LEP_Section_L_Final_Draft.docx

PART A GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 GENERAL

1.1 INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL

Offerors are required to submit sufficient information concerning all evaluation factors to enable Government personnel to fully assess the capabilities of the Offeror to perform all requirements. The proposal must be sufficient in detail and scope to enable evaluation and provide the evaluators a clear understanding of the Offeror’s approach, expertise, experience and capability as required by the solicitation. All proposals must clearly and convincingly demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of all requirements and associated risks; is able, willing, and competent to devote the resources necessary to meet all requirements; and has valid and practical solutions for all requirements and potential risk areas. The Offeror shall not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The burden of proof for all substantiation within the proposal rests with the Offeror. Offerors are advised that the Government may incorporate any part of the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government, into the final contract. With the exception of Volume 4 Cost/Price, no cost/price should appear in any other volume. Alternate proposals are not acceptable.

In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of 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 to be meaningfully evaluated. Unsubstantiated statements that the prospective Offeror understands, can or will comply with the specifications, or paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof are considered inadequate and may render a rating of unacceptable.

The Offeror shall include any data necessary to illustrate the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. There is no need to repeat information in more than one volume. The detailed information must be included in the most logical place and summarized and referenced in other areas if an overlap exists. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

Throughout these instructions, Offeror is defined as the prime contractor with its CAGE code identified in Block 15A on Standard Form (SF)-33, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. “Principal Subcontractors” are defined as a subcontractor who provides at least 10% of the proposed total cost/price for the contract. A “Joint Venture” (JV) is a partnership or teaming arrangement that is formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation when the prime contractor consists of more than one legal entity. “JV Team Members” are the entities that make up a Joint Venture. “Critical Subcontractors” are subcontractors that perform a critical function, whether technical or financial, in the performance of the resulting contract, whether it is technical or financial and/or have important roles in any high or medium risk areas identified in the Offeror’s proposal. The term “Entity” is used to mean any or all of the following: Prime, principal subcontractor, critical subcontractor, JV, and/or each JV team member or other subcontractor.

Questions: Offerors may submit questions requesting clarification or solicitation requirements by emailing the contract specialist at tyesha.parker@navy.mil. It is requested that all questions be received within 10 calendar days of the date this solicitation is issued.

2.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT AND SUBMISSION

All offers must comply with the following instructions for proposal format and content. Proposals that do not comply with these instructions may be considered deficient and may render the Offeror ineligible for award.

In order to maximize efficiency and minimize time for proposal evaluation, all offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with the format and content specified. All Proposals must be submitted in electronic and bound form. Proposals must meet the following format requirements:

· Times New Roman 12 point normal font (no reduction permitted)

· Single-spaced typed lines

· 1-inch margins on all sides

· Formatted for/printed on standard 8.5 x 11 inch paper

· All pages should be numbered with volume, paragraph, and page numbers

· No fold-out pages

· Drawings may be provided separately and may be any size but should be folded to approximately 8.5 x 11 inch standard size and will count as 1 page.

· Newspaper column formatting is not permitted

· Graphs and tables shall be presented in no smaller than a 10 pt. font.

· Each volume, book, or annex shall be provided separately in a 3-ring binder.

· Binders should be of an appropriate thickness for the number of pages they contain (e.g., a 30-page book shall not be placed in a 2-inch binder).

· No ZIP files

· All file names shall include title of the evaluation factor or subfactor

2.1 Electronic Submission of Proposal

This section is intended to provide information to the Offeror on the electronic format and application software to be used for submitting proposals. Use of the software and procedures described in this section will reduce the amount of time and effort needed to receive and install proposals onto the electronic evaluation system, and will ensure that the proposals received are suitable for reading electronically.

