9_160727_-_ECH_AAO_Increase_Sections_L_and_M_PSN.pdf

SECTION L – Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

L.1. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

In order to be considered for award, each Offeror shall submit their proposal in accordance with these Section L instructions. Failure to adhere to these instructions may result in rejection of the offer and t result in the proposal not receiving further consideration in the source selection process. Offeror’s may ONLY submit one proposal in response to this solicitation. Proposals shall remain valid for a minimum of one hundred eighty (180) days and shall not contain classified data/information.

L.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

L.2.1 Written Proposal Delivery Address

Marine Corps Systems Command

2201A Willis Street

Quantico, VA 22134-6050

Attn: Katy Hurd, RFP: M67854-16-R-1122

Source Selection Sample Delivery Address: NIJ Certified Laboratory (To Be Determined)

L.2.2 Proposal Submission Date

TBD

L.2.3 Package Labeling

All packages and boxes responding to this solicitation shall contain the following information on the address label:

Solicitation Number: M67854-16-R-1122 ECH

A statement: "TO BE DELIVERED UNOPENED TO KATY HURD”

The volume and copy number of the written material in each package/box

The Source Selection Sample quantity and sizes

L.3 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

L.3.1 General Proposal Format

Offerors shall submit technical, past performance, and business proposals as separate volumes in loose-leaf three ring binders. Offerors shall submit one original technical proposal, one original past performance proposal, and one original business proposal. Each copy shall have a cover sheet marked with the copy number (e.g. Copy 1 of 2), title

(e.g. Volume I – Technical Proposal), RFP number (M67854-16-R-1122), classification (i.e., ECH), and Offeror's name. Each CD shall be marked with the title, RFP number, classification, and Offeror’s name. Offerors shall apply all appropriate markings, including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information. Offers shall also stamp all documents “For Official Use Only and Source

Selection Sensitive - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.” All information that the Offeror wishes to have considered shall be submitted with the initial proposal. The information in the proposal shall be presented in a clear, coherent, and concise manner sufficient to demonstrate a clear understanding of contract requirements and method of accomplishing these requirements. Any pages in excess of the limit specified will be removed from the volume and not considered part of the proposal. A page printed on both sides will be counted as two (2) pages. Pages containing text shall be on 8 ½ x 11 inch paper. Drawings or other graphics should be reduced to the extent legibility is not lost.

Each page shall be single spaced with a minimum of twelve (12) point font and one (1) inch margins. All pages shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and solicitation number in the header and/or footer. The official ballistic and non-ballistic test reports shall be delivered unaltered in Portable Document

Format (pdf) format and contain a signature from the test laboratory. CD Requirements: Microsoft Office 2000 software or higher shall be used to create the required .xls, .ppt and .doc files. Adobe Acrobat Version 7.0 or higher shall be used to create .pdf files. Proposal submission requirements are detailed in Table 1 below:

Table 1: Proposal Submission Requirements

VOLUME CONTENT SUBMISSION Page Limit

Volume I Technical Proposal:

94 Source Selection

Samples – Finished

Helmets

NIJ-Approved Laboratory

Test Results

Government Purpose

Rights (GPR)

Certification (if offered)

Documented/Claimed

Helmet Weights

Manufacturing

(1) Original

(2) Duplicative Copies

(1) Electronic Copy - CD

30 pages (excluding NIJ-

Approved Test Results)

Volume II Past Performance Proposal (1) Original

(1) Duplicative Copy

(1) Electronic Copy-CD

No page limit

Volume III Subcontracting (1) Original

(1) Electronic Copy -CD

No page limit

Volume IV Business Proposal

(1) Original

(1) Electronic Copy -CD

No page limit

L.3.2 Specific Proposal Instructions

L.3.2.1 Volume I – Technical Proposal The Technical Proposal shall contain NO proposal price information whatsoever.

L.3.2.1.1 Source Selection Samples – Finished Helmets (Correlates to Section M, Factor 1, Subfactor 1:

Ballistic and Non –Ballistic Protection, Subfactor 2: Weight and Subfactor 3: Design and Workmanship)

Offerors shall submit a total of 94 finished helmets in accordance with the ECH PD (Attachment J.1). The helmet shell should contain a removable label that includes the Solicitation number, unique identifier (e.g., serial number) and Offeror Name.

