M00264-20-Q-0091_amend01.docx

M0026420Q0091

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 08-Jun-2020 12:00 PM to 22-Jun-2020 12:00 PM.

DELIVERIES AND PERFORMANCE

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0001 has been changed from:

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

30-JUN-2025

2076 SOUTH STREET

QUANTICO VA 22134

MAJ. LEE STUCKEY

(703) 432-0230 FOB: Destination M20409

To:

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

3300 RUSSELL ROAD

MCCDC

QUANTICO VA 22134

MARK DINGESS

703-784-4273

M30708

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0002 has been changed from:

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

2076 SOUTH STREET

QUANTICO VA 22134

MAJ. LEE STUCKEY

(703) 432-0230

M20409

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

3300 RUSSELL ROAD

MCCDC

QUANTICO VA 22134

MARK DINGESS

703-784-4273

M30708

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0003 has been changed from:

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

2076 SOUTH STREET

QUANTICO VA 22134

MAJ. LEE STUCKEY

(703) 432-0230

M20409

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

3300 RUSSELL ROAD

MCCDC

QUANTICO VA 22134

MARK DINGESS

703-784-4273

M30708

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0004 has been changed from:

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

2076 SOUTH STREET

QUANTICO VA 22134

MAJ. LEE STUCKEY

(703) 432-0230

M20409

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

3300 RUSSELL ROAD

MCCDC

QUANTICO VA 22134

MARK DINGESS

703-784-4273

M30708

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0005 has been changed from:

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

2076 SOUTH STREET

QUANTICO VA 22134

MAJ. LEE STUCKEY

(703) 432-0230

M20409

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

3300 RUSSELL ROAD

MCCDC

QUANTICO VA 22134

MARK DINGESS

703-784-4273

M30708

The following Delivery Schedule item for CLIN 0006 has been changed from:

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

2076 SOUTH STREET

QUANTICO VA 22134

MAJ. LEE STUCKEY

(703) 432-0230

M20409

POP 01-JUL-2020 TO

3300 RUSSELL ROAD

MCCDC

QUANTICO VA 22134

MARK DINGESS

703-784-4273

M30708

The following have been added by full text:

Q&AS

For IDIQ award evaluation purposes, all quoted pricing is totaled in cell “G39” of the rate table template under the “Sample TO Pricing” tab; however, only tasks 01, 02, and 05 will be awarded under task order 0001.

For IDIQ award evaluation purposes, all quoted pricing is totaled in cell “G39” of the rate table template under the “Sample TO Pricing” tab; however, only tasks 01, 02, and 05 will be awarded under task order 0001.

The total ordering period of the IDIQ will be three years.

For task 03, the Government anticipates no more than two iterations of low complexity, two iterations of moderate complexity, and one iteration of high complexity per year.

The total ordering period of the IDIQ will be three years.

For task 04, the Government anticipates no more than two iterations of low complexity, one iteration of moderate complexity, and one iteration of high complexity per year.

Q11 – Evaluation 1.1 p17, Evaluation 2.2.1 - It is unclear how a Best Value Trade-Off decision for this highly technical and complex requirement will be made given the minimal evaluation technical criteria provided in the solicitation. While Subfactor 1, Past Performance, and Subfactor 2, Management and Quality Process, are stated factors in the Factor 1, Technical Capability, the only criteria defined in the evaluation criteria is "The quoter may include discussion of relevant past performance. The quoter shall demonstrate how it will utilize its resources to best meet the Government’s requirement, to include its quoted management and quality assurance processes," and this must be addressed within the 20 page Volume I page limitation. In order to ensure a structure that supports the stated Factors and Subfactors in 52.212.2 Evaluation, 1.1:

1. Will the Government breakout the 52.212.2 Evaluation and 52.212-1 Instructions associated with Factor 1 "Technical Capability" to consist of three Volumes with distinct instructions (including page count), and evaluation criteria, to allow Offerors to be assessed fairly and consistently as follows: 1) Past Performance (10 pages); 2) Management and Quality Processes (25 pages); and, 3) Technical Approach (25 pages)? This is similar to the structure MCINR-RCO uses for solicitation similar in scope and construct to this requirement and will provide all Offerors:

a. Criteria that will support evaluation of how well a quoter is able to perform the technical tasks and clarity as to how technical risk will be associated with Offeror's proposed solution.

b. Criteria that will support evaluation of past performance to include relevancy, recency, and how past performance will factor into the overall technical assessment.

c. Criteria that will support evaluation of management and quality processes, and how management and quality processes will factor into the overall technical assessment A11 - FAR 52.212-1 and FAR 52.212-2 have been revised in the amended RFQ.

