DRAFT_PERM_Sections_LM_Pre_Sol_Mar9Mar2015_REV1_JHG_edits_3-9-15.doc

UNCLASSFIED

M67854-15-R-6007

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

52.211-14 NOTICE OF PRIORITY RATING FOR NATIONAL DEFENSE, EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, AND ENERGY PROGRAM USE (APR 2008)

Any contract awarded as a result of this solicitation will be ____ DX rated order; _X_ DO rated order certified for national defense, emergency preparedness, and energy program use under the Defense Priorities and Allocations System (DPAS) (15 CFR 700), and the Contractor will be required to follow all of the requirements of this regulation. [Contracting Officer check appropriate box.]

(End of provision)

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of one Fixed Price Incentive Firm (FPIF), Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract) resulting from this solicitation.

(End of provision)

52.233-2 SERVICE OF PROTEST (SEP 2006)

(a) Protests, as defined in section 33.101 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation, that are filed directly with an agency, and copies of any protests that are filed with the Government Accountability Office (GAO), shall be served on the Contracting Officer (addressed as follows) by obtaining written and dated acknowledgment of receipt from Commander, Marine Corps Systems Command, Armor and Fire Support Systems (PMM-114.1/CT 2.6), Attn: Margot Haycook, Quantico, VA 22134-6050; Email: margot.haycook@usmc.mil.

(b) The copy of any protest shall be received in the office designated above within one day of filing a protest with the GAO.

(End of provision)

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L-1 OVERVIEW

It is intended that the Projectile, 120 Millimeter: Precision Extended Range Munition (PERM), XM1109, requirements identified in this solicitation be procured through the selection of a single Offer. This acquisition will utilize Best Value/Trade-Off source selection procedures and the Government intends to award one (1) FPIF, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract to the successful Offeror for the Production and Deployment Phase and associated data over a five-year period. The diagram below provides a visual representation of the acquisition approach to this procurement:

L-2 GENERAL

The Offeror’s best solution, that meets the requirements of the PERM RFP, shall be submitted. Should an offeror have more than one solution, the offeror must submit a full and complete second proposal package. The Offeror shall submit documentation illustrating their approach in satisfying the requirements of this solicitation. The Offeror’s proposal must be clear, coherent, and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation against the evaluation criteria. The proposal must clearly demonstrate how the Offeror intends to accomplish the project and must include convincing rationale and substantiation of all claims. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentations beyond those sufficiently required to present a complete effective response to the solicitation are not desired or required. The Offeror may describe in their proposal, through the use of graphs, charts, diagrams, and/or narratives, in sufficient detail for the Government to understand and evaluate the nature of the Offeror’s approach. During the evaluation process, the Government will consider the degree of substantiation of the Offeror’s proposed approach in the proposal volumes and responses to any discussions, if held.

Each proposal shall sufficiently demonstrate an understanding of the ability to comply with all the requirements referenced in the PERM Statement of Work (SOW) and Performance Specification (separate Attachments to this solicitation). Additionally, the proposal shall include any Government collected test data, or contractor developed test data that can support the Offerors claims in product performance. Clarity, completeness, and conciseness are essential and the quality of the proposal being indicative of the Offeror’s capability to perform the solicitation requirements. Failure to submit all of the information requested by this solicitation may be cause for unfavorable consideration or proposal being dismissed.

All correspondence in conjunction with this solicitation should be directed to Product Manager, Fire Support Systems (PdM FSS) Contracting Officer identified below:

Contracting Officer Name: Ms. Margot Haycook E-mail address: margot.haycook@usmc.mil Phone Number: 703.432.5922 Contracting Specialist Name: Ms. Jeanette Hernandez-Guilleaume E-mail address: jeanette.hernandezgu@usmc.mil Phone Number: 703.432.5924

L-3 CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

Offerors should clearly indicate which portions of their proposal are submitted in confidence and which they believe are exempt from Government disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Offerors making such assertions are encouraged to use descriptive legends citing to the FOIA exemption asserted as a cited exemption might apply to specific portions of their proposal.

