Solictation_with_changes.pdf

CSPO OT&E Solicitation HSBP1013R0080

This is a combined synopsis/solicitation for commercial items prepared in accordance with the format in FAR 12.6, simplified acquisition procedures and the resultant Purchase

Order will include all applicable provisions and clauses in effect through the Federal

Acquisition Circular 05-67.

This announcement constitutes the only solicitation and a written solicitation will not be issued. This synopsis/solicitation is to notify contractors that the Government intends to issue a Purchase Order in accordance with FAR Part 13.106 for the following specifications, under the simplified acquisition procedures. This is a HUBZone Small

Business set-aside. Prospective offerors are responsible for downloading the solicitation and any amendments. It is the offeror's responsibility to monitor the Federal Business

Opportunities (FBO) website for the release of any amendments to this solicitation. The

Government reserves the right to award a contract without discussions if the Contracting

Officer determines that the initial offer(s) is/are providing the Best Value and discussions are not necessary.

This solicitation is issued as a Request for Proposal.

The U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Cargo Systems Program Office (CSPO) has a requirement to obtain a contract for Operational Testing and Evaluation Support cargo systems applications, as they are developed iteratively using agile development practices.

Required services and details are provided in Attachment A - Statement of Work.

CBP intends to enter into a Time and Material (T&M) single award Purchase order.

Required NAICS: 541511 - Computer Software Support Services.

The Government will award a Purchase order resulting from this RFP to the responsible vendor whose proposal, conforming to the solicitation, is most advantageous to the Government. The vendor must be registered in the Government’s System for Award Management (SAM).

Vendor questions: Any questions should be emailed to Contract Specialist, Jagdish

Narayan, at jagdish.narayan@dhs.gov. All questions are due by 9:00 am (Eastern

Daylight Time) on August 26, 2013.

Submission of Proposals : Proposals are due by 11:00 am (Eastern Daylight Time) on

September 9, 2013. If emailed, please email to: jagdish.narayan@dhs.gov

If hand-delivered, please use the following address:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Jagdish Narayan

1331 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 901

Washington DC 20229 mailto:jagdish.narayan@dhs.gov

BACKGROUND:

CBP is one of the largest and most complex components within the Department of

Homeland Security (DHS), with a priority mission of keeping terrorists and their weapons out of the U.S. CBP also has a responsibility for securing and facilitating trade and travel while enforcing hundreds of U.S. regulations, including immigration and drug laws. Within CBP, CSPO is responsible for the development and maintenance of systems and interfaces that support CBP, other Government agencies, and the trade community for import, export, and control of merchandise shipments.

CSPO will follow Agile values and principles, and implement specific agile practices, as described in Attachment A - Statement of Work (SOW). The CSPO ACE Agile Software

Development Lifecycle will be used to guide systems development on this contract. This lifecycle encompasses five phases: Solution Engineering; Release Planning;

Development Sprints; Hardening / Integration; and Operations and Maintenance, and is further described by the Agile Software Development Quick Reference Guide. The Agile

Practices, the Agile Software Development Quick Reference Guide and ACE Systems

Engineering Life Cycle (SELC) Tailoring Plan provide context on the environment under which OT&E must operate.

PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE:

Base Period: November 1, 2013 – October 31, 2014

Option Period I: November 1, 2014 – October 31, 2015

Option Period II: November 1, 2015 – October 31, 2016

PRICING SUMMARY: (based on Price Proposal)

Base Period

OT &E Planning 1 AU $________________

OT &E Execution/Reporting 1 AU $________________

Option Period 1

OT &E Planning 1 AU $________________

OT &E Execution/Reporting 1 AU $________________

Option Period 2

OT &E Execution/Reporting 1 AU $________________

Six Month Extension (if exercised)

OT &E Execution/Reporting 1 AU $________________

SOURCE SELECTION PROCEDURE

A. Exchanges

1. Clarifications. Clarifications are limited exchanges, between the Government and offerors that may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. When awarding without conducting discussions, offerors may be given an opportunity to resolve minor or clerical errors, or clarify aspects of their proposal (e.g., the relevance of an offeror’s past performance information and adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond).