Q13 – Evaluation 2.2.2 p17; Instructions b) Vol II p19 - Given the highly technical skills required to support this complex effort, and in order to ensure a fair evaluation and comparison of Offeror's responses to this solicitation in support of a best value trade-off decision:

1. Will the Government allow each Offeror to submit a detailed Excel Basis of Estimate as an attachment to the Price Volume, outside of the page limitation for the price narrative, in order to illustrate price completeness and reasonableness and provide traceability to Offeror's proposed Volume I solution?

2. Typically, price volumes do not have page limitations yet the RFQ limits the price narrative in Volume II to 10 pages. In order to ensure Offeror may provide sufficient detail to support price completeness and reasonableness of its proposes prices will the Government remove page limits for Volume II or at a minimum increase the page limit for price narrative to 20 pages?

A13 - The Government will allow a detailed Excel Basis of Estimate as an attachment to the Price Volume.

The page count for the price volume will be increased to NTE 20 pages.

Q14 – Evaluation 2.2.2 p17, 18; Instructions, Volume I - Offerors will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness, yet Offerors are given no instructions for what is required for a determination of completeness and the Excel pricing template provides no additional instruction. Offerors are not required to submit a detailed basis of estimate (BOE) and minimum acceptable information (labor category, labor category rates, labor mix, ODCs, etc.) are not defined. Without adjustment to the instructions/evaluation criteria there appears to be no way to assess the completeness of the Offeror's proposed pricing approach for this highly technical and complex requirement.

Will the government adjust the instructions/evaluation for the price volume to include details regarding BOE, labor category, labor category rates, labor mix, etc. to support a fair and equitable assessment as to the completeness and reasonableness of each Offeror’s proposed price? MCINR-RCO has used this type of structure for solicitations similar in scope and construct to this requirement to support a fair evaluation of Offerors:

• Price Sub-Volume A: Unit Pricing Matrix and Basis of Estimates

– Fully loaded unit prices (cost and profit) for each ordering period (each period consists of 12 months). Unit Pricing Matrix for FFP IDIQ CLINs will serve as the basis for task order pricing.

– Description of what comprises the unit prices proposed. This includes, but is not limited to information such as labor category and labor mix used in their approach, tooling, materials, etc.

– Offerors shall submit a basis of estimate (in Microsoft Excel format) depicting the resources considered for execution of the technical approaches proposed as it relates to each of the deliverables. Basis of Estimates must include:

a. Labor categories and fully loaded labor rates for all deliverables.

b. Mapping of proposed labor categories against the Standard Occupational Classification provided by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor and Statistics.

• Sub-Volume B: Sample Task Order pricing

– The Sample TO pricing characterizes an adequate representation of the IDIQ, which will be used in determining best value under the IDIQ contract.

– The Offeror shall provide a price proposal for the sample task order based on the unit prices proposed under the IDIQ rate table. Rates per unit proposed at the task order must match the rates included under IDIQ rate table.

– Discounted rates shall not be proposed under this task order.

A14 - The Government will allow a detailed Excel Basis of Estimate as an attachment to the Price Volume.

Q20 – Instructions, Volume I p18, Evaluation 2.2.1 p17 – Clear demonstration of Offeror's technical capabilities to meet requirements is required, yet Offerors are not required to submit proof by citing past performance information, to include recent and relevant contracts for the same or similar items and other references (including contract numbers, points of contact with telephone numbers and other relevant information), even though Past Performance is a stated and evaluated subfactor of Technical Capability. Without adjustment to the instructions/evaluation criteria there is no consistent way for Offerors to present and be evaluated for Past Performance.

Will the Government adjust the current one sentence requirement of “The quoter may include discussion of relevant past performance.” and instead allow for the submission of a Past Performance Volume? This is like the structure MCINR-RCO uses in solicitations similar in scope and construct to this requirement and supports fair evaluation of Offerors:

• References providing information regarding the Prime Offeror's relevant past performance during the last three years in regard to the following areas: (1) Customer Satisfaction, (2) Timeliness, (3) Technical Success, (4) Quality, and (5) Cost Control.