Required finished helmets shall consist of 22 Smalls, 26 Mediums, 24 Larges, and 22 Extra-Larges. Each finished helmet shall include a retention system and a suspension system. The mandatory 7-Pad Suspension System and

Improved Retention System specified in the Purchase Description shall be acquired from the Government-mandated sources.

The following quantities must also include an NVD Mount and, NVD Mount Hardware: 4 Smalls, 5 Mediums, 5

Larges and 4 Extra-Larges. The Government will conduct testing on these samples to determine ballistic and non-ballistic performance. Each required sample shall be separately packaged and submitted as specified above.

L.3.2.1.2 Written Technical Proposal

L.3.2.1.2.1 Mandatory Security Requirement (GO/NO GO Requirement)

Offeror’s must have a minimum SECRET Facility Clearance (FCL) in order to respond to the solicitation. The solicitation will include a Classified Annex (provided under separate cover upon request) at the SECRET level which will be released only to Offeror’s possessing the appropriate facility clearance. All classified material must be handled in accordance with the DD254, Classified Annex, the National Industrial Security Program Operating

Manual (NISPOM) (DoD 5220-22-M), and Industrial Security Regulation (DoD 5220.22-R). All FCL information will be verified through the Defense Security Service for all Offeror’s and their subcontractors. Offeror’s without a security FCL will neither be able to discuss nor access key aspects of the program that are classified nor will they be able to pass such information on to their subcontractor.

Classified Annex A to GL-PD-09-04, provided as Attachment J.2 to this solicitation, is classified SECRET. Offerors requesting this document must provide their classified mailing address and classified account e-mail address to the

ECH Project Officer at john.draper@usmc.mil. The Government will verify the offeror’s eligibility (current facility security clearance and appropriate storage capability) and provide the Annex via U.S. Postal Service. Further dissemination by offerors is NOT authorized.

L.3.2.1.2.2 NIJ-Approved Laboratory Test Results (GO/NO GO Requirement) Offerors shall provide a National Institute of Justice (NIJ) approved laboratory test report that clearly demonstrates the Offeror’s proposed ECH solution meets the threshold/minimum ECH PD requirements for those tests listed in

Table 2 .The NIJ-approved laboratory test report must be unaltered in a Portable Document Format (pdf) file with an official signature from the test laboratory.

Table 2: NIJ-Approved Test Report Requirements

Test Type ECH PD Reference Test

*9mm Shell RTP/BFD 3.10.2.1 / 3.10.3 1 Medium @ cold (R, F) / 1 Large @ cold (C,B)

9mm Hardware (Retention) 3.10.2.1 1 Small @ cold

9mm Hardware (NVD) 3.10.2.1 1 Small @ cold

Small Arms (Threat M) 3.10.2.2 1 Extra-Large @ hot

4 grV50 Ballistic Protection Limit 3.10.1 Medium @ hot

*Each of the four BFD shots shall be below the requirement specified in the PD (no UTL calculation)

L.3.2.1.2.3 GPR Certification, if offered (Correlates to Section M, Factor 1: Technical Performance)

The Government wishes to obtain Government Purpose Rights (GPR) for the Night Vision Detection (NVD) Mount hardware design in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7012. Offerors who provide GPR to the NVD Mount hardware shall include a certification stating that they are providing GPR as definined in DFARS 252.227-7012 to the NVD Mount hardware design, and that the price associated with the rights is not separately priced.

L.3.2.1.2.4 Weight (Correlates to Section M, Factor 1, Subfactor 2: Weight).

Offerors shall document /claim a weight for each size in the written proposal. The finished helmet documented/claimed weight shall include the Retention System and Suspension System but exclude the NVD

Mount and NVD Hardware. The documented/claimed weight must achieve the same percentage of reduction for each size.