2. Communications. Communications are exchanges, between the Government and offerors after receipt of proposals, leading to establishment of the competitive range.

(a) If a competitive range is to be established, these communications shall be limited to the offerors whose: (i) past performance information is the determining factor preventing them from being placed within the competitive range (such communications shall address adverse past performance information to which an offeror has not had a prior opportunity to respond); and (ii) Exclusion from, or inclusion in, the competitive range is uncertain.

(b) Communications may be conducted to enhance Government understanding of proposals; allow reasonable interpretation of the proposal; or facilitate the

Government’s evaluation process. Communications are for the purpose of addressing issues that must be explored to determine whether a proposal should be placed in the competitive range, and may address, (i) ambiguities in the proposal or other concerns (e.g., perceived deficiencies, weaknesses, errors, omissions, or mistakes); and (ii) information relating to relevant past performance. Such communications shall not be used to cure proposal deficiencies or material omissions, materially alter the technical or cost elements of the proposal, and/or otherwise revise the proposal. Such communications may be considered in rating proposals for the purpose of establishing the competitive range.

3. Discussions. If discussions are determined to be necessary, the CO shall recommend a competitive range comprised of the most highly rated proposals be established.

Exchanges with offerors after establishing a competitive range are called discussions.

In the event that it is not feasible to make award on the basis of the initial proposals received, discussions with offerors in the competitive range will be necessary.

Discussions are tailored to each offeror’s proposal, and are conducted in order to maximize the Government’s ability to obtain the best value. It is often necessary during the Source Selection Process to obtain additional information from one or more offerors regarding the terms of their proposals. This requirement shall be communicated to the CO. The CO will prepare a letter to the offerors to request the necessary information. The letter(s) will be included as part of the pre-negotiation business clearance. If an offeror is required to submit additional information, all other offerors within the competitive range will also be afforded the opportunity to submit additional information.

4. Government personnel involved in exchanges, in any form, shall not:

(a) Favor one offeror over another;

(b) Reveal an offeror’s technical solution, including unique technology or any information that would compromise an offeror’s intellectual property, to another offeror;

(c) Reveal an offeror’s price without that offeror’s permission. However, an offeror may be informed that its price is considered by the Government to be too high, or too low, and of the results of the Government's evaluation supporting that conclusion;

(d) Reveal the names of individuals providing reference information about an offeror’s past performance; or

(e) Knowingly furnish source selection information.

B. Evaluation Protocol

1. A contract will be awarded based on Best Value for the Government, using the source selection procedures outlined in this document. Best value shall be determined based on price and all non-price factors. Offerors will respond with information requested in the RFP. The Government intends to issue a single T&M-type contract.

2. The Government will not compensate the offerors for the costs associated with participating in the pre-proposal conference, if one is held, or responding to the RFP.

3. The Government reserves the right to reject any or all proposals at any time prior to award; to award contract to other than the offeror submitting the lowest total price;

and to award a contract to the offeror determined by the CO to be the most advantageous to the Government. Award may be made without discussions or any contact concerning the proposals received.

4. All proposals shall be evaluated against the established criteria set in this document.

Evaluation Factors

A. Relative Importance of the Evaluation Factors

1. In accordance with FAR 13.106-2(b), the evaluation factors and sub-factors that apply to this acquisition are stated below.

The Factors are listed in Descending Order of Importance. Sub-factors are of Equal

Importance within the factors

Factor 1 - Technical and Management

Sub-Factor 1.1: Understanding Program Objectives and Requirements

Sub-Factor 1.2: Technical Approach

Sub-Factor 1.3: Key Personnel

Sub-Factor 1.4: Project Task Proposal

Factor 2 – Specialized Experience and Past Performance

Sub-Factor 2.1: Specialized Experience

Sub-Factor 2.2: Past Performance and

Price

Each of the above are evaluated individually. The applicable evaluation factors with the basis of evaluation and submission requirements are stated in paragraph B below.