• Past performance relevancy to this effort to include:

– how the work was/is similar to these Support Services requirements in terms of the scope, magnitude, and complexity

– current Point of Contact (POC) (e.g. Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer’s Representative, Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative, or Government Program Manager), name of contracting agency, agency representative, telephone number, email address

– type of contract, dollar value, brief description of work performed, problems encountered during contract performance and corrective actions taken.

– copy of the CPARS (in complete status) for the effort

A20 - FAR 52.212-1 and FAR 52.212-2 have been revised in the amended RFQ.

Q21 – Instructions, Volume I p18; Evaluation 2.2.1 p17 - Clear demonstration of Offeror's technical capabilities to meet requirements is required to support Factor 1 Subfactor 2, Management and Quality Process, yet Offerors are not required to a submit a detailed basis of estimate (BOE) nor a comprehensive management approach to support Offeror's understanding, resources and experience required to perform and meet all the deliverables in the solicitation, including the detailed procedures and methods to be used. Without adjustment to the instructions/evaluation criteria there appears to be no way to assess Offerors proposed solution with regards to staffing, management, and quality for this highly technical and complex requirement.

Will the Government replace the current one sentence requirement in Volume I of “The quoter shall demonstrate how it will utilize its resources to best meet the Government’s requirement, to include its quoted management and quality assurance processes” and add a Management Approach Volume to the proposal including submission of an unpriced BOE Excel attachment file supporting the Offeror’s proposed staffing solution with traceability to the Volume II Price Volume? This is like the structure MCINR-RCO uses for solicitations similar in scope and construct to this requirement and supports fair evaluation of Offerors:

• Ability, understanding, resources and experience required to perform and meet all the deliverables in the Solicitation, including the detailed procedures and methods to be used.

• Management plan approach to address managing the magnitude and complexity of work detailed in the Sample PWS including Offeror’s corporate experience and management structure to successfully perform all tasks.

• Teaming approach to be used in the overall operational concept for this contract with greater than 50% of the work performed by the Offeror. Description of team structures, relationships, roles and responsibilities that establish how the proposal provides for maximum quality performance and how the approach minimizes risk to performance along with the percentage of work planned to be assigned to team members.

• Staffing plan approach to provide a fully qualified work force including the ability to recruit, train, and retain sufficient numbers of personnel with required skill sets and security clearances to perform all Sample PWS requirements and how they correlate to the capability requirements of the PWS.

• A quality control plan (QCP) to ensure services are performed in accordance with the PWS, including the procedures to identify, prevent, and ensure non-recurrence of defective services, with a description of the procedures for each deliverable.

A21 - FAR 52.212-2 has been revised in the RFQ amendment.

For COTs software, the contractor will be responsible for acquiring the environment. Since this is constantly changing and dependent on the study we can not provide a final list however, we currently use SysML and MS Visio.

Q26 – Sample PWS, 8.2 p39 - 1. To meet this requirement Offeror must possess advanced knowledge in several different simulations and modeling environments. The environment type is a direct driver for the Offeror's staffing for this effort. What is the expected number of engagements (taskings) per tool during the 12 month period?

2. Regarding "the contractor will have and maintain advanced knowledge," how will the government evaluate "advanced knowledge" of the Offeror without the requirement to submit a detailed staffing plan to include labor categories and labor category descriptions with years of experience and other qualifications?

1. A26 - Modeling will be conducted on the continuous bases but for planning purposes the Govt estimates one tasking per month per tool.

2. Quoters may include non-priced BOE information in the discussion of its management approach.

Q27 – Sample PWS, 8.5 p41 - The level of effort for each searchable repository and time to complete will vary greatly based on the state of the data, timely access to servers, type of software, documentation, training, etc.

1. For this FFP IDIQ CLIN, and for evaluation purposes only, how does the Government intend for the Offeror to price one notional month of support service for each searchable repository (quantity 3 for the sample TO) regardless of the complexity of the effort (state of data, timely access to servers, type of software, documentation, training, etc.)?

2. How will the total ceiling for CLIN 0005 be calculated for the IDIQ? Will the unit be a 'month' of effort with each TO issued during contract performance based on a request for quote which provides details on the requirements for the repository?