L-4 PROPOSAL VOLUME REQUIREMENTS

The Offeror’s proposal shall be accompanied by a letter of transmittal prepared on the company’s letterhead stationery. The letter of transmittal shall identify all enclosures being transmitted and any exceptions taken to the specified format prescribed herein or any contingencies to the proposal and shall be used only to transmit the proposal and include no other information. If any exceptions are taken to the terms and conditions of the solicitation, they shall be clearly set forth in the letter of transmittal and they shall be explained by the Offeror with the understanding that the exceptions may render the Offeror’s proposal unacceptable to the Government. The Offeror’s proposal shall also include an Executive Summary briefly describing the overall approach of that volume’s contents and any major subcontractor or teaming arrangements. The first or title page shall be in accordance with FAR 52.215-1, paragraph (c)(2). The following are further descriptions of information that shall be provided with the proposal.

Table L-1. Volume Requirements.

Volume

Number & Name

Page Limit

(Include all volume contents on 1 CD) Original plus 5 copies of all volume contents

Annexes

Volume 2:

Business

Original plus 2 copies of all volume contents

Volume 3:

Past Performance

Original plus 3 copies of all volume contents

* The Technical Proposal “Total Page Limit” includes Sections A and B, which shall not exceed 100 pages. The SAR and QAP, have separate page limits and are exclusive of the 100-page limit of the Technical Proposal.

L-4.1 Content

The Offeror’s proposal must clearly and convincingly demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements and associated risks; is able, willing, and competent to devote the resources necessary to meet the requirements, and has valid and practical solutions for all requirements. Statements that the prospective Offeror understands, can, or will comply with the specifications, and statements paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof without substantive evidence will not satisfy evaluation requirements.

In presenting material in the Offeror’s proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to present enough information to allow the various work efforts, support, and management approaches, as well as price, to be meaningfully evaluated without discussions. Include any data necessary to illustrate adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems.

There is no need to repeat information in more than one volume if an overlap exists; the detailed information must be included in the most logical place and summarized with references to the information cited in applicable areas. Price information will not be included in the technical proposal.

Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentations beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired. Additionally, all Government collected test data from the EMD Government test demonstrations will be incorporated into the proposals submitted by contractors that participated in the EMD demonstration.

L–4.2 Page Limitations

The letter of transmittal, title page, table of contents, table of figures, list of tables, and glossary of abbreviations and acronyms do not count against page count limitations. Proposal contents that exceed the stated page limitations set by the solicitation, including any amendments, will not be considered in the evaluation of such a proposal.

L–4.3 Format

The printed proposal shall be single-spaced, on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper (with the exception of the Contractor Performance Specification Change Matrix (CPSCM), Cross Reference Matrix (CRM), and Production Schedule, submitted with the Technical Volume and the Section B Excel Spreadsheet submitted with the Business Volume, which can be on 11 x 17 inch white paper), with a minimum one-inch margin all around. Pages shall be numbered consecutively. A page printed on both sides shall be counted as two pages. Submission as double-sided printing/copying on recycled paper is encouraged. Print shall be of a minimum 11-point font size using "Arial" or "Times New Roman" font style. Bolding, underlining, and italics may be used to identify topic demarcations or points of emphasis. Graphic presentations, including tables, may use a reduced font style not less than 8 point and shall have spacing and text that is easily readable. The Offeror should ensure that each page provides identification of the submitting contractor in the header or footer.

Each volume in the proposal shall include a copy of the cover letter (letter of transmittal), title page, and table of contents. The table of contents shall list sections, subsections, and page numbers. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used. Each acronym used shall be spelled out in the text the first time it appears in each proposal volume.

In addition to the paper copies identified above, the Offeror shall submit all proposal information in electronic format on a CD. Text and graphics portions of the electronic copies shall be editable and compatible with Microsoft (MS) Office 2007. Data submitted in spreadsheet format shall be editable and compatible with MS Office 2007. In case of conflict between the paper copy and the electronic copy of the proposals submitted, the paper copy shall take precedence. However, if contradictory information is found in the CD, such as to discredit the claim in the paper proposal that the requirements of the Performance Specification (Attachment (1) - Section J) or SOW can be met, then the CD information may lead to a finding of technical unacceptability. Each volume, to include the "Original" and "Copies," shall be bound separately in hard side three-ring binders. Offeror(s) are responsible for ensuring printed material accurately reflects the electronic data on the CD.

Proposals shall be valid for a period of at least 240 days.

L–4.4 Submission Address

The proposal and all copies may be mailed, express mailed, or hand-carried, however, the addresses vary depending on the delivery method chosen by the Offeror. The Government’s preferred delivery method is for proposals to be MAILED OR EXPRESS MAILED (via third party couriers, i.e. FedEx, UPS, etc.).