The relative importance of the evaluation factors is determined by the adjectival rating system (and associated definitions) established below in Section B. Evaluation

Factors/Criteria Description. Factors are listed in descending order. Sub-factors are of equal importance within the factors. Factors 1 and 2 combined together are significantly more important than Price. The importance of evaluating price will increase if offerors are determined to be essentially equal in terms of their rating on the non-price factors or if a price is so significantly high as to diminish the value of the proposal’s technical superiority to the Government.

B. Evaluation Factors/Criteria Description

1. FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL AND MANAGEMENT

Basis of Evaluation

The offeror’s Technical and Management proposal will be evaluated on assessed strengths, weaknesses, deficiencies and risks. Sub-factor ratings will be individually evaluated. Sub-factor ratings will be rolled up into an overall rating for the Technical and

Management Factor. Failure to comply with RFP requirements may result in a lower rating for this factor.

Evaluation will focus on:

Demonstrated understanding of program objectives and requirements;

Proposed technical and management approaches for meeting program objectives and requirements;

Proposed program resources and key personnel; and

Understanding, approach, and plan for the initial work effort.

Factor 1 Sub-factors 1.1 through 1.4 will be rated in accordance with the following:

Adjectival ratings and definitions:

Outstanding (O)

Proposal significantly exceeds requirements in a way that benefits the Government or meets requirements and contains at least one exceptional enhancing feature which benefits the government. Any weakness is minor.

Highly Satisfactory

(HS)

Proposal exceeds requirements in a way that benefits the government or meets requirements and contains enhancing features which benefit the Government. Any weakness is minor.

Satisfactory (S) Proposal meets requirements. Any weaknesses are minor and will have little or no impact on contract performance.

Marginal (M) Proposal contains weaknesses or minor deficiencies which could have some impact if accepted.

Unsatisfactory (U) Proposal does not comply substantially with requirements.

Risk Assessment Definitions –Risk For this evaluation risk is defined as the probability of an undesirable event occurring and the significance of the consequence of that occurrence of undesirable event and its attendant probability and impact. Risk will be evaluated using the following scale:

Low (L)

Has little or no potential to cause disruption of schedule, increase in cost, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

Medium (M)

Can potentially cause some disruption of schedule, increase in cost or degradation of performance. However, special contractor emphasis will probably be able to overcome difficulties.

High (H)

Likely to cause significant serious disruption of schedule; increase in cost, or degradation of performance even with special contractor emphasis.

Sub-factor 1.1 Understanding Program Objectives and Requirements The following specific elements will be evaluated:

Understanding of high-level Government program objectives for meeting operational requirements;

Understanding of government Operational Test and Evaluation planning, execution and reporting and

Understanding Agile development methodologies.

Sub-factor 1.2 Technical Approach The Government will evaluate: (1) the extent to which proposed strategy and approach satisfy Program objectives;

Sub-factor 1.3 Key Personnel The Government will evaluate the extent to which the following elements give the

Government confidence in the proposed program key personnel team’s ability to lead and manage the required effort: (1) composition of the proposed program key personnel team; (2) their respective education, training, professional certification; (3) their experience on projects of similar size, scope, and complexity; (4) their familiarity with

Agile software development methodologies; and (5) their availability to support the program and the percentage of time they will be committed to the program.

Sub-factor 1.4 Project Task Proposal The Government will evaluate the extent to which the offeror’s Technical Proposal reflects an understanding of Government requirements and provides a sound solution and resource capability to successfully plan and execute the initial work effort contemplated under this contract. In addition to the content, quality, and relevancy of information required by RFP, the Government will also consider consistency with proposal information provided in response to RFP and overall project risk.

2. FACTOR 2: SPECIALIZED EXPERIENCE AND PAST PERFORMACE

Factor 2 – Specialized Experience and Past Performance

The offeror shall describe at least three (3) but no more than five (5) past projects similar in scope, size, and complexity to the work described in the SOW. Descriptions shall be sufficiently robust to allow evaluators to judge relevancy (scope, size, and complexity) to this Project. All specialized experience must have been completed or substantially completed within the past five years of the RFP closing date. If the offeror was not the prime contractor on a project described, the offeror shall describe the scope, size, and complexity of the offeror's involvement as a sub-contractor.