A27

1. Additional information has been incorporated into the PWS for task 5.

1. The repository development is a non-severable task with an associated delivery date. There are three repositories that are required, each of which to be actually awarded and funded under task order 0001, along with severable tasks 0001 and 0002. Additional details will be incorporated into the task order 0001 PWS to facilitate accurate quote development for this real need.

Q30 – PWS 3.4.5 / 3.4.12: I noticed that paragraph 3.4.5 requires the contractor to have a SECRET clearence at the time of the proposal but the paragraph 3.4.12 indicates that we must have an Active Facility Clearance prior to award.

PWS 5.1: Paragraph 5.1 requests a Top Secret Facility Clearance.

As we are a newly incorperated SDVOSB, we are actively seeking a sponsore for Facility Clearance. Would you be willing to iniate that for interested offerors?

A30 – Paragraph 3.4.5 contractor personnel, performing at the Secret level shall possess at a minimum a Secret Clearance and Paragraph 5.1 plus the DD254 requires a Top Secret Facility Clearance. One applies to personnel and the other the contractor facility.

The Government will not sponsor a contractor to gain a Facility Clearance under this requirement.

We want to own the data.

1. Personnel

1. Summary of overall activity

1. Support planned next 45 days

1. Problem areas and recommended solutions

1. Travel

1. Funding Status

This information has been added to the associated CDRL.

Low complexity is 30 days, moderate is 60 days and high is 90 days.

Any of the simulations may be required for a low, moderate, or high complexity requirement. The complexity should be based on the level of effort needed to construct the simulation; i.e. 5 entities vs 50 entities.

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS

Addendum to 52.212-1

Instructions to Quoters

1. General Instructions

The Government intends to issue a single award Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract, with Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINS for service requirements under this solicitation. The contract will have a three (3) year ordering period in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 16.505(b)(1).

The Contractor shall submit a quote that clearly and concisely describes their response to the requirements of this solicitation. Use of general or vague statements such as “standard procedures will be used” will not satisfy this requirement. Unnecessary elaboration or presentations beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective quote are not desired and may be construed as an indication of the contractor’s lack of understanding. Elaborate artwork and expensive visual or other presentation aids are discouraged.

Quotes must be prepared in accordance with these instructions. Failure to do so may result in the Quoter’s submission being determined to be unacceptable and ineligible for award. The Quoter’s submission shall be screened by the Contracting Officer or a designee upon receipt to ensure completeness and compliance with the instructions contained in the RFQ. Elimination of a Quoter is at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

QUESTIONS: The Quoter may submit questions requesting clarification of solicitation requirements. All questions must be received no later than 10:00 A.M. EDT on 15 May 2020.

2. Instructions for Submission of Quotes

1. The Quoter is responsible for ensuring that quotes are received in the Contracting Office no later than 12:00 P.M. EDT on 22 JUNE 2020. Failure of Quoter’s quote to be received prior to the hour and date specified may result in rejection of the quote.

1. Quotes must be submitted electronically by e-mail to Ms. Judith Campbell at judith.campbell@usmc.mil with a copy to Mr. Michael Dennie at michael.dennie@usmc.mil.

1. RFQ Number M00264-20-Q-0091 must be clearly shown in the subject line.

3. Quote Format

In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the time for proposal evaluation, it is required that all Quoters submit their quotes in accordance with the format and content specified. The electronic proposal shall be prepared so that if an evaluator prints the proposal it meets the following format requirements:

· 8.5 X 11 inch paper, double-sided (each typewritten page side counts as one page).

· Single-spaced typed lines.

· 1 inch margins on all sides.

· 12 point font, Times New Roman for text material. For text material included in graphics, figures and exhibits, the contractor is allowed to the use of a minimum 10 point, and maximum of 12 point font . Contractor is encouraged to incorporate graphics, figures and exhibits as attachments to the volume. If included within the volume text, it will count in the overall page count of the volume. Attachment will not impact the page count limitations.

· Graphs, drawings and “Screen Shots” of pictures depicting an element(s) of the proposed approach must be clear and legible.

· No photographs or hyperlinks are permitted.

· Microsoft Office 2016 compatible files are required.

4. Proposal Content

Each quote shall contain the following volumes/sections:

Pricing information may not appear anywhere in the proposal other than Volume II.

I

The Quoter shall submit technical and price quotes, separately, in accordance with the following instructions:

a) Volume I:

Technical Quote Instructions: The Quoter’s technical quote shall describe in detail and provide information that demonstrates how their proposed product meets or exceeds the minimum requirement of the CLINs based on meeting the requirements of the RFQ, quantity, quality, and timeliness of delivery.