MAILED OR EXPRESS MAILED (via third party couriers, i.e. FEDEX, UPS, etc.) proposals shall be delivered to the address and Point of Contact (POC) shown below. DO NOT HAND-CARRY PROPOSALS TO THIS ADDRESS.

Commander

Marine Corps Systems Command

Armor and Fire Support Systems (PMM-114)

ATTN: Ms. Margot Haycook 2200 Lester Street Quantico, VA 22134

RFP: M67854-15-R-6007

Phone Number: 703.432.5922 Offerors are advised that proposals sent by conventional U.S. Mail service are not routed directly to the above address. Therefore, the possibility that a proposal will not comply with the stated closing date/time exists, in such case the proposal will be considered a “late submission”.

HAND-CARRIED proposals shall be delivered to the address and POC below. OFFERORS MUST CALL AHEAD AS ACCESS TO THIS BUILDING IS RESTRICTED.

Commander

Marine Corps Systems Command

Armor and Fire Support Systems (PMM-114)

ATTN: Ms. Margot Haycook 105 Tech Parkway, Suite 105

Stafford, VA 22556

RFP: M67854-15-R-6007

Phone Number: 703.432.5922 Alternate POC for locations listed above is:

Marine Corps Systems Command

Armor and Fire Support Systems (PMM-114)

ATTN: Ms. Jeanette Hernandez-Guilleaume 105 Tech Parkway, Suite 105

Stafford, VA 22556

RFP: M67854-15-R-6007

Phone Number: 703.432.5924 L–4.5 Submission Due Dates

Responsibility falls solely on the Offerors to submit proposals on time. Offers shall be received no later than the date and time specified in the solicitation, Standard Form 33, Page 1, Block 9. Late submissions will not be accepted. The Procurement Contracting Officer (PCO) will not accept e-mails and phone calls from Offerors with late submissions.

L–4.6 Communication with the Contracting Office

Solicitation information and amendments will be posted to the Federal Business Opportunities website at www.fbo.gov. Offerors may ONLY e-mail written questions, utilizing the format in Table L-2 below, requesting clarification of the RFP to the Government via the Contracting Officer, Ms. Margot Haycook at: margot.haycook@usmc.mil and copy Ms. Jeanette Hernandez-Guilleaume, jeanette.hernandezgu@usmc.mil. . Written questions will be received no later than 2:00 P.M. EST, ten (10) calendar days after the “Date Issued” in the solicitation, Standard Form 33, Page 1, Block 5, unless specified otherwise. The Government will answer questions and provide responses via an amendment to the solicitation posted on the FBO website. Questions received after this date may not be answered.

Table L-2 Format for Questions

General Issue

Solicitation

SOW

Performance Spec

Other

L-4.7 Volume 1 – Technical

The Technical Volume shall include the Performance and Management Sections. No contract pricing information shall appear in the Technical Volume. Submitting pricing in this volume may lead to an unfavorable evaluation.

The Technical Volume shall address Evaluation Factor 1 – Technical and Evaluation as per solicitation Section M. The Technical Volume shall demonstrate an understanding of the Offeror’s ability to meet all of the requirements covered in the PERM SOW and Performance Specification (Attachment (1) – Section J). The proposal should be sufficiently complete to demonstrate how the Offeror will comply with requirements throughout the performance period. Data previously submitted, or presumed to be known, i.e., descriptions of previous projects performed for the Government cannot be considered as a part of the proposal unless physically incorporated in the proposal.

The Government expects the following in each Offeror’s proposal: Clarity, completeness, and conciseness. The Offeror shall demonstrate the ability, resources, and experience required to meet the requirements, to include detailed procedures, plans, and methods to be used. All information shall be presented in sufficient depth for the Government to make a comprehensive evaluation of the Offeror’s understanding of the solicitation requirements and of the Offeror’s capability for successful performance. The proposal should demonstrate this understanding and capability in a concise, logical manner and should not contain superfluous material not directly related to this solicitation.