Copies of industry awards, certificates, and letters of recommendation pertaining to specialized experience projects can be submitted and will not count against the page limitation. Awards, certificates, and letters shall be numbered in the upper right hand corner to match the corresponding project number. Only awards, certificates, and letters that correspond with submitted specialized experience will be considered.

The Government will evaluate the degree of comparability of each offeror’s past projects relative to this acquisition. Failure to comply with RFP requirements specified under

“Instructions to Offerors” may result in a lower rating for this factor.

Specifically, the Government will evaluate the following characteristics of the past projects of each offeror:

Nature of the requirements;

Size of the requirements;

Complexity of the requirements;

Innovative and/or proactive approach executed by the offeror;

Successful cost control measures;

Successful schedule control measures; and

Successful quality control measures.

Factor 2 will be rated in accordance with the following definitions:

Neutral

No relevant performance record Is identifiable upon which to base a meaningful performance rating. A search was unable to identify any relevant past performance information for the offeror or key team members/subcontractors or their key personnel. This is neither a negative or positive assessment.

Superior Based on an offeror’s past performance record, essentially no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Based on an offeror’s past performance record, some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unsatisfactory Based on an offeror’s past performance record, extreme doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Risk Assessment Definitions – Performance Risk (for Specialized Experience only)

Very Low (VL) Based on the offeror's specialized experience, no doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Low (L) Based on the offeror's specialized experience, little doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Moderate (M) Based on the offeror's specialized experience, some doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

High (H) Based on the offeror's specialized experience, substantial doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Very High (VH) Based on the offeror's specialized experience, extreme doubt exists that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Unknown (Unk) This applies only to specialized experience. No performance record is identifiable.

Sub-factor 2.1 Specialized Experience

Specialized experience is an additional confidence indicator that the offeror has the capability to marshal the necessary resources and expertise to lead projects of similar size, scope, and complexity.

The proposal may receive an increased rating for this factor among offers which include teaming arrangements if the offeror demonstrates that proposed teaming partners for this contract have successfully teamed with the offeror in the past.

Successful Specialized Experience of the offeror in “partnering” and resolving project challenges with the customer may result in an increased rating for this factor.

Sub-factor 2.2 Past Performance

Past performance on projects of similar size, scope, and complexity provides confidence in the offeror’s ability to successfully perform the proposed effort.

The Government's sources of information for evaluating specialized experience may include, but are not limited to, any and all information provided by the contractor, inquiries of owner representative(s), any other known sources not provided by the offeror, and retrieval of information from other contractor performance evaluation databases. The Government will use completed Past Performance Questionnaires

(Attachment C) in this evaluation. Past Performance Questionnaires describing performance of proposed sub-contractors on this effort will carry less weight in the government’s evaluation those describing past performance of the offeror.

3. PRICE

The Government intends to evaluate proposals to determine price reasonableness and, if necessary conduct discussions with all responsible offerors within the competitive range.

The Government anticipates adequate price competition per FAR 13.106-2(b) as it has reasonable expectations that two or more responsible offerors, competing independently, will submit price offerors in response to the solicitation’s expressed requirement. The evaluation methodology to determine whether the proposed prices are fair and reasonable will use one of those applicable price evaluation techniques as prescribed in the FAR

13.106-2(b). No adjectival rating system of the proposed prices will be used to determine if prices are fair and reasonable. Prices that are determined not be fair and reasonable for the proposed work may result in the overall proposal being considered unacceptable.

Offerors must provide sufficient details in their BOE to support the proposed prices.

Failure to comply with the RFP requirements may result in the overall proposal being considered unacceptable. The award will be made to the offeror whose proposal conforms to the terms and conditions of the solicitation and award may be made to other than the lowest priced or the highest technically rated offer.

Relative importance and trade-offs. The Government will base the determination of best value on performance, and the other evaluation factors identified elsewhere in this solicitation. The determination of best value also considers the relative importance of the evaluation factors. Technical factors are significantly more important than price. It is pointed out, however, that should technical competence between offerors be considered approximately the same, then price could become primary.