2.1.1 Electronic Proposal Media

The Offeror should submit all volumes of its proposal electronically on CD-ROM(s) compatible with the operating system and applications defined in Section 2.1.2 below. The Offeror should put as much proposal material as possible on each CD-ROM, keeping the portions of the proposal that contain pricing information on separate CD-ROM(s) from the portions of the proposal that do not contain pricing information. For this solicitation, Volume 4 Cost/Price should be delivered on separate CD-ROM(s) from the remainder of the proposal. The Offeror should submit four sets of CD-ROMs that contain its proposal. One set of CD-ROM disks should be marked "Master," the others should be marked "Back-Up." All sets of CD-ROM disks should be clearly marked with the Offeror's name and address, the point of contact's name and phone number, and proposal volumes contained therein. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring electronic proposals are virus free in accordance with Section 2.1.4. If a discrepancy exists between the original paper copy of the proposal and the disk copy, the original paper copy shall take precedence.

2.1.2 Operating System and Applications

The proposals will be accessed utilizing the Microsoft 2010 Operating System. The Offeror shall submit two identical proposals in separate, electronic versions: one version in Portable Document Format (.pdf) and one version in Microsoft Office 2010 Applications (Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft PowerPoint, and Microsoft Project). The .pdf document must be fully searchable. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that the .pdf and the appropriate Microsoft Office 2010 applications versions contain identical information. The Government shall have the discretion to use the information in either version, and shall not be responsible for any differences in content between the two proposal formats submitted by the Offeror. Use of other application software for submission of proposals is prohibited except where specific instructions for non- PDF or Office 2010 applications are provided.

2.1.3 Hyperlinks

Offerors may use hyperlinks within and among proposal volumes that do not include cost/price information. However, there shall be no links from any other volume into Volume 4 Cost/Price or any portion of the proposal that contains cost/price information.

2.1.4 Virus Free Electronic Submission

Offerors are responsible for ensuring that their electronic proposals are virus free. The Offeror shall certify, in its proposal cover letter, that all electronic proposal information has been checked for viruses, and specify the software, version, and virus definition used to check the data. With each subsequent submission of proposal information (e.g., responses to Evaluation Notices, Final Proposal Revisions, etc.), the Offeror shall ensure and certify that its files are virus free.

2.1.5 Multimedia

The Offeror should not embed sound or video (e.g., MPEG) files within the proposal submission.

2.1.6 Graphics

Large files require greater computer system resources and are discouraged. The Offeror is encouraged to:

· Simplify the color palette used in creating figures;

· Minimize size of graphics files; and

· Avoid scanned images.

2.1.7 Evaluation Hardware

The source selection facility uses the following type workstation computer systems and printers.

2.94 GB RAM

CD-ROM Drive

Windows 2010 Operating System

2.1.8 File Naming Conventions

There is no limit to the number of files that may be submitted. However, it is preferable that each volume, book, or annex not be broken up into multiple electronic files. Valid extensions for files using their associated applications follow:

Files should have the following naming convention ("#" represents the sequential numbering of files and the suffix is for illustration, and may be .pdf, .docx, .xlsx, .pptx, or .mpp). For electronic file submissions (e.g. proposal volumes, annexes, appendices, enclosures) the Offeror should follow the basic structure of the file naming convention suggested in Table G-1 “Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention”. Offeror’s shall keep the file name as short as possible (under 40 characters) so that it is accessible on Government share drives. The Offeror shall ensure that the electronically submitted file names are directly traceable to hard copy submittals. In general, the Offeror should provide each binder (e.g. volume, book, or annex) as one separate file (i.e. do not provide each section/paragraph as separate files).

Table G-1 Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention

Table ES-1 Offeror Summary Table ES-2 Relevant Contract Summary Vol 1 ES Tables.xlsx and Vol 1 ES Tables.pdf

Vol 4 Cost/Price#.docx Vol 4 Cost/Price#.xlsx

Annexes

Please note: The Offeror should provide both a .pdf and .docx version if they are available. If not, a .pdf version only is acceptable.

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES

The Offeror shall present its proposal information in a manner that facilitates a one for one comparison between the information presented and these proposal instructions. Proposal information must be structured such that its paragraph numbers/letters correspond to the proposal instructions paragraph numbers/letters, although the Offeror may add lower tier sub paragraphs.