L-4.7.1 Section A - Performance This section shall include a CPSCM per the template provided as Attachment (2) - Section J. The completed CPSCM will be incorporated into the awarded contract. This section shall also include substantiating data material to address the Contractor's performance specifications. The Offeror shall also provide substantiating technical data on the following specifications that are verified by analysis: Enhanced Portable Inductive Artillery Fuze Setter (EPIAFS) compatibility, M-code/P(Y)-code/(C/A)-code SAASM GPS compatibility, containerized weight, projectile initialization timing, M327 Rifled Towed Mortar (RTM) compatibility, minimum range, maximum range, time of flight, GPS noise interference, rocket motor initiation, CEP accuracy, lethality, warhead fuzing, casualty mode, Built-In-Test functionality, shelf life, and reliability. Additionally, the Offeror shall submit any test data that will aid in supporting the Offerors claims in product performance for items that were insufficient/inadequate during the Government Demonstation test phase. Any test data collected prior to the conduct of the Government Demonstration may be included as part of the Technical Proposal. Only quick look test reports (raw data) will be available to the Offeror for the development of their proposals prior to submission. Therefore, the Government will only be using quick look raw test data from each test event to evaluate the contractors proposal.

L-4.7.2 Section B - Management

This section shall address Production and Systems Engineering. The Technical Volume, Management Section shall include a CRM per the template provided as Attachment (3) – Section J.

· Production: A Production Schedule shall be included with this section. The Production Schedule shall be editable and compatible with Microsoft Project 2010. At a minimum, the schedule shall integrate all data items, testing, hardware deliveries, contract program events/reviews, contract milestones, technical milestones, key decision points and program events. If the Offeror’s proposed delivery for the base year is shorter than the Government's minimum requirement delineated in Section F of the RFP, the Offeror shall include that delivery schedule in their response, which will then become the required delivery schedule, if awarded a contract. The Offeror shall also include their proposed delivery schedule for the follow-on years in accordance with their proposed production capability.

This section shall also address and substantiate current plant capacity or analysis to achieve the plant capacity necessary to meet the contract requirements, long lead items, production schedule for the All Up Rounds (AURs), and current and projected workload on current contracts. The Offeror shall also provide a Staffing Plan to support the production effort including labor mix and hiring plan. Any areas which have proven to be schedule risks or issues on current or past contracts shall be addressed. The Offeror shall also provide evidence that they meet or will meet all of the security requirements contained in the PERM Production SOW.

· Systems Engineering: The Offeror shall discuss their approach in meeting the systems engineering requirements contained in the PERM Production SOW. In particular, the Offeror shall provide their PERM Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) and Safety Assessment Report (SAR). The QAP shall address the Offeror's ability to maintain the quality management system to be used on the PERM contract. The SAR shall be in accordance with Task 301 of MIL-STD-882E.

L–4.8 Volume 2 – Business

The Business Volume shall address Evaluation Factor 2 – Price and Evaluation Factor – 4 Small Business Plan, as per solicitation Section M. The Offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 240 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers. After proposal submission, the Government reserves the right to request more detailed price information, as necessary.

L-4.8.1 Section A - Price

This volume shall include the price proposal that includes a Fixed Price or Labor Rate for each separately priced CLIN in Section B of the RFP. Offerors shall propose a step-ladder pricing structure for quantities based on price breaks for all step-ladder CLINs, but a maximum of six (6) step-ladder ranges applies. The minimum quantity for the first range shall be one (1) and the maximum quantity for the last range shall be the maximum quantity specified for each CLIN. The Offeror shall submit prices for each period of performance. If the Offeror does not propose prices for all step-ladder quantities in each year of the period of performance, they may be considered non-responsive and rejected. All dollar amounts provided shall be rounded to the nearest dollar.

It is expected that this contract will be awarded based upon determination that there has been adequate market research conducted that has proved that competition has been sought and there is adequate price competition. The Offeror will still be required to submit or certify cost or pricing data with their proposal(s).