L.3.2.1.2.5 Manufacturing (correlates to Section M, Factor 2: Manufacturing) The Offeror shall submit the following:

a. Written evidence of ISO 9001:2008 compliance. A list of equipment, available personnel and manufacturing capacity to address ability to produce at least 2,000 ECHs per month(threshold) 120 days after FAT approval, and ability to ramp up to 4,000 per month within 180 days after FAT approval

(objective). Based on FAT approval 90 days after contract award (estimated to be 1 December 2017).

b. Signed manufacturing agreements with the ballistic material supplier(s), NVD mount and hardware, mandatory source providers (i.e., retention and suspension system), and the edging supplier.

c. A Supply Chain Management chart demonstrating the use of Berry Amendment Compliant materials for constructing the ECH. The Supply Chain Management chart does not count against the technical proposal page limit and shall be an appendix. The chart may incorporate into the final contract and become a quality assurance reference.

d. Self-Certification: Offerors must submit the following signed self-certification in order for its offer to be compliant. The certification must be from the Offeror must not contain any alternative wording.

I, (sign name here), in submitting this offer under solicitation number M67854-16-R-1122, affirm that only products compliant with the Berry Amendment (10 USC 2533a) will be delivered to the Government. As such, all items delivered, either as end products or components, will be grown, reprocessed, reused, or produced in the United States (as defined in DFARS 252.225-7012(b) included by reference herein). This certification covers all materials (including those of all components) and components supplied by subcontractors at any tier, and all labor (including that of all intervening processes), whether performed by the offeror or any of its subcontractors at any tier. FR Rayon fiber included in the fabric is sourced from outside the United States but meets the Berry requirement through the established DoD waiver.

mailto:john.draper@usmc.mil

L.3.2.2 Volume II – Past Performance (Correlates to Section M, Factor 3: Past Performance)

Offerors shall submit a list of all Government contracts (prime and major subcontracts in performance or awarded) during the past five (5) years, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Offerors with three (3) or more prior Government contracts shall provide at least three (3) Government contracts. Those Offerors with less than three (3) Government contracts shall provide all Government contracts.

Relevant efforts are defined as follows:

Relevant: Past/present performance efforts with similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities required by this solicitation. This includes helmets, head protective equipment, or protective equipment contracts in similar size or value.

Not Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. Contracts completed more than five (5) years prior to the release of the solicitation.

At minimum, past performance information shall include:

(1) Section 1 – Contract Descriptions.

This section shall include the following information in the following format:

a. Contract Number and associated Delivery Order in the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements;

b. Government contracting activity, and current address, Procuring Contracting Officer's name, email address, telephone and fax numbers;

c. Contractor place of performance, CAGE Code and DUNS Number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and Point of Contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, email address, and telephone and fax numbers);

d. Government’s technical representative/COR, and current email address, telephone and fax numbers.

e. Government contract administration activity and the Administrative Contracting Officer's name, and current email address, telephone and fax numbers;

f.. Contract Type (specific type such as Fixed Price (FP), Cost Reimbursement (CR), Time & Materials

(T&M), etc.) In the case of Indefinite Delivery contracts, indicate specific type (Requirements, Definite

Quantity, and Indefinite Quantity) and secondary contract type (FP, CR, T&M, etc.));

g. Awarded price/cost;

h. Final or projected final price/cost;

i. Original delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work; and

j. Final or projected final, delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

(2) Section 2 – Relevance to Solicitation Requirements

Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Section 1 describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirements of this solicitation.

(3) Section 3 – Contract Performance

The Offeror’s narrative for each contract shall provide information that addresses all of the questions and information that is requested in the attached Past Performance Questionnaire.

For any contracts that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence.

The Offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. The Offerors shall also provide a copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action implemented by the Offeror or proposed subcontractor. The Offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

Offerors are cautioned that the Government may use data provided in the Offeror’s proposal and data obtained from other sources, to include the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS).

Since the Government may not necessarily interview all of the sources provided by the Offerors, it is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided. The Offerors are reminded that while the Government may elect to consider data obtained from other sources, the burden of proving acceptable past performance rests with the Offeror. The Offeror will provide documentation to demonstrate the lowest possible performance risks. The Offeror must explain the relevance of the data provided and whether the data is current, accurate and complete.

(4) Section 4 – New Corporate Entities

New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above.

(5) Section 5 – Past Performance Assessment Questionnaire

For all contracts identified in Section 1, Past Performance Assessment Questionnaires must be completed and submitted. The Offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Assessment and email the questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past/current contract. The POC's shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and email the entire questionnaire to the Contract Specialist within thirty (30) calendar days of the release of the solicitation. The POC shall send completed questionnaires via e-mail to kathryn.hurd@usmc.mil. The Offeror shall also email to the Contract Specialist a list of all the POC’s who were sent a questionnaire. The

Government should receive this list within twenty (20) calendar days after release of the solicitation. The

POC List shall be submitted in Word for Windows Table Format to include the following fields: Solicitation

Number; Company Name; Contract Number; Government Agency; POC Last Name, First Name; POC Title;

POC Telephone Number; POC Email Address; Date Emailed to POC (month/day).