Past Performance Quote Instructions: The Quoter’s description of relevant past performance should consist of contracts performed withinthe last three years (from date of issueance of this RFQ) in regard to the following areas: (1) Customer Satisfaction, (2) Timeliness, (3) Technical Success, and (4) Quality. (Note: Individual task orders under an ID/IQ contract are each considered to be one past / present performance effort.). The reference information must be current to facilitate the evaluation process. Information on up to three (3) recent contracts performed by an offeror’s significant teaming partners / subcontractors and significant subcontractors considered most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the quoted effort may be submitted.

Management and Quality Processes Quote Instructions: The Quoter’s management approach should include a discussion on how it will utilize its resources to best meet the Government’s requirement, to include its quoted management and quality assurance process. Quoters may include non-priced basis of estimate information in the discussion of its management approach.

Volume I shall not exceed 50 pages.

b) Volume II: Price Quote Instructions:

1. The Quoter shall complete the Rate Table Pricing Template and provide an electronic copy upon quote submission. Quoter must include unit price for each line item throughout the ordering period.

1. Completeness. The Quoter must sign the SF-1449 solicitation, acknowledge all amendments if applicable, and include a compliance matrix and Table of Contents corresponding to their price submission. At a minimum, the following areas must be addressed:

Orders to be placed against the IDIQ shall utilize the ‘CLIN Structure” price table contained within the Rate table Pricing Template.

No ambiguities of inclusion, exclusion, or content shall be extended and lack of content or clarity with regard to pricing may be result in the Government finding a quote 'non-responsive'. Volume II shall not exceed 20 pages.

c) Representation and Certification Instructions: Contractors interested in doing business with the government must be registered in the System for Award Management (SAM). The vendor shall confirm that they are registered in SAM and that all representation and certifications are current in the system. Contractors must also be registered in the Wide Area Workflow (WAWF) invoicing system at https://wawf.eb.mil.

(End of provision addendum)

ADDENDUM 52.212-2 EVALUATION

52.212-2 ADDENDUM

EVALUATION AND BASIS OF AWARD

1. Evaluation Criteria

The Government will evaluate the following factors:

Factor 1 – Technical Capability Subfactor 1 – Past Performance Subfactor 2 – Management and Quality Processes Factor 2 – Price

Factor 1 - Technical Capability

The Technical Capability factor will be evaluated based on the contractor’s:

· Knowledge and understanding of the PWS including the qualifications andcapabilities of the proposed labor mix, and the validity of underlying assumptions and methodologies to meet the PWS requirements.

· Approach to executing their proposed technical solution including their approach to identifying, recruiting, training, and retaining their proposed workforce; teaming and communicating effectively with the Government; and otherwise meeting or exceeding quality standards in the PWS will be evaluated.

· Demonstrated technical experience executing similar efforts based on scope, complexity and magnitude.

Subfactor 1 - Past Performance

· The past performance evaluation factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in a Quoter’s ability to supply products and services that meet users’ needs, based on a demonstrated record of performance. Performance confidence is assessed at the overall past performance subfactor level after evaluating aspects of the quoter’s recent past performance. The past performance evaluation may take into account past performance information regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the performance of tasks detailed in the PWS.

· Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials; and the Defense Contract Management Agency.

· If a Quoter submits no record of past performance information or references submitted and the Government has no information available regarding the Quoter’s past performance, that Quoter will receive a Neutral/Unknown Confident rating (i.e. the Quoter is evaluated neither positive nor negative) for past performance.

Subfactor 2 - Management and Quality Processes

· The Quoter will be evaluated on:

· The quoted approach to managing, teaming, staffing, communication, ensuring flexibility appropriate to the magnitude and complexity of work detailed in the PWS.

· The quoted approach for communicating, coordinating, resolving problems and working successfully as part of the overall team; team structures, relationships, roles and responsibilities will be evaluated.

· The quoted teaming approach to be used in the overall operational concept for this contract with greater than 50% of the work performed by the quoter.

· Staffing plan approach to provide a fully qualified work force including the ability to recruit, train, and retain sufficient numbers of personnel with required skill sets and security clearances to perform all PWS requirements and how they correlate to the capability requirements of the PWS.