The Business Volume shall consist of the following, separated by tabs:

a. This volume shall include a master table of contents of the entire proposal (Note: include the master table of contents in Volume 3 only).

b. Including its subcontractors, the Offeror shall provide the company/division address, identifying codes, and applicable designations, company/division's street address, county and facility code, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code, Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) code, size of business (large or small), and labor surplus area designation. The Offeror shall also provide the mailing address, e-mail address, telephone numbers, fax numbers, and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), and Government paying office including the name, e-mail address, telephone number, and fax number for the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO). Offeror shall provide a single point of contact and one alternate for all matters dealing with its proposal; including name, position title, address, telephone number, fax number, and e-mail address.

c. Signed Standard Form 33, titled Solicitation, Offer and Award with blocks 12 through 17 shall be completed by the Offeror.

d. Signed Standard Form 30, titled Amendment of Solicitation/ Modification of Contract.

e. Completed Attachment (X) “Section B - Description of Supplies/Services” located in Section J, to reflect total price for PERM. Offerors are encouraged to submit their proposals based on the most favorable terms provided to reflect their best offer. See instructions in Attachment (X) for how to complete the Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet.

f. Completed Section K “Contractor’s Representations and Certifications”.

g. Certification: Offerors shall also execute and include the following Certification in Volume 3 - Business:

“I hereby certify our offer dated (INSERT DATE) in response to solicitation M67854-15-R-6007 does not include any ground rules, assumptions, or any other verbiage which conditions or otherwise limits our offer dated (INSERT DATE) in response to solicitation M67854-15-R-6007 unless otherwise noted in our Letter of Transmittal.”

Company: (INSERT COMPANY NAME)

Authorized Signature/Title/Date: (SIGN/INSERT TITLE/INSERT DATE)”

h. The following provides additional information on how to complete each of the columns in Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) 252.227-7017, Identification and Assertion of Use, Release, or Disclosure Restrictions. This volume shall also include any technical data and computer software which the Contractor intends to provide with limited rights or restricted rights at the time of delivery IAW DFARS 252.227-7017, Identification and Assertion of Use, Release, or Disclosure Restrictions for the table titled, List of Technical Data Computer Software to be furnished with Restrictions.

Column 1. Technical Data or Computer Software to be furnished with Restrictions

(Note. Identify the deliverable technical data and the Item, Component, or Process (ICP) to which it pertains.)

Column 2. Basis for Assertion

(Note. Specify whether “development” of the ICP or software was EXCLUSIVELY or PARTIALLY at private expense. Provide evidence of private expense, such as IR&D account numbers. “Developed” is defined at 252.227-7013(a)(6) for technical data and 252.227-7014(a)(6) for software. Indicate whether the ICP or the software will be further developed with Government funding. If so, indicate whether the new development can be segregated from the original.)

Column 3. Asserted Rights Category

(Note. Identify the expiration date for Government Purpose Rights and Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR) Data Rights. Commercial technical data and software should be listed separate from the noncommercial items. See 252.227-7015(b) for the Government’s license rights in commercial technical data. Commercial software licenses must comply with DFARS 227.7202-1; attach a copy of the license.)

Column 4. Name of Persons Asserting Restrictions

Column 5. 252.227-7028 – Similar Item Delivered to the Government

(Note. Identify if the same or similar technical data or software has been produced for, delivered to, or is subject to delivery to the Government under any contract or subcontract. Identify the contract number, organization, and any limitations on the Government’s rights to use and disclose [to include applicable expiration date].)

Date

Printed Name and Title

Signature

L-4.8.2 Section B - Small Business Participation

The Offeror shall describe the extent to which it proposes to utilize Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) in the performance of the contract in accordance with FAR 52.219-9. Where possible, describe firms to include NAICS Code qualifications germane to this effort, the type to be used, along with the complexity and variety of work. Indicate the dollar amount of the proposed effort and give its relative impact with respect to total price of the proposal. Detail how the Offeror will meet DOD’s goal of a minimum of 5% SDB subcontracting utilization or provide a detailed explanation as to why the goal cannot be achieved. The subcontracting plan shall be provided in Volume 3 as a separate section.

L-4.9 Volume 3 – Past Performance

The Past Performance Volume shall include the Offeror’s Past Performance data. The Past Performance Volume shall address Evaluation Factor 3 – Past Performance, as per solicitation Section M. No production or pricing information shall be contained in the Past Performance Volume. Submitting pricing in this volume may lead to an unfavorable evaluation.