In addition to the electronic copies requested in paragraph, 2.1, “Electronic Submission of Proposals,” each volume, book, and annex of the proposal shall be submitted as one paper original and additional paper copies as specified in Table G-2 Proposal Structure. The Offeror shall submit all paper and electronic copies of the proposal to the address provided in section 4.0. Suggested page counts for each volume, if any, are also specified in Table G-2 Proposal Structure (title and table of contents pages are not included in the suggested page count). Annexes do not have suggested page counts.

Information submitted as an Annex to a particular proposal volume could include manuals, specifications, plans, procedures, and company policies, as well as other information requested in Section B Specific Instructions and do not count towards the suggested page count. Additionally, the individual subcontracting reports for the past performance volume are not included in the suggested page count.

Table G-2 Proposal Structure

Vol. 2 Book 1 (2.1)

TECHNICAL

Design Approach

Vol. 2 Book 2 (2.2)

TECHNICAL

Programs and Schedule

Copies

Copies

Each binder must contain the following information:

a. Cover and title page;

b. Title of proposal and proposal number as applicable;

c. Offeror’s name, address and POC;

d. Solicitation number;

e. Proposal volume/book/annex number;

f. Copy number;

g. Table of Contents (The table of contents must provide sufficient detail to easily locate important elements). At a minimum it must include the paragraphs identified in the CRM; and

h. Tabs and dividers.

i. Glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation for each.

Catalog Card - Each volume must contain an 8 1/2" x 11" Catalog Card containing the information required for the cover and title page. The back of the card must be formatted with three columns entitled "Name," "Date Out," and "Date In." This card must be removable from the back of each binder.

The following table G-3 lists the attachments provided to the Offeror with Section L, to assist with proposal development.

Table G-3 Section L List of Attachments

A Cross Reference Matrix (CRM), Table G-4, is included to help the Offeror develop its proposal and to ensure traceability of Section L paragraphs to the requirements. The Offeror’s CRM may be identical to the one provided or revised to add information. For example, the Offeror’s CRM may cross-reference its proposal volumes, paragraph numbers, and pages to specific solicitation requirements identified within the table, as well as other parts of the proposal that contain relevant information.

Table G-4 Cross Reference Matrix

3.3.3.1

3.4.1

3.4.2

3.5.1

3.5.2

3.7.1

3.7.6

3.14.1, 3.14.1.1

3.3, 3.3.1

No cost/price information, (e.g., Dollar Values and/or Hourly Rates) shall be included in any volume other than Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Table T-1 (Small Business Goals); Volume 4 Cost/Price, and Volume 5 Contract Administration.

4.0 PROPOSAL PACKAGING AND SUBMISSION:

4.1 Unclassified Data

Clearly mark all packages with the solicitation number. The submission date for all volumes shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 9 of Standard Form 33 of the solicitation. However it is requested that one hard copy and one electronic copy on a CD-ROM of Volume 3 Past Performance, Table PP-1 (Past Performance Contract Data); as well as Volume 1 Executive Summary, Table ES-1 (Offeror’s Summary), and Volume 1 Executive Summary, Table ES-2 (Relevant Contract Summary) be submitted three weeks prior to the submission date and time specified on Standard Form 33 (Block 9). Please indicate any changes made to the information delivered three weeks early in the submission provided on the date and time specified in Block 9 of Standard Form 33 of the solicitation. If no changes are made, please state so at the beginning of Volume 1 Executive Summary and Volume 3 Past Performance.

Method of delivery, such as by hand, United States Postal Service or commercial carrier, shall be coordinated with Jamie Billig, Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) (301) 866-4432. Proposals shall be submitted using the address provided below. Initial and Final Proposals shall not be submitted by facsimile or electronically via email.

Naval Air Systems Command Code: AIR- 2.4.2.2 (Attn: Jamie Billig) Solicitation Number: N00019-16-C-0017 47123 Buse Road

BLDG 2272

Patuxent River, MD 20670-1547

All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED

4.2 Classified Data

Classified material shall be packaged separately. Packaging and handling of the classified material must be in compliance with SECNAV M-5510.36 and associated DoD directives and procedures. Classified data submitted via United States Postal Service or through an overnight express carrier must be IAW paragraph 4.3B.