· A quality control plan (QCP) to ensure services are performed in accordance with the PWS, including the procedures to identify, prevent, and ensure non-recurrence of defective services, with a description of the procedures for each deliverable.

Factor 2 - Price Evaluation Criteria

· The quoter shall utilize the Rate Table Template included as an attachment to this solicitation to submit its quoted task order pricing in response to the sample PWS as well as its quoted unit pricing to be incorporated into the IDIQ ordering contract.

· The evaluated price will be the sum within the Rate Table Template under the “Sample TO Pricing” tab at cell “G39”. This amount equals the total quoted price for the real requirements under tasks 1, 2 and 5 as well as the sample requirements under tasks 3 and 4.

· The proposed price will be evaluated for fair and reasonableness. For a price to be reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. The Government will determine prices fair and reasonable through the use of one or more of the price analysis techniques at FAR 15.404-1(b)(2). The Government may determine that a response is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

1. Basis for Award

The Government intends to award a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) single award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) ordering contract under the procedures available at FAR 13.5, Simplified Acquisition Procedures for Certain Commercial Items to the responsible Contractor whose quote, conforming to the solicitation, represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered. The best value to the Government may include a tradeoff between price and non-price factors.

In determining the best value tradeoffs between price and non-price factors, award may not be made to the quoter that submits the lowest evaluated price. The Government reserves the right to award without discussions. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the quoter’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct exchanges if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

(End of provision addendum)

PWS

Performance Work Statement (PWS) Marine Corps Warfighting Lab (MCWL) G3/G5 Support

1. Background

1.1. The MCWL G3/G5 provides sustained and progressive examination of 21st century warfighting concepts, plans, and capabilities. Working closely with partners throughout Headquarters Marine Corps and the operating forces, the MCWL G3/G5 works to identify solutions that meet today and tomorrow’s combatant commander (COCOM) operational challenges. The MCWL G3/G5 provides the expertise to synthesize COCOM requirements and Service strategy informing Service level planning and Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) force development scenarios supporting future operational requirements. Based on future challenges, planning, and concepts, the MCWL G3/G5 will conduct high fidelity table top exercises, modeling and simulation (M&S), analysis, and assessments that informs how the Marine Corps will fight, exercise, evaluate concepts, experiment, and perform combat development in general. The MCWL G3/G5, produces the Future Force Assessment (FFA) and conducts the Marine Corps Capability-based Assessment Integrated Process (MCCIP) as an integral part of the Naval Capability-based Assessment Integrated Process. These activities require analytical support that includes: M&S, visualization tools, and assessment.

2. Scope

2.1. The Contractor shall provide all support for MCWL G3/G5 force development activities including campaign level M&S (Synthetic Theater Operations Research Model (STORM)), mission/engagement level M&S (Next Generation Threat System (NGTS), BRAWLER, SUPPRESSOR, Advanced Framework for Simulation Integration and Modeling (AFSIM), Systems Planning and Analysis (SPA) GCAM, Naval Simulation System (NSS), Systems Toolkit (STK), and other simulation support), model development, table top exercise support, assessment, product generation, and support meetings for development of Marine Corps and Naval capabilities. These tasks directly support the Commandant of the Marine Corps, Deputy Commandant for Capability Development and Integration, Capability Development Directorate, and Operations Analysis Division and are coordinated and directed by the MCWL G3/G5 at the Pentagon, National Capital Region, and Marine Corps Base (MCB), Quantico, Virginia.

3. General Requirements

3.1 Business Relations. The Contractor shall successfully integrate and coordinate all activity needed to execute the requirement. The Contractor shall manage the timeliness, completeness, and quality of problem identification. The Contractor shall provide corrective action plans, timely identification of issues, and effective management of subcontractors to the COR. The contractor shall ensure customer satisfaction through professional and ethical behavior of all contractor personnel.

3.1.1 The contractor shall make available a facility for SECRET storage and discussion within five (5) miles of the Marine Corps Base Quantico. The facility should be capable of getting access to SIPRNET, sponsored by the government, no later than six (6) months after contract award. The facility shall provide a room capable of hosting DE2 hardware, SDREN and workstations to support visualization and analysis.

3.1.2 The contractor shall provide the capability to enable information management, sharing, and M&S analysis at the SECRET level at the contractor site.

3.2 Contract Management: The Contractor shall establish clear organizational lines of authority and responsibility to ensure effective management of the resources assigned to the requirement.