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

(a) Technical Proposal

Proposal Volume 1 (Technical and Management) Sections 1 through 6 shall address the effort described in the overall contract – see individual Section requirements below.

Sections 1 through 4 (excluding résumés) shall not exceed 15 total pages.

Section 5 (Specialized Experience) is limited to 10 pages. Any additional pages will not be considered in the evaluation process. Section 6 (Attachment C - Past Performance

Questionnaire) supplements Section 5 - Specialized experience—that is, projects submitted in Section 6 must also be included as Section 5 specialized experience projects.

Although Section 6 has no page limitation, evaluations for specialized experience outside the 10-page Section 5 limit will not be considered (unless negative in tone or content). In addition, Section 6 projects not included as Section 5 specialized experience will not be considered (unless negative in tone or content).

Section 1 - Understanding the Objectives and Requirements

The offeror shall provide a narrative describing their understanding of Program objectives and technical and operational requirements. The narrative shall not simply restate the requirements of the Statements of Work but shall be expanded in sufficient detail to demonstrate understanding.

Section 2 - Approach

The offeror shall provide a narrative describing their strategy and approach for achieving the Program objectives.

Section 3 - Key Personnel

The offeror shall propose skill sets they believe should be identified as key personnel and provide résumés of those key personnel. Each résumé shall be limited to two (2) pages.

The offeror shall also provide a description of: (1) key personnel program roles and responsibilities; (2) the extent of their authority to make decisions and commit respective company resources; and (3) when they will be available to support the contract effort and the percentage of time they will be committed to the contract effort. All proposed key personnel with current CBP background investigations shall be identified.

Section 4 - Project Task Proposal

The successful offeror will be required to submit a Technical Proposal, which shall include at a minimum:

o A project work breakdown structure at a level sufficient to allow evaluators to assess the completeness and relevance of the proposed work – not included in the page limitation.

o Project-specific technical solution to address the initial work efforts contemplated under this contract.

o A project risk assessment shall be provided including associated project impacts, probability assessments, and mitigation plans.

Section 5 – Specialized Experience

The offeror shall describe no more than five (5) past projects similar in scope, size, and complexity to the work described in the Task Order (preferably work performed in a

DHS environment). Descriptions shall be sufficiently robust to allow evaluators to judge relevancy (scope, size, and complexity) to this Program. All specialized experience must have been completed or substantially completed within the past five years of the RFP closing date. Offerors are responsible for numbering the projects in the upper right hand corner.

Copies of industry awards, certificates, and letters of recommendation pertaining to specialized experience projects can be submitted and will not count against the page limitation. Only awards, certificates and letters that correspond with submitted specialized experience will be considered.

Section 6 – Past Performance Questionnaire – Attachment C

For all Specialized Experience projects that have been completed or substantially completed within the past five years of the RFP closing date, the offeror shall send the

Attachment C questionnaire to respective customers and request they be returned electronically via email to Jagdish Narayan, Jagdish.Narayan@dhs.gov, for inclusion in the proposal. Attachment C submissions do not have a page limitation. Offerors are responsible for matching the projects submitted on Attachment C with the projects submitted for Section 5 - Specialized Experience by sequentially numbering the projects in the upper right corner of the form. Offerors will complete the first two blocks of

Attachment C, indicating the name of the Contractor and Contract Number. The rating section should be left blank for the customer to complete. The Government reserves the right to contact identified customers to request additional information or provide clarifications. The Government will also consider past performance reports available on other past performance databases, such as the Past Performance Information Retrieval

System, in the evaluation.

Note 1: Offerors may include projects with the Federal Government, agencies of state and local governments, and commercial customers.

Sections 1 through 6 shall be submitted in the following quantities: one (1) original, three (3) hardcopies, and one (1) complete electronic copy sent via email to

Jagdish.Narayan@dhs.gov. Documents submitted shall be in Microsoft Word 2010 format, single paged, single space, Times New Roman, and size 12 font. Any graphs and charts are to be submitted in either Microsoft Word 2010 (Times New Roman 10 Font or

Adobe Acrobat (.pdf) format.

(b) Price Proposal

Proposal Volume 2 shall include a completed Section “CLINs and Prices by Period of

Performance” using the attached Pricing Template (see Attachment B - Pricing

Template). The Pricing Template shall use Microsoft Excel 2010 with working formulas, calculations, summations and unlocked spreadsheets.

mailto:Jagdish.Narayan@dhs.gov

All Contract Line Items (CLINs) and Sub-Contract Line Items (SLINs) shall be offered in order for the Offeror to be considered for award. Each Offeror’s price proposal shall be based on the Offeror’s Technical and Management proposal’s approach to fulfill the

Government requirements, the Government’s specifications and other contractual requirements. All pricing information submitted by Offerors is for the exclusive use of the Government.

Volume 2 shall be structured as follows:

Tab A – Executed SF1449 and RFP amendments.

Tab B – Completed Pricing template(s) with supporting data.

Tab C – Non- Pricing template – similar to Tab B but with no Pricing information

– include labor categories, quantity, hours, and ODCs.

Tab D – Certification that the offeror’s System for Award Management (SAM) information is current and accurate.

Tab E – Offerors participating in teaming/partnering arrangements for this procurement shall submit their teaming/partnering agreements with their proposal.

The agreements shall be signed by the parties and shall demonstrate the relationship between firms and identify contractual relationships and authorities to bind the firm and the team/partnership.

Volume 2 has no page limitation and shall be submitted in the following quantities: one

(1) original hard copy and one (1) complete electronic copy sent via email to jagdish.narayan@dhs.gov. The pricing and supporting data file(s) shall be available separately and readily identifiable on electronic copy. Documents submitted shall be in

Microsoft Word 2010 format, single paged, single space, Times New Roman, and size 12 font.

Questions Deadline:

Any questions should be emailed to Contract Specialist, Jagdish Narayan, at jagdish.narayan@dhs.gov. All questions are due by 9:00 am (Eastern Daylight Time) on

August 26, 2013.

Due Date for Proposals:

Proposals are due by 11:00 am (Eastern Daylight Time) on September 9, 2013

Email address: jagdish.narayan@dhs.gov

For hand-delivery, use the following address:

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

Jagdish Narayan

1331 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 901

National Place Bldg., North Tower

Washington DC 20229

In addition (if mailing the proposal), please email the Contract Specialist, Jagdish

Narayan at jagdish.narayan@dhs.gov to alert the Government that the proposal was mailed and provide the tracking number if available.

No phone calls will be accepted.

PROVISIONS AND CLAUSES

I.1 52.252-1 Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference (FEB 1998)

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the

Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es):

www.acquisition.gov

FEDERAL ACQUISITION REQULATION (48 CFR CHAPTER 1) PROVISIONS

NUMBER TITLE

I.2 52.203-11 Certification and Disclosure Regarding Payments to Influence

Certain Federal Transactions (Sept 2007)

I.3 52.204-4 Printed or Copied Double-Sided on Postconsumer Fiber Content

Paper (Aug 2000)

I.4 52.204-7 System for Award Management (Apr 2008)

I.5 52.209-7 Information Regarding Responsibility Matters (Jul 2013)

I.6 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors -- Commercial Items (Jul 2013)

I.7 52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (Jan 1999)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

i. Technical and management

ii. Specialized Experience and Past Performance

iii. Price

Factors i and ii combined together are significantly more important than Price.

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The

Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the

Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

I.8 52.212-4, Contract Terms and Conditions -- Commercial Items (Jul 2013

I.9 52.214-34 Submission of Offers in the English Language (Apr 1991

I.10 52.214-35 Submission of Offers in U.S. Currency (Apr 1991)

I.11 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors -- Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2004)

I.12 52.217-5 Evaluation of Options (July 1990)

Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the

Government’s best interests, the Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement.

Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the Options

I.13 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services (Nov 1999)

The Government may require continued performance of any services within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract. These rates may be adjusted only as a result of revisions to prevailing labor rates provided by the Secretary of Labor. The option provision may be exercised more than once, but the total extension of performance hereunder shall not exceed 6 months. The Contracting Officer may exercise the option by written notice to the Contractor within 30 days of the contract end date.

I.14 52.217-9 Option to Extend the Term of the Contract (Mar 2000)

(a) The Government may extend the term of this contract by written notice to the

Contractor within 10 days; provided that the Government gives the Contractor a preliminary written notice of its intent to extend at least 30 days before the contract expires. The preliminary notice does not commit the Government to an extension.

(b) If the Government exercises this option, the extended contract shall be considered to include this option clause.

(c) The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed 3 years.

I.15 52.222-33 Notice of Requirement for Project Labor Agreement (May 2010)

I.16 52.222-35 Equal Opportunity for Veterans (Sep 2010)

I.17 52.222-36 Affirmative Action for Workers With Disabilities (Oct 2010) http://www.acquisition.gov/far/html/Subpart%2017_2.html#wp1078150

I.18 52.222-38 Compliance With Veterans’ Employment Reporting Requirements

(Sep 2010)

I.19 52.232-18 Availability of Funds (Apr 1984)

Funds are not presently available for this contract. The Government’s obligation under this contract is contingent upon the availability of appropriated funds from which payment for contract purposes can be made. No legal liability on the part of the Government for any payment may arise until funds are made available to the

Contracting Officer for this contract and until the Contractor receives notice of such availability, to be confirmed in writing by the Contracting Officer.

I.20 52.250-2 SAFETY Act Coverage Not Applicable (Feb 2009)

I.21 3052.209-72 Organizational Conflict of Interest (JUN 2006)

(a) Determination. The Government has determined that this effort may result in an actual or potential conflict of interest, or may provide one or more offerors with the potential to attain an unfair competitive advantage. The nature of the conflict of interest and the limitation on future contracting _____.

(b) If any such conflict of interest is found to exist, the Contracting Officer may

(1) disqualify the offeror, or

(2) determine that it is otherwise in the best interest of the United States to contract with the offeror and include the appropriate provisions to avoid, neutralize, mitigate, or waive such conflict in the contract awarded. After discussion with the offeror, the Contracting Officer may determine that the actual conflict cannot be avoided, neutralized, mitigated or otherwise resolved to the satisfaction of the Government, and the offeror may be found ineligible for award.

(c) Disclosure: The offeror hereby represents, to the best of its knowledge that:

[__] (1) It is not aware of any facts which create any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest relating to the award of this contract, or

[__] (2) It has included information in its proposal, providing all current information bearing on the existence of any actual or potential organizational conflicts of interest, and has included a mitigation plan in accordance with paragraph (d) of this provision.

(d) Mitigation. If an offeror with a potential or actual conflict of interest or unfair competitive advantage believes the conflict can be avoided, neutralized, or mitigated, the offeror shall submit a mitigation plan to the Government for review. Award of a contract where an actual or potential conflict of interest exists shall not occur before Government approval of the mitigation plan. If a mitigation plan is approved, the restrictions of this provision do not apply to the extent defined in the mitigation plan.

(e) Other Relevant Information: In addition to the mitigation plan, the Contracting

Officer may require further relevant information from the offeror. The

Contracting Officer will use all information submitted by the offeror, and any other relevant information known to DHS, to determine whether an award to the offeror may take place, and whether the mitigation plan adequately neutralizes or mitigates the conflict.

(f) Corporation Change. The successful offeror shall inform the Contracting Officer within thirty (30) calendar days of the effective date of any corporate mergers, acquisitions, and/or divestures that may affect this provision.

(g) Flow-down. The contractor shall insert the substance of this clause in each first tier subcontract that exceeds the simplified acquisition threshold.

(End of Provision)

I.22 3052.209-73 Limitation of Future Contracting (JUN 2006)

(a) The Contracting Officer has determined that this acquisition may give rise to a potential organizational conflict of interest. Accordingly, the attention of prospective offerors is invited to FAR Subpart 9.5--Organizational Conflicts of

Interest.

(b) The nature of this conflict is .

(c) The restrictions upon future contracting are as follows:

(1) If the Contractor, under the terms of this contract, or through the performance of tasks pursuant to this contract, is required to develop specifications or statements of work that are to be incorporated into a solicitation, the

Contractor shall be ineligible to perform the work described in that solicitation as a prime or first-tier subcontractor under an ensuing DHS contract. This restriction shall remain in effect for a reasonable time, as agreed to by the

Contracting Officer and the Contractor, sufficient to avoid unfair competitive advantage or potential bias (this time shall in no case be less than the duration of the initial production contract). DHS shall not unilaterally require the

Contractor to prepare such specifications or statements of work under this contract.

(2) To the extent that the work under this contract requires access to proprietary, business confidential, or financial data of other companies, and as long as these data remain proprietary or confidential, the Contractor shall protect these data from unauthorized use and disclosure and agrees not to use them to compete with those other companies.

(End of Clause)

I.23 PAYMENT AND INVOICE INSTRUCTIONS (FEB 2012)

In order to request contract payment, the contractor shall submit a proper invoice, as defined by Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 2.101 for payment in the manner and format described below.

SUBMISSION OF INVOICES

(a) The contractor shall submit an original invoice/voucher, via postal mail or electronic mail (email), simultaneously to the following:

(1) National Finance Center (NFC)

DHS/U.S. Customs and Border Protection

National Finance Center/Commercial Accounts

PO Box 68908

Indianapolis, Indiana 46268

OR email: cbpinvoices@cbp.dhs.gov

NOTE: For invoices with payment terms less than net 30, the subject line for all emailed invoices to the NFC must include the following text: “Per CBP, Net [state # days] Invoice”.

(2) Contracting Officer or Contract Administrator (CO or CA) [fill in at time of award]

Attention:

OR email:

(3) Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) [fill in at time of award]

OR email:

(b) The contractor shall submit a copy of the original invoice/voucher for all DHS cost-reimbursement and time and material/labor hour contracts and delivery orders to the branch manager/resident auditor of the cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency

(DCAA) Field Audit Office. Copies may be sent to DCAA, via postal mail or email and must be sent at the same time the invoice/voucher is sent to the NFC, CO and

COR. The CO shall provide the following information:

DCAA Field Office [fill in at time of award]

Phone:

Email:

(c) In accordance with FAR 32.904(b), the CO, in conjunction with the COR and NFC, will determine whether the invoice is proper or improper within seven (7) days of receipt. Improper invoices will be returned to the contractor within seven (7) days of receipt

INVOICE REVIEW AND APPROVAL REQUIREMENTS

(a) To constitute a proper invoice, invoices shall include, at a minimum, all the items required in FAR 32.905.

(1) The minimum requirements are:

i. Name and address of the contractor.

mailto:cbpinvoices@cbp.dhs.gov

ii. Invoice date and invoice number.

iii. Contract number or other authorization for supplies delivered or services performed (including order number and contract line item number).

iv. Description, quantity, unit of measure, unit price, and extended price of supplies delivered or services performed.

v. Shipping and payment terms (e.g. shipment number and date of shipment, discount for prompt payment terms). Bill of lading number and weight of shipment will be shown for shipments on Government bills of lading.

vi. Name and address of contractor official to whom payment is to be sent (must be the same as that in the contract or in a proper notice of assignment).

vii. Name (where practicable), title, phone number, and mailing address of person to notify in the event of a defective invoice.

viii. Taxpayer identification number (TIN).

ix. Electronic funds transfer (EFT) banking information.

x. Any other information or documentation required by the contract (e.g.

evidence of shipment).

(2) For cost reimbursement or time and material contracts (other than a contract for a commercial item), the contractor shall bill and maintain a record of indirect costs in accordance with FAR 52.216-7(d).

(b) Supplemental documentation required for review and approval of invoices, at the written direction of the contracting officer, may be submitted directly to either the contracting officer, or the contracting officer’s representative. Contractors shall submit all supplemental invoice documentation along with the original invoice.

(c) Invoices that fail to provide the information required by the Prompt Payment clause

(FAR 52.232-25) may be rejected by the Government and returned to the contractor.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Attachment A – Statement of Work

2. Attachment B – Pricing Template

3. Attachment C - Past Performance Questionnaire