Offerors are advised that the Government may use and evaluate independently obtained past performance data such as Past Performance Retrieval System (PPIRS) data and Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) (Attachment (8) – Section J), as well as recent and relevant past performance data provided by the Offeror. Therefore, the Government requests that Offerors provide past performance information that adequately supports its stated capabilities to accomplish the work defined in this solicitation. Since the Government may not necessarily interview all of the sources provided by the Offeror, it is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of any past performance data provided. Furthermore, the Government does not assume the duty to search for data to explain or remedy any inconsistencies it finds in the information provided by the Offeror. All past performance information required is applicable to all proposed key subcontractors with whom the Offeror is teaming, as well as the Offeror. The Offeror shall submit with its proposal its key subcontractors’ letter(s) of consent allowing the Government to disclose the subcontractors’ past performance to the Offeror if necessary. Key subcontractors are those which perform 25% or more of the proposed cost of this effort and/or whose performance on the award contract is such that if it fails, could significantly impact program success.

At a minimum, proposals shall include the following information for work similar in size, scope, and/or complexity to the PERM: technical relevance of the referenced effort to this procurement, demonstrated technical and schedule performance, general responsiveness to contract requirements, management aspects of the effort to include problem resolution, quality of the products and services, and overall customer satisfaction with products and services. For any contracts which did not/do not meet the original requirements with regard to original cost, schedule, or technical performance, the Offeror shall provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for such shortcomings and any demonstrated corrective actions taken to avoid recurrence. Provide a copy of any cure notices or show cause letters received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action taken.

Offeror shall submit past performance citations within the past three (3) years that are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. PLEASE SUBMIT NO MORE THAN THREE (3) CITATIONS PER OFFEROR AND TWO (2) PER KEY SUBCONTRACTOR. Pages are limited to no more than three (3) pages per citation. In addition, any and all contracts terminated in whole or in part during the past five (5) years, to include those currently in the process of such termination are considered relevant and the Offeror shall provide past performance information for those contracts.

Offerors shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment (8) – Section J) and send it to the assessors (Government or Commercial personnel that had experience with the Offeror on a previous, relevant contract). Offerors shall request the assessors complete Part II of the questionnaire and ask they email it by the closing date of the solicitation, directly to margot.haycook@usmc.mil with copy to Ms. Jeanette Hernandez-Guilleaume, jeanette.hernandezgu@usmc.mil. Offerors shall also identify to whom Past Performance Questionnaires were submitted for completion by providing, via email to margot.haycook@usmc.mil with copy to jeanette.hernandezgu@usmc.mil, the Name of the Government Agency or Commercial Organization, Address, Contract Number, and Evaluator’s Name/Contact Info (Phone Number and Email Address). Any Offeror that is unable to provide three (3) relevant contracts for past performance evaluation may submit a lesser number.

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

EVALUATION FACTORS

M–1 AWARD BASED ON BEST VALUE TO THE GOVERNMENT

The Government will award one (1) contract to the Offeror whose proposal offers the best value in terms of Technical, Price, Past Performance, Small Business Plan, as prescribed in Section M-2 of this solicitation. Within the best value continuum, the Government will employ a tradeoff analysis of cost or price and non-cost factors (FAR 15.101-1) in evaluating the proposals submitted. Prospective Offerors are advised that in consideration of Best Value, a proposal meeting the solicitation requirements with the lowest price may not be selected if award to a higher priced Offeror is determined to be more advantageous to the Government. The Offeror’s best solution that meets the requirements of the RFP should be submitted.

Proposals will be assessed for how well the Offeror’s proposal meets the solicitation requirements and the risks associated with the Offeror’s approach. Strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies of each offer will be identified. In addition, the Government will examine the impact of the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies and assess their relative value to the Government.

M–2 EVALUATION FACTORS

In making its “best value” determination, the Government will evaluate the following factors and their sub-factors: Technical, Price, Past Performance, and Small Business Plan, which are listed in descending order of importance. The sub-factors are also in descending order of importance within each factor. The adjectival ratings listed in Table M-3 will only be applied at the factor level. Technical is significantly more important than Price. Price is more important than Past Performance. Past Performance is more important than the Small Business Plan. Price will be evaluated, but will not be rated. The Small Business Plan will be rated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis.

Factor 1 – Technical

Subfactor 1 – Performance

Subfactor 2 – Management

Factor 2 – Price Factor 3 – Past Performance

Factor 4 – Small Business Participation M–2.1 Factor 1 - Technical

The Offeror must demonstrate an understanding in their proposal of the requirements of the PERM Statement of Work (SOW) which articulates the Offeror’s approach, mitigation plan to address EMD shortcomings, and capability in meeting the requirements of the PERM Performance Specification (Attachment (1) – Section J). Factor 1 Technical is divided into the Subfactor 1 Performance and the Subfactor 2 Management , listed in descending order of importance below. Factor 1 will be rated using the criteria in Table M-3.