Hand delivery of classified data is only permitted with prior coordination with the PCO, and requires display of a valid courier card prior to handover of information. Couriers must possess a current security clearance and background investigation required to handle the information within their possession. Contact the PCO at (301) 866-4432 a minimum of three working days prior to intended delivery date to arrange for a delivery appointment.

4.3 PROPOSAL PACKAGING:

A. UNCLASSIFIED PACKAGING

The Offerors shall package the proposal volumes in cartons or equivalent packaging containers in the most efficient manner possible grouping like volumes to the maximum extent possible. Each box should identify its contents by including a packing slip detailing each volume/book number and title, and copy number. Each carton should be double wrapped. The outside of the carton should be plain and the inside carton shall be stamped or marked ― For Official Use Only; and Source Selection Information – See FAR-2.101 and 3.104, marked for the intended recipient as identified below, and should contain only those proposals intended for that person. The master set of proposals and set No. 1 copy will be marked for NAVAIR PCO, AIR-2.4.2.2. The Master Set shall include all original proposal volumes, all proposal volumes on CD-ROM, a completed and original signed Standard Form 33; acknowledgement of all solicitation amendments, if applicable; and Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors or Respondents (Section K of this RFP) and other applicable fill-ins. Note: Any documents which contain cost data shall be on a separate disk(s) from the other disks.

B. CLASSIFIED PACKAGING

Outer Wrap:

COMMANDER

ATTN: CONTRACTS DIVISION

NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND PMA202

21491 GREAT MILLS ROAD

LEXINGTON PARK MD 20653

Inner Wrap: COMMANDER ATTN: Jamie Billig AIR 2.4.2.2 Solicitation N00019-15-P1-PMA-202-0006 Naval Air Systems Command 47123 Buse Road

BLDG 2272,

Patuxent River MD 20670

5.0 CHANGES TO SOLICITATION

All amendments to this solicitation shall be posted at https://www.fbo.gov/

Search the database for the solicitation number N00019-15-P1-PMA-202-0006

PART B SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 VOLUME 1 – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Note: This volume shall not contain any reference to cost/price aspects of the offer.

The following is a list of Section L Attachments that the Offeror shall utilize to provide information for this volume:

Attachment L-1 Executive Summary Tables

The purpose of the Executive Summary is to provide the Government with an overview of the Offeror’s entire proposal, excluding cost/price. Each section within the Executive Summary shall contain the salient points contained in each of the proposal volumes. In addition, this volume should be used by the Offeror to identify and highlight significant features of its proposal. The Executive Summary volume should be divided into the areas outlined below:

a. Offeror Summary Table

(1) The Offeror shall complete Table ES-1 (Offeror Summary), provided in L-1 (Executive Summary Tables), according to the instructions within the attachment, and submit it within this section and as a separate electronic file.

(2) The Offeror shall provide a written explanation if multiple CAGE codes/DUNS for the same physical location are provided in Table ES-1 (Offeror Summary). The written explanation shall detail the distinct roles and responsibilities for entities with different CAGE codes/DUNs at the same physical location for where the work is being performed or from where the work is being directed. The description shall include all changes in the organization as a result of a corporate acquisition, reorganization, merger, or other administrative reason.

Note: Place of Performance for this solicitation pertains to the physical location of the prime, all subcontractors, and JV team members who will perform the work.

ES-1 Offeror Summary Table

b. Relevant Contract Summary Table The Offeror shall complete the Table ES-2 (Relevant Contract Summary) provided in Attachment L-1 (Executive Summary Tables), for all contracts proposed as relevant for Past Performance for the Prime, principal subcontractors, critical subcontractors, and JV team members. Complete the table according to the instructions within the attachment and submit it within this section and as a separate electronic file. The contract references designated in Table ES-2 (Relevant Contract Summary) shall be used in completing Volume 3 Table PP-1 (Past Performance Contract Data).