L.3.2.3 Volume III – Subcontracting (Correlates to Section M, Factor 4: Subcontracting) This factor evaluates the Offeror’s approach to maximizing opportunities for small businesses (SB) in the proposed effort, both in terms of the percentage of overall contract value (Sub-Factor 1: Small Business Participation Plan) and in terms of the percentage of the subcontracted portion’s value (Sub-Factor 2: Small Business Subcontracting

Plan). The SB Subcontracting Plan is only required from an Offeror which is itself is not a Small Business (SB), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), Woman Owned Small Business (WOSB), HubZone SB, or Service Disabled

Veteran Owned SB (SDVOSB).

The cover page for the Offeror’s Small Business Participation volume shall summarize the Offeror’s SB

Participation goals and SB Subcontracting percentage goals for the total requirement as follows:

Template for the Summary Table

SM Participation Plan SB Subcontracting Plan

Total Total

SB % %

SDB % %

WOSB % %

HUBZone SB % %

SDVOSB % %

*Offerors which qualify as small businesses shall enter “N/A” in this column

L.3.2.3.1 Small Business Participation Plan (Correlates to Section M, Factor 4, Subfactor 1: Small Business

Participation Plan)

This plan is required from all Offerors, regardless of the Offeror’s size status. The Offeror’s SB Participation Plan percentages are to be presented in terms of total dollars of work for each SB category, divided by the total contract value.

The Offeror shall identify the extent and nature of participation of SB, WOSBs, HUBZone SBs, and SDVOSBs in the performance of the proposed contract. Participation includes subcontractors or material suppliers to the prime contractor or subcontractors. The Offeror’s own participation as a SB, WOSB, HUBZone SB or SDVOSB shall be identified and included in the percentages.

The plan shall include, at a minimum:

a. the name and DUNS number (or CAGE code) of each of the firm(s) included in the plan;

b. a copy of the System for Award Management (SAM) profile for each of the firm(s) included in the plan;

c. discussion of the specific components to be produced or services to be performed by each firm;

d. identification of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code (appropriate to the principal nature of the planned subcontract) supporting each firm’s size status;

e. the estimated total dollar value subcontracted to each firm;

f. the estimated total dollar value subcontracted to each SB category;

g. the percentage of total contract value subcontracted to each firm; and

h. the percentage of total contract value subcontracted to each SB category

The Offeror shall provide evidence of any enforceable commitments in place between itself and the participating small businesses. Each participation percentage shall be accompanied by detailed supporting documentation regarding the individual commitments.

The Offeror shall include evidence of compliance with the requirements of FAR 52.219-8, “Utilization of Small

Business Concerns,” and 52.219-9, “Small Business Subcontracting Plan,” in prior contracts containing the clause.

This information shall be provided, at minimum, for each of the contracts discussed in the Offeror’s Past

Performance volume.

SB Participation Plan Objectives.

The Government’s Participation objectives for this acquisition are as follows:

Small Business 5.25%

Small Disadvantaged Business: 0.4%

Women-Owned Small Business 0.4%

HUBZone Small Business: 0.4%

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business 0.4%

For each category in which the Offeror’s SB Participation Plan contains goals below those described above, the

Offeror shall provide a detailed explanation as to why.

L.3.2.3.2 Small Business Subcontracting Plan - LARGE BUSINESSES ONLY (Correlates to Section M, Factor 4, Subfactor 2: Small Business Subcontracting Plan)

The SB Subcontracting Plan is a requirement for award to a large business and will be incorporated into any resultant contract. This plan is only required from an Offeror which is itself other than a SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB or SDVOSB. The SB Subcontracting Plan describes the Offeror’s approach to maximizing opportunities for small businesses in this effort, relative to the subcontracted portion’s value. The Offeror’s SB

Subcontracting Plan percentages are to be presented in terms of total dollars of work for each SB category, divided by the total value of subcontracts.

The required elements of the SB Subcontracting Plan are set forth in FAR 52.219-9, DFARS 252.219-7003 should be organized to address these elements in similar order to clearly demonstrate that each element has met the SB

Subcontracting Plan objectives. All small businesses and historically black colleges or universities and minority institutions included in the SB Subcontracting Plan shall be specifically identified to facilitate compliance with

252.219-7003(g). The Offeror shall provide the CAGE code or DUNS number for each proposed subcontractor, and include identification of the NAICS code (appropriate to the principal nature of the planned subcontract) supporting each proposed subcontractor’s size status. The information in the SB Subcontracting Plan must properly correlate with that of the Offeror’s SB Participation Plan.

SB Subcontracting Plan Objectives.

The Government’s subcontracting objectives for this acquisition, as follows:

Small Business 36.7%

Small Disadvantaged Business 5%

Women-Owned Small Business 5%

HUBZone Small Business 3%

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business 3%

For each category in which the Offeror’s SB Subcontracting Plan contains goals below those described above, the

Offeror shall provide a detailed explanation as to why.

L.3.2.4 Volume IV – Business Proposal (Correlates to Section M, Factor 5: Price)

The Business Proposal shall include a completed, signed copy of the entire solicitation, completing all appropriate

“fill-in” sections and statements. Failing to provide a complete business submission may result in the Government disqualifying an Offeror’s proposal from competition. Offerors seeking any exception to the solicitation’s terms and conditions shall clearly explain the exception in its cover letter. Exceptions, however, may render the Offeror’s proposal unacceptable. Should conflicts arise between the hard copy material marked “original” in the Business

Proposal and the electronic version, the hard copy material shall govern.

L.3.2.4.1 The Offer

The Offeror shall provide a completed, signed copy of the entire solicitation, with all appropriate “fill-in” sections completed as follows:

Section A: An official having the authority to bind the firm contractually must sign the SF33. If the individual is not an officer of the company, the proposal include written evidence of the individual’s authority to bind the company under contract to a particular course of action, such as a written delegation of authority signed by an officer of the company.

Section B: Follow the below instructions for particular CLIN pricing:

o Offerors shall propose step-ladder unit pricing for CLIN 0007. Offerors may structure their own quantity ranges for quantities of 1-50,000. Offerors shall propose a single blended unit price for all sizes. Offerors shall include their overall proposed price at the end of the

Schedule of Supplies/Services section, including all line item pricing. Offerors are cautioned that failure to fill in the total price for each CLIN and to provide their overall proposed price may render the offeror’s proposal non-responsive and could be grounds for disqualification.

Copy provided electronically in Microsoft Excel format shall include all applicable calculations in the individual cells.

o The pricing for each CLIN remains valid for the duration of that specific 12 month contract ordering period.

Section K: Complete all the required certifications, representations, and acknowledgments for the prime contractor and subcontractors as applicable.

Amendments: Acknowledge amendments to this solicitation by signature of an official having the authority to bind your firm contractually upon a completed SF30 or appropriate annotation on the

SF33.

L.4 INCORPORATION OF TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The Government may incorporate all or part of the successful Offeror’s technical proposal in any contract resulting from this solicitation. Nothing contained in the successful Offeror’s technical proposal shall constitute a waiver to any other requirement within the contract. Conflict between the successful Offeror’s technical proposal and any other requirement of the contract shall be resolved in accordance with the Order of Precedence clause.

The successful Offeror will provide, as necessary, any updated technical proposal changes reflecting the results of any clarification or discussion. If the Government discovers after award that the awardee did not incorporate changes made as a result of any clarification or discussion into the contact, such changes to the Contractor’s documents shall be administrative in nature, and the Government may unilaterally modify the contract accordingly at no change in contract price or other terms and conditions.

L.5 PRE-AWARD SURVEY

The Government may conduct a Pre-Award Survey to examine the Offeror's technical ability, production capacity, quality control plan, management structure, financial capability, labor resources, performance record, and ability to meet required schedules.

L.6 PRE-CONTRACT COSTS

Pre-contract costs are NOT authorized.

L.7 QUESTIONS REGARDING THE SOLICITATION

Offerors should carefully read this solicitation’s terms and conditions and refer any questions in writing to the Contract

Specialist, Katy Hurd via email: kathryn.hurd@usmc.mil no later than TBD. The Government may not address any questions, comments, concerns it receives after that time. The Government will post responses via published amendment to the solicitation.

L.7 OFFER ACCEPTANCE PERIOD

Offerors must hold prices firm for 180 days from receipt of proposals mailto:kathryn.hurd@usmc.mil

SECTION M – Evaluation Factors for Award

M.1 GO/NO GO CRITERIA

Offeror must meet two (2) entry criteria prior to the Government evaluation of the Offeror’s proposals. Failure to meet any, or all, of the criteria will result in dismissal of the Offeror’s proposal from the evaluation. The

Government will not review any Offeror’s proposal that does not meet the following criteria:

Criteria 1: Offerors with a SECRET Facility Clearance (FCL) at the time of proposal submission will receive a

“GO.” Offeror’s without a SECRET Facility Clearance (FCL) at the time of proposal submission will receive a

“NO GO” and the proposal will not be evaluated further.

Criteria 2: Offerors that provide a National Institute of Justice (NIJ)approved laboratory test report that clearly demonstrates the proposed ECH solution meets the threshold/minimum ECH PD requirements for those tests listed in Table 2 (Section L, Paragraph 3.2.1.2.2) will receive a “GO.” Offeror’s that either don’t provide a National

Institute of Justice (NIJ)approved laboratory test report or provide a report that doesn’t clearly demonstrate the proposed ECH solution meets the threshold/minimum ECH PD requirements will receive a “NO GO” and the proposal will not be evaluated further.

Criteria 3: Offeror’s that provide 94 helmets (22 Smalls, 26 Mediums, 24 Larges, and 22 Extra-Larges, of which

Smalls, 5 Mediums, 5Larges, and 4 Extra-Larges include an NVD Mount and, NVD Mount Hardware) will receive a “GO.” Offeror’s that don’t provide 94 helmets (22 Smalls, 26 Mediums, 24 Larges, and 22 Extra-

Larges, of which Smalls, 5 Mediums, 5Larges, and 4 Extra-Larges.include an NVD Mount and, NVD Mount

Hardware will receive a “NO GO” and the proposal will not be evaluated further.

In reviewing proposals for the Go/No Go analysis, the Government may determine that Discussions are necessary with one or more Offeror(s). The Go/No Discussions will only occur with those Offerors that have problems that require Discussions to resolve. Discussions will not be held with any Offeror(s) whose proposal has been assigned a

“Go” assessment. Offerors are cautioned that its initial offer should contain the Offeror’s best terms.

All proposals remaining after the Go/No Go assessment will be evaluated for compliance with the terms, conditions, and requirements set forth in the solicitation, as well as for the risk associated with the Offeror’s approach. Failure to address each of the areas identified in Section L may impact the resulting evaluation ratings and/or risk assessment. Proposals remaining after the Go/No Go assessment shall be evaluated against the evaluation factors and sub-factors described below.

M.2 BASIS FOR AWARD

This acquisition uses best value tradeoff source selection procedures in accordance with Federal Acquisition

Regulation (FAR) FAR 15.101-1. The Marine Corps System Command (MARCORSYSCOM) will award one, 60-month (consisting of four one-year ordering periods), FFP, IDIQ contract for the ECH and spare parts to an Offeror whose proposal complies with the solicitation’s terms and conditions, meets or exceeds the solicitation’s requirements, and is the most advantageous to the Government based upon an assessment of the evaluation factors.

When making the best value determination, the Government will consider the following factors:

The Government will evaluate offers using the following evaluation criteria:

Factor 1 Technical Performance

- Subfactor 1 - Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Protection

- Subfactor 2 - Weight

- Subfactor 3 - Design and Workmanship

Factor 2 Manufacturing

Factor 3 Past Performance

Factor 4 Subcontracting http://farsite.hill.af.mil/reghtml/regs/far2afmcfars/fardfars/far/15.htm#P25_3805

- Subfactor 1 - Small Business Participation Plan

- Subfactor 2 - Small Business Subcontracting Plan

Factor 5 Price

Past Performance will be evaluated as either acceptable or unacceptable. Subcontracting will be evaluated as either acceptable or unacceptable. Technical Performance is the most important factor. All three subfactors under Factor 1 are of equal important. is more important than Manufacturing is less important than Technical Performance.

Technical Performance and Manufacturing when combined are more important than price. The importance of price as a factor in the final award determination will increase with the degree of equality in the non-price factors of the proposal.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award on an “initial offer” without discussions. If discussions are necessary, the Government will establish a competitive range and notify all Offerors of their inclusion or exclusion. The Government will hold discussions with Offerors in the competitive range and notify Offerors it eliminates from the competitive range in writing in accordance with FAR 15.503.

The Government will use the following table in the evaluation of Factors 1 and 2. Subfactors for Factor 1will not be rated but strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies will be assessed.

Color

Rating

Adjectival

Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength.

Green Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable.

DEFINITIONS

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

2. Strength: Any aspect of a proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

3. Weakness: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

4. Significant Weakneess: A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

M.3 EVALUATION FACTORS

M.3.1 Factor 1: Technical Performance

This factor consists of three subfactors, which are of equal importance:

Subfactor 1: Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Protection

Subfactor 2: Weight

Subfactor 3: Design and Workmanship

Offerors who certify the Government has Government Purpose Rights for the Night Vision Detection (NVD) Mount hardware design in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7012 will receive a Strength.

M.3.1.1 Subfactor 1: Ballistic and Non-Ballistic Protection

The Government will test Source Selection sample helmets at an NIJ certified test facility to determine the Offeror’s ability to meet the following ballistic and non-ballisyic ECH PD requirements:

- Inclusion of correct retention and suspension systems.

- The helmet shall meet the requirements set forth in the PD.

- 9mm Shell RTP/BFD (PD paragraph 3.10.2.1 / 3.10.3)

- 9mm Hardware (Retention) (PD paragraph 3.10.2.1)

- 9mm Hardware (NVD) (PD paragraph 3.10.2.1)

- Small Arms (Threat M) (PD paragraph 3.10.2.2)

- V50 Ballistic Protection Limit (PD paragraph 3.10.1)

- Blunt Impact (PD paragraph 3.12)

M.3.1.2 Subfactor 2: Weight

The Government will verify the claimed weight by weighing eachSource Selection Sample finished helmet. The finished helmet weight includes the Retention System and Suspension System but does not include the NVD Mount and NVD Hardware. The claimed weight must achieve the same percentage of reduction for each size. The

Government will weigh each of the 94 helmets and the Government verified weight must be equal to or less than the claimed weight. If any evaluated helmet weights exceed the claimed weight, the Government will increase the claimed weight for each size until the actual helmet weights are met. Once the offeror’s claimed weight has been verified, the Government will use the weight to evaluate price through the Value Adjusted Total Evaluated Price

(VATEP) tradeoff process. The claimed weight for the awardee will be incorporated into the PD for the final contract.

M.3.1.3 Subfactor 3: Design and Workmanship

The Government will evaluate Design and Workmanship on four (4) helmets of each size (16 total sample helmets) based on Table IX of the PD and the below criteria.

Rating Evaluation Criteria

Acceptable

< 3% Critical Defect Rate OR

< 15% Major Defect Rate OR

< 22% Minor Defect Rate

Unacceptable

≥ 3% Critical Defect Rate OR

≥ 15% Major Defect Rate OR

≥ 22% Minor Defect Rate

Note: Defects will be counted per Source Selection sample.

M.3.2 Factor 2: Manufacturing

The Government will use the information provided in Section L (Paragraph 3.2.1.2.5) to evaluate the Offeror’s capability to manufacture quality Berry Amendment compliant products in accordance with the required delivery schedule. The Government may choose to visit the Offeror’s manufacturing facility to validate Offeror provided information.

M.3.3 Factor 3: Past Performance.

The Government will conduct an evaluation to determine whether the offeror has an acceptable record of past performance using sources provided by the offeror and other sources available to the Government.

The Government will establish an overall rating, per FAR 15.305(a)(2), in the Offeror’s ability to meet the requirements of the solicitation. The ratings are described in the below table.

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note above)

Unacceptable

Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the

Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability or unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered acceptable.

M.3.4 Factor 4: Subcontracting

The Small Business (SB) Subcontracting Factor will be evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable based on the evaluation of both Sub-Factors: SB Participation Plan (this sub-factor applies to both small and large businesses) and SB Subcontracting Plan (this sub-factor applies to large business concerns only). To be acceptable for this factor, BOTH the SB Participation Plan and the SB Subcontracting Plan (if both are required) must demonstrate that they meet or exceed the requirements established in the solicitation. If one of these two plans is considered unacceptable, the entire proposal will be determined to be unacceptable.

The Government will evaluate the extent to which the Offeror’s SB Participation Plan and SB Subcontracting Plan

(if required) demonstrates commitment to using SBs, SDBs, WOSBs, HUBZone SBs and SDVOSBs in performance of the contract.

M.3.4.1 Subfactor 1: Small Business Participation Plan

The Offeror’s SB Participation Plan will be evaluated on the basis of:

(1) The extent to which SB firms are specifically identified in proposals

(2) The extent of commitment to SB firms;

(3) The complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

(4) Past performance of the Offerors in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan; and

(5) The extent of participation of SB firms in terms of the value of the total acquisition and the extent of which the proposals meets and/or exceeds ACC-APG’s small business participation goals for this acquisition.

The Offeror’s SB Participation Plan will be evaluated and must meet a minimum of Acceptable in the description in the below table.

Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

M.3.4.2 Subfactor 2: Small Business Subcontracting Plan - LARGE BUSINESSES ONLY

The Offeror’s SB Subcontracting Plan will be evaluated IAW FAR 19.705-4. The Offeror’s plan must fully satisfy the required elements set forth by FAR 52.219-9, DFARS 252.219-7003, and DFARS Appendix DD. The Offeror’s

SB Subcontracting Plan must correlate properly with the information regarding SB, WOSBs, HUBZone SBs and

Service SDVOSBs subcontractors identified in the Offeror’s SB Participation Plan. An unacceptable subcontracting plan will make an Offeror ineligible for award of a contract.

(1) The Government will determine the basic acceptability of the SB Subcontracting Plan.

(2) The Offeror’s SB Subcontracting Plan will be evaluated and must meet a minimum of Acceptable in the description in the below table.

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

M.3.5 Factor 5: Price

The Government will calculate the Total Proposed Price (TPP) by adding the total price for Contract Line Item

Numbers (CLIN) 0001 through 0008, including all sub-CLINs. To evaluate those CLINs with step ladder pricing, the Government will select a random quantity. The Government will calculate the total price for CLIN 0007 by multiplying the step ladder unit price associated with the randomly selected quantity by the CLIN quantity.

Once the Government calculates an offeror’s TPP and verifies the Offeror’s claimed weight, the Government will calculate the Offeror’s Total Evaluated Price (TEP) using the VATEP method. For evaluation purposes only, the

Government will reduce the unit price for CLINs 0001, 0002, 0003 & 0007 and associated subCLINs by the TEP

Adjustment associated with the Offeror’s reduction in weight described in the below table. The Government will then calculate the TEP using the reduced unit prices by adding the total price for Contract Line Item Numbers

(CLIN) 0001 through 0008, including all sub-CLINs. To evaluate those CLINs with step ladder pricing, the

Government will select a random quantity. The Government will calculate the total price for the CLIN 0007 by multiplying the reduced unit price associated with the randomly selected quantity by the quantity. The TEP will be used for source selection evaluation purposes only. The resultant contract will include the TPP.

Size

TEP

Adjustment Small Medium Large X-Large

Unacceptable N/A <2.94 <3.06 <3.31 <3.88

Max Acceptable $0 2.94 3.06 3.31 3.88

1% Reduction $5 2.91 3.03 3.28 3.84

2% Reduction $10 2.88 3.00 3.24 3.80

3% Reduction $15 2.85 2.97 3.21 3.76

4% Reduction $20 2.82 2.94 3.18 3.72

5% Reduction $25 2.79 2.91 3.14 3.69

6% Reduction $30 2.76 2.88 3.11 3.65

7% Reduction $35 2.73 2.85 3.08 3.61

8% Reduction $40 2.70 2.82 3.05 3.57

In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b), Price Analysis, the Government will evaluate offerors’ price proposals through comparison of prices proposed in response to the solicitation in order to establish price reasonableness.

Award will only be made upon a determination by the PCO that the award price is fair and reasonable. Price will be evaluated but not rated. Incomplete pricing will render the entire quote Unacceptable and is ineligible for award.

The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the prices proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. A proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.