Technical Risk Rating. Assessment of technical risk, which is manifested by the identification of weakness(es), considers potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance. Technical risk shall be rated using the ratings listed in the Table M-1 below.

Table M-1 - Technical Risk Ratings

degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close

Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

M-2.1.1 Subfactor 1 - Performance The Subfactor 1 Performance will be evaluated to assess:

· The Offeror’s technical approach to achieving compliance with the attached performance specification including contractor test plans and planned approach. All Performance Specification (Attachment (1) – Section J) requirements will be evaluated using the below listed order of importance. All other performance requirements will be evaluated as having equal importance.

· Range (ref Perf. Spec. para. 3.4.3.1)

· Lethality (ref Perf. Spec. para. 3.4.4.2)

· Accuracy (ref Perf. Spec. para. 3.4.4.1)

· Loadout (Total number of rounds per Prime Mover Trailer)

M-2.1.2 Subfactor 2 - Management

· Overall Management Approach: The Government will evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the offeror’s overall management approach to Statement of Work requirements. Innovations proposed in the offeror’s management approach will be evaluated for their impact on effectiveness and efficiency. The Government will evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the overall organizational structure and work breakdown structure proposed. The Government will also evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the offeror’s approach to attracting and retaining personnel, customer interface, and customer satisfaction.

· Production Schedule: The proposal will be evaluated based upon the extent to which the proposal demonstrates how the Offeror will achieve an overall schedule to meet or exceed contract requirements, current and projected workload based on contracts in place, etc. to substantiate delivery requirements. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's rationale for the delivery schedule to include facts, assumptions, ground rules, risks and opportunities which provide the basis of the schedule. The capacity to meet the proposed delivery schedule will include evaluation of plant capacity, long lead items, LRIP schedule for the production projectiles, current and projected workload based on contracts in place to substantiate delivery capability. The Government will also evaluate the proposed delivery schedule for completeness, logical flow, identification of critical paths and the extent to which the Offeror is able to meet their proposed delivery schedule. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Staffing Plan for the appropriate labor mix to substantiate production capability. The Government will evaluate the schedule risks identified by the Offeror and their mitigation strategy.

· M–2.2 Factor 2 - Price

The Price evaluation will assess the Total Evaluated Price to the Government (using the methodology described below) for each offer and a determination of whether each Offeror’s proposed price to the Government is fair, reasonable, and balanced using one or more of the methods cited in FAR 15.404-1. The price evaluation is intended to be limited to price analysis, by employment of one or more of the techniques described in FAR 15.404-1(b), but the Government reserves the discretion to request additional information from Offerors and employ any of the other cost/price analysis techniques described in FAR 15.404-1 if the Government is unable to determine whether offered prices are fair and reasonable through price analysis alone.

The step-ladder pricing structure proposed for quantities based on price breaks for all step-ladder CLINs shall be limited to a minimum of two (2) and a maximum of six (6) step-ladder ranges. The minimum quantity for the first range shall be two hundred fifty (250) and the maximum quantity for the last range shall be the maximum quantity specified for each CLIN: 1001, 1002, 1003, and 1004.

For planning purposes, the PERM program has a nominal procurement profile based upon existing budgets, however, due to the current budget environment, procurement could be accelerated to reduce total costs, delayed to fund other priorities or quantities adjusted based on mission demand. As a result, the program is pursuing a price evaluation approach that balances the nominal baseline while accounting for potential variation. The approach will base half of the price evaluation on the nominal profile listed in Column “H” in Attachment (X) of Section J, which is provided as “Basis of Price Evaluation Quantity 1.” This will be averaged with randomly selected values representing another possible procurement profile from the “Basis of Price Evaluation Quantity 2.”

The “Total Evaluated Price” will be calculated using the following steps and are based on Attachment (X) in Section J:

1. The "Basis of Price Evaluation Quantity 1" will be multiplied by the "Proposed Unit Price" for the respective quantity range to come up with the "Amount per Quantity 1".

2. The "Basis of Price Evaluation Quantity 2" will be multiplied by the "Proposed Unit Price" for the respective quantity range to come up with the "Amount per Quantity 2".