ES-2 Relevant Contract Summary Table

c. Technical The Offeror shall provide a summary of the technical effort and describe how its approach addresses the requirements of this solicitation.

d. Past Performance The Offeror shall provide a summary of the Prime’s, principal subcontractors’, critical subcontractors’, and JV team members’ past performance and systemic improvements that pertains to the tasks required by this solicitation;

e. Contract Administration The Offeror shall provide a summary of any exceptions or deviations, and proposed Section H clauses addressed in Volume 5 Contract Administration.

f. Viewgraphs/Photographs The Offeror may provide up to five electronic photographs for the proposed concept to assist the Government in understanding the Offeror’s design and as an aid in briefing Navy management. The electronic photographs must be in a standard readable format, e.g. Joint Photographic Expert Group (JPEG). Any text placed on these pictures shall contain factual information only, i.e., no “marketing”.

2.0 VOLUME 2 - TECHNICAL

Note: This volume shall not contain any reference to cost/price aspects of the offer.

The following is a list of Section J and Section L Attachments that the Offeror shall utilize to provide information for this volume:

This volume consists of two books - 1) Design Approach and 2) Programs and Schedule. Please provide each book in a separate 3-ring binder. In this volume, provide the information described below:

Throughout the Technical Volume the Offeror should identify any proposed capability, approach or feature that exceeds a requirement or provides merit associated with a performance or operational benefit to the Government. The Offeror should also identify any proposed capability, approach or feature that reduces risk inherent in the program. Specifically, the Offeror should explain the benefits to the Government in technical terms and should explain the degree of impact it will have to performance, operations and/or risk. Offerors are advised that any offer to exceed a requirement or to provide a feature with performance and/or operational benefits may be included in the resulting applicable contract within the proposed cost/price.

The Offeror shall demonstrate the extent to which its proposed capabilities will meet the requirements. The extent and the type of substantiation may vary, but each paragraph in the Technical Volume must be substantiated. The method of demonstration is at the discretion of the Offeror, however Offerors are advised that risk may be assessed based on the level of confidence the Offeror provides the Government with its substantiating information. The primary method of demonstration is documented operational experience in an operational environment (an environment that addresses all of the operational requirements and specifications required of the system to include platform/packaging) or a simulated operational environment (a real environment that can simulate all of the operational requirements and specifications required of the system). A secondary method of demonstration is independent testing and evaluation in a non-operational (laboratory) environment (a simulated environment that allows for testing to determine if a system will meet the operational requirements and specifications of the system) at the system-level. The instructions below provide specific guidance for the type of demonstration. However, the Offeror is advised that application of this guidance is not a guarantee that the Offeror's demonstration will be deemed adequate or without risk. The burden of proof still rests with the Offeror.

Table T-1 Technical Cross Reference Matrix

2.0 Technical

2.1 Design Approach

2.1.1 Weight

3.3.3.1

2.1.2 Laser Protection

3.4.1, 3.4.2

2.1.3 Integration with Aircrew Systems

3.5.1, 3.5.2

2.1.4 Transmission

3.7.1, 3.7.6

2.2 Programs and Schedule

2.1 Design Approach – Book 1

2.1.1 Weight

The Offeror shall describe how its LEP Threat Spectacle will meet the weight requirement as specified in Paragraph 3.3.3.1 of the LEP Performance Specification. The Offeror shall describe its design approach for decreasing weight while still meeting all the requirements of the LEP Performance Specification. The design approach description shall include planned values to be achieved by each of the following reviews: Preliminary Design Review – Technical Interchange Meeting (PDR – TIM), Prototype – TIM, Critical Design Review (CDR), Test Readiness Review (TRR), and System Verification Review (SVR). The Offeror shall provide weights for each individual component. The Offeror shall describe any risks and tradeoffs associated with its design approach for decreasing weight. The Offeror shall provide data from modeling, simulation, analysis or test to substantiate its assertions.

2.1.2 Laser Protection

2.1.2.1 Threat

The Offeror shall describe how its LEP Threat Spectacle will meet the Threat-protection requirements contained in Paragraph 3.4.1 of the Performance Specification to include lens construction and technology used. The Offeror shall provide data from modeling, simulation, analysis or test to substantiate its assertions.

2.1.2.2 Self

The Offeror shall describe how its LEP Threat Spectacle will meet the Self-protection requirements contained in Paragraph 3.4.2 of the Performance Specification to include lens construction and technology used. The Offeror shall provide data from modeling, simulation, analysis or test to substantiate its assertions.

