluation process. The technical proposal should include all information the offeror wants the Government to consider and evaluate regarding its ability to perform all required tasks and conform to all required terms and conditions. To be eligible for award, the offeror’s proposal must sufficiently address all aspects of the PWS. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being ineligible for award.

With regard to the best value analysis for the award decision, the below evaluation factors and subfactors will be used in the best value tradeoff analysis. Section 508 Accessibility Standards do apply to this requirement.

Compliance with Section 508 standards will be considered prior to evaluating any of the selection criteria listed below.

b. Evaluation Factors and Subfactors

(1) The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal:

FACTOR 1 -- TECHNICAL: The purpose of the technical factor(s) is to assess the offeror’s proposed approach, as detailed in its proposal, to satisfy the Government’s requirements.

a. Sub Factor 1 – CAIRS system Access and Capability. Offeror is a CAIRS OEM certified service provider and is authorized Code and Patch Authority for CAIRS software.

b. Sub Factor 2 – Personnel Qualifications (Task 6.2.2.2). Offeror’s Tier 2/3 Technicians must be OEM Certified, or be able to obtain certification upon award, and must be able to work remotely for Code and Patch issues that arise during performance of the requirement.

FACTOR 2: MANAGEMENT

a. Sub Factor 1 – Personnel Qualifications. Project Lead with 5 years, minimum, of management experience in telephony industry and the use of billing software.

b. Sub Factor 2 - Management Approach to successfully deliver timely performance for the requirement.

FACTOR 3: PRICE

a. The Offeror’s firm-fixed price proposal will be evaluated for award purposes based upon the total evaluated price which consists of the offeror’s proposed prices for the base period to include option periods. Evaluation of the options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options. The offeror’s price proposal will be evaluated, using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404, in order to determine if it is reasonable and complete. Normally, price reasonableness is established through cost and price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404. For a price to be complete, all solicitation requirements must be priced, figures correctly calculated and prices presented in in a detailed, clear, and useful format. The Government reserves the right, but is not obligated, to conduct a realism analysis.

b. Due to the likely inability of any offeror to accurately estimate travel and material/equipment purchases associated with this requirement, the Government is providing plug numbers to be used by all offerors when proposing ODCs. Offerors are instructed to propose plug numbers for ODCs in the following EXACT amounts, however actual travel shall be authorized by the COR in writing prior to performance and will be paid IAW FAR Part 31.205-46.]

Travel ODCs Equipment ODCs Base Year: $20,000 Base Year: $30,000 Opt Year 1: $20,000 Opt Year 1: $30,000 Opt Year 2: $20,000 Opt Year 2: $30,000 Opt Year 3: $20,000 Opt Year 3: $30,000 Opt Year 4: $20,000 Opt Year 4: $30,000

These EXACT amounts shall include all audited markups and burdens and shall not be rounded or adjusted based upon independent decisions regarding actual anticipated ODCs. A proposal that fails to bid the plug numbers EXACTLY as provided may be excluded from further consideration.

(2) Relative Importance of Factors and Subfactors. The relative importance of each factor and subfactor is as follows: Within the Technical/Management factor, the subfactors are of equal importance. The Technical/Management Approach Factor is more important than the Price Factor. All non-price evaluation factors, when combined, are significantly more important than price.

c. Ratings

(1) Each technical/management subfactor will receive one of the ratings described in Table 1. The subfactor ratings will not be rolled up into an overall color rating for the Technical/Management factor.

The combined technical-management/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. Combined technical/risk evaluations shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in Table 1. Table 2 provides definitions relating to the technical evaluation rating process.

Technical/Risk Ratings for Factor 1. The technical-management/risk rating provides an assessment of the offeror’s proposed solution for satisfying the Government’s requirements.

Table 1. Combined Technical/Management and Risk Ratings Color Rating Description BLUE Outstanding Proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths far outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

PURPLE Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains strengths which outweigh any weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

GREEN Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

YELLOW Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

RED Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

Table 2. Definitions Relating to the Technical Evaluation Rating Process

Deficiency is a material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Risk, as it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or subfactor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Strength is an aspect of an offeror's proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Uncertainty is any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., there is more than one way to interpret the proposal or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

d. Evaluation of Options

The offeror shall submit pricing for the base period and all option periods. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

e. Discussions

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without exchanges. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct exchanges or seek clarifications if the KO determines they are necessary.

(End of provision revisions)