3. The sum of all "Amount per Quantity 1" CLINs and the sum of all "Amount per Quantity 2" CLINs will then be averaged to come up with the "Total Evaluated Price".

Where the quantity is stated as random, a random value between the minimum and maximum order quantity will be drawn for each CLIN, not to exceed the contract maximums. The same random value will be used for each Offeror.

The minimum quantity for the entire life of the contract will be two hundred fifty (250). The minimum quantity for each production Option will be two hundred fifty (250) from any combination of (optional) CLINs 1001AB, 1002AB, 1003AB, and 1004AB. Maximum quantities for the entire life of the contract for CLINs 1001AB, 1002AB, 1003AB, and 1004AB will be 2,170 (e.g. CLINs 1001AB, 1002AB, 1003AB, and 1004AB will not exceed 2,170 in total). Proposals that include prices for items other than the CLIN structure identified below will be considered nonresponsive and removed from further consideration.

To simplify the above process, the total evaluated price will be determined by utilizing the Offeror’s completed Attachment (TBD) in Section J, containing the process described above.

Upon contract award, prices used will be those proposed, not prices that have been evaluated.

As part of this evaluation, the Government may consider Defense Contract Audit Agency audit information and other information the Government deems relevant.

M-2.3 Factor 3 - Past Performance

The Government will evaluate the Offeror's probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The Government will conduct an assessment of the Offeror’s and key subcontractor’s past performance. Key subcontractors are those which perform 25% or more of the proposed cost of this effort and/or whose performance on the award contract is such that if it fails, could significantly impact program success. The Government will consider recent work, which is defined as work performed during the five (5) year period preceding the date of RFP release. Note: If any part of the performance falls within the required five (5) year timeframe, the contract in its entirety may be evaluated for past performance. In case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or whom information on past performance is not available past performance will receive a neutral score. A neutral score will not count for or against the Offeror's proposal.

Relevancy means similarity in equipment, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of sub-contract teaming. Incorrect information will be noted and may cause an unfavorable rating. The Government may use information from sources other than those identified in the proposal to develop evaluations of the Offeror’s past performance.

Confidence means the level of confidence the Government has in the Offeror’s ability to perform to required effort successfully based on the Offeror’s and key subcontractor’s relevant past performance and systemic improvement. Under Past Performance, the Government will evaluate how well an Offeror has performed similar work before. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s and key subcontractor’s demonstrated past performance in delivering quality products and services and in meeting technical and schedule requirements on products and services deemed relevant to the solicitation requirements. The degree to which the Offeror can demonstrate that it has successfully applied continuous systemic improvement to resolve past performance problems will be evaluated. The Government will consider trends in the number and severity of problems, the effectiveness of corrective action taken, and the overall work record. Problems not addressed by the Offeror will be considered to still exist. More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the Past Performance Confidence Assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Table M-2 is the evaluation criteria for past performance relevancy and Table M-3 is the evaluation criteria for past performance confidence.

Table M-2. Past Performance Relevancy

Performance Relevancy Assessments

Table M-2. Past Performance Confidence

Performance Confidence Assessments

M–2.4 Factor 4 – Small Business Participation The Offeror’s Small Business Plan will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis only. Offerors that include a Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) plan with anticipated SDB utilization of 5% or more, or provide a detailed explanation as to why the goal cannot be achieved, will be deemed acceptable.

M-3 ADJECTIVAL RATINGS FOR COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK FOR TECHNICAL FACTORS

The Government will utilize the below adjectival rating scale in Table M-4 for the Technical Factors.

Table M-4. Adjectival Ratings for Combined Technical/Risk for Technical Factors

demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal has one or more weakness which is/are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

UNCLASSIFIED

_1482901726.ppt

Company A

Company B

Company C

Company D

Company E

Proposals Submitted by Industry

One (1) proposal for the PERM consisting of:

Volume 1 – Technical, Volume 2 – Past Performance, and Volume 3 – Business

2. Evaluation of Proposals

Evaluation of Technical Proposal (Volume 1)

Factor 1: Technical

Sub-factor 1: Performance

Sub-factor 2: Management

Evaluation of Business Proposal (Volume 2)

Factor 2: Price

Factor 4: Small Business Participation

Evaluation of Past Performance Proposal (Volume 3)

Factor 3: Past Performance

3. Establish the Competitive Range and Hold

Discussions, if Needed

4. Best Value Determination and Award of One (1) Contract