2.1.3 Integration with Aircrew Systems

2.1.3.1 Physical Compatibility

The Offeror shall describe its design strategy for meeting the Physical compatibility requirements contained in Paragraph 3.5.1 of the LEP Performance Specification and shall describe how it will ensure that the Physical compatibility requirements will be met. The Offeror shall describe how the LEP Threat Spectacle is capable of interfacing with all the required equipment and anthropometric ranges. The Offeror shall provide data from modeling, simulation, analysis or test to substantiate its assertions.

2.1.3.2 Visual Compatibility

The Offeror shall describe how its LEP Threat Spectacle will meet the Visual Compatibility and Optical Quality requirements contained in Paragraph 3.5.2 and 3.6 of the LEP Performance Specification including the characteristics of the design, material and construction of the spectacles which ensure compliance. The Offeror shall provide cross sectional diagram of the lens and describe how each element of the lens is used to meet specific requirements and how the final assembly meets all the visual compatibility requirements of the specification. The design approach description for Off Axis Prismatic Imbalance shall include planned values to be achieved by each of the following reviews: PDR – TIM, Prototype – TIM, CDR, TRR, and SVR. The Offeror shall provide data from modeling, simulation, analysis or test to substantiate its assertions and identify areas of technical risk.

2.1.4 Luminous Transmission2.1.4.1 Photopic Transmission

The Offeror shall describe how its LEP Threat Spectacles will meet the Photopic Luminous Transmission (PLT) requirement contained in Paragraph 3.7.1 of the LEP Performance Specification. The Offeror shall describe its design approach for increasing PLT while still meeting all of the requirements of the performance specification. The design approach description shall include planned/projected values at each of the following reviews: PDR – TIM, Prototype – TIM, CDR, TRR, and SVR. The Offeror shall describe any risks and tradeoffs associated with exceeding the PLT requirement. The Offeror shall provide data from modeling, simulation, analysis or test to substantiate its assertions.

2.1.4.2 Chromaticity Coordinates

The Offeror shall describe how its LEP Threat Spectacles will meet the Chromaticity coordinates requirements contained in Paragraph 3.7.6 of the LEP Performance Specification. The Offeror shall describe its design approach for reducing the distance from neutral while still meeting all the requirements of the performance specification. The design approach description shall include planned/projected values to be achieved by each of the following reviews: PDR – TIM, Prototype – TIM, CDR, TRR, and SVR. The Offeror shall describe any risks and tradeoffs associated with exceeding the Chromaticity Coordinates requirement. The Offeror shall provide data from modeling, simulation, analysis or test to substantiate its assertions.

2.1.5 Technology Maturity Self-Assessment (TMSA)

In compliance with DoD Instruction 5000.02 and SECNAVINSTR 5000.2D, a Technology Readiness Assessment (TRA) will be required for Milestone B approval. In compliance with Title 10 USC 2366b and in support of a Milestone B decision, the Offeror shall be required to have demonstrated all Critical Technology Elements (CTEs) (immature technologies) in a relevant environment (TRL 6).

To substantiate that all CTEs have been demonstrated in a relevant environment, the Offeror shall populate a Government-provided Technology Maturity Self-Assessment (TMSA) EXCEL-based Technical Work Breakdown Structure (TWBS) spreadsheet template file (Attachment L-6) and provide it as Annex X electronically.

2.2 Programs and Schedule – Book 2

2.2.2 Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

The Offeror shall provide an IMS submitted electronically, in Microsoft Project 2010, as part of Annex B that delineates the planned schedule for all activities, events, milestones, and critical/driving paths associated with this procurement. The IMS shall be constructed in accordance with DI-MGMT-81861 and MIL-STD-881C, and the Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) (see Cost Attachments 1 and 3). The program’s critical path based on critical path analyses, shall be identified within the IMS. The proposed IMS shall be developed by logically networking (predecessor and successor logic) all discrete prime, principal subcontractor and critical subcontractor activities and milestones for the LEP contract. For purposes of developing the IMS, the Offeror shall use a contract award date of 14 September 2017. All activity durations and resources must be substantiated using relevant historical data.

The Offeror is expected to use realistic data and assumptions to produce a realistic IMS. 1) The Offeror shall complete the IMS utilizing the instructions below:

a. The level of detail in the schedule should be developed to at least Level 5 of the WBS, and go to the lowest level of tasks and activities that the effort will be managed. The IMS should include significant external interfaces, critical items from subcontractors or other detailed schedules that depict significant and/or critical elements and Government Furnished Property/Government Furnished Information (GFP/GFI) dependencies for the entire contractual effort in a single integrated network. The IMS must have the capability to roll-up from the lowest manageable level to the highest summary level with complete horizontal and vertical traceability and capability to produce a calculated program critical path.

b. The IMS shall identify proposed labor hours by functional labor category (e.g., design engineering, systems engineering, manufacturing, etc.) for each task (utilizing MS Project ‘Work’ and ‘Resource Name’ fields). The labor hours and resources proposed in the IMS shall be traceable to the staffing plan submitted in Annex A. Where subcontractor hours/resources are not included in the IMS, this shall be noted in the IMS narrative.

c. The Offeror shall include a narrative on the Basis and Assumptions of IMS, outlining all program milestones and IMS events and documenting all major schedule logic and duration basis/assumptions/sources/rationale that were utilized in the development of the plan. The Offeror shall identify moderate-to-high risk areas and provide ground rules and assumptions as well as rationale for durations of activities with moderate-to-high technical or schedule risk. All additional schedule information shall be submitted within a schedule narrative provided in hardcopy and electronic format.

d. The Offeror shall develop its IMS within the following constraints:

1. The Offeror shall propose a single numbering system that ties all activities in the network schedule to the events in the proposal IMS.

2. The Offeror shall utilize a calendar consistent with the company’s work schedule. A listing of company holidays and non-working days, for each year of the proposed plan, should also be included in the schedule narrative.

3. The Offeror shall identify each activity in the schedule with the appropriate organizational Integrated Product Team (IPT) or functional code in the MS Project Text1 field. The Offeror shall ensure the organizational or functional code is aligned with the Systems Engineering Plan (SEP).

4. The schedule file(s) submitted electronically shall contain the following data, as a minimum for each event, activity, and milestone in the proposal IMS:

i. Responsible CAM - (if available)

ii. Control Account Number - (if available)

iii. Unique ID

iv. IMP Reference/Code (Text3 field)

v. Name

vi. Start Date

vii. Completion Date

viii. Duration (most likely) (use of elapsed days is only permitted for CDRLs)

ix. Total Slack Time (Work Days)

x. Predecessors

xi. Successors

xii. Constraint Type (minimal constraints should be used)

xiii. Constraint Date

xiv. Organizational or Functional Code (Text1 field)

xv. Level of Effort tasks (if applicable) (Text4 field)

xvi. CWBS (Text10 field)

xvii. SOW Reference (Text5 field)

xviii. Resource Name (functional labor category)

xix. Work (labor hours)

xx. Performing Company (Text11 field)

e. The Offeror shall identify any customized fields used in the Microsoft Project schedule file and address their applicability in the schedule narrative. The Offeror must also provide tracking to the text fields used if they do not correspond to the assigned text fields as identified by the above list.

f. If LOE tasks are included within the IMS, the Offeror shall ensure that they are clearly labeled and do not drive discrete work. LOE tasks shall not appear on the critical or driving paths.

g. Relationships with excessive lead or lag time should be avoided in the IMS submittal. If relationships with large lead or lag times (i.e., greater than 5 days (working or elapsed)) or if any of the logic ties associated with the driving/critical paths have lead/lag time cannot be avoided, the Offeror shall explain the need for each lead/lag in the schedule narrative and in the MS Project Notes field of the successor task/milestone.

h. Any activity with duration greater than 125 workdays should be divided into activities with smaller durations or, where this does not make sense, the Offeror shall explain the duration within the schedule narrative and MS Project Notes field.

i. The durations provided by the Offeror for each task in the network schedule shall represent most likely durations.

j. The Offeror shall let the logic determine the network and minimize the use of constraints. Constraints (other than “as soon as possible”) and directed dates and rationale supporting the need for each constrained/directed date in the schedule shall be included in the schedule narrative. Each constraint other than “ASAP” shall be justified separately in the schedule narrative and in the MS Project Notes field.

k. The Offeror’s schedule narrative shall describe its current or proposed schedule management system and how it will be used to plan, coordinate, integrate, control, and manage the program schedule, including the plan for electronic data transfer of schedule information to the Government.

l. Where the Offeror must represent Government working time, this time shall be represented using one (and only one) of the following methods as approved by the Offeror’s System Description/Processes:

1. Use of a Schedule Visibility Task (SVT). A discrete task with no assigned work hours, resources, budget, or Cost Account reference.

i. It shall be easy to identify the task by the use of a distinguishable character included within the task name such as SVT (Schedule Visibility Task), TA (Tracking Activity), etc. and by clearly identifying the SVT by use of a customized field.

NOTE – The SVT task method is the desired method for tracking non-budgeted tasks.

2. A start and completion milestone linked using a Finish to Start (FS) lag. For example:

i. Government Test Begins (milestone) linked

ii. FS + 40d (Government conducts test) to

iii. Government Test Complete (milestone)

m. Offeror tasking necessary for the Government start milestone shall be linked as predecessors; subsequent tasking that is reliant on the completion of the Government milestone shall be linked as successors. The activity names of the start and completion milestone should be descriptive of the work that will be occurring within the lag.

NOTE – this is not applicable for the actual conduct of SETR tasks (e.g., Conduct CDR, SVR, etc.), which shall be represented in the IMS as actual tasking.

n. For CDRLs with Approval Code “A” in block 8 of the DD form 1423-1, the Offeror shall represent Government review and approval time (using work days or elapsed days as appropriate), specified in Block 16, with an SVT task or lag tied using a Finish to Start relationship from a ‘Start Government CDRL Review’ milestone to a ‘Government CDRL Review Complete’ milestone. The Start milestone shall be driven by the Offeror’s CDRL submittal; subsequent tasks that rely on the contents of the CDRL shall be linked to the ‘Government CDRL Review Complete.’ Note: The Offeror shall use a naming convention that clearly describes the CDRL being reviewed by the Government.

2.2.3 Small Business Management

a. Small Business (SB) Utilization Strategy All Offerors (Large and Small Businesses) shall address their strategies for utilizing SB Concerns in the performance of this contract, whether as a joint venture, teaming arrangement or subcontractor. SB Offerors may meet this requirement using work they perform themselves. For purposes of this solicitation, the term SB Concern shall also include the subcategories of Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), HUBZone Small Business (HUBZone), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), and Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB). Each subcategory of SB shall be addressed. This strategy is separate from, but shall be consistent with, the SB Subcontracting Plan, if such a Plan is required. In describing its SB Utilization Strategy for this solicitation, the Offeror shall, as applicable:

(1) Describe its approach to identifying SB Concerns;

(2) Describe the extent of participation of SB Concerns on this contract, including a detailed description of the supplies and services for each SB Concern subcategory, and the complexity and variety of the work SB Concerns are to perform. For each SB Concern specifically identified in the proposal, provide the SB Concern's CAGE Code, or, if the SB Concern is not registered in the System for Award Management (SAM), at a minimum provide evidence of self-certification in accordance FAR 19.703(b) as an SB Concern. Where possible, provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments to utilize each SB Concern.

(3) Identify processes to correct inabilities to meet proposed goals with corresponding improvements that will be used on this contract;

Table T-2 Small Business Goals Offeror Name

Large Business

Small Business

Total

100%

VOSB

SDVOSB

HUBZone

SDB

WOSB

(4) Describe its specific efforts and new, contract-specific initiatives to ensure the resulting contract meets or exceeds proposed goals. These efforts shall include, but are not limited to: sponsoring program specific outreach events and industry conferences, establishing Mentor-Protégé relationships and market research using websites such as the NAVAIR Office of Small Business Programs website (http://www.navair.navy.mil/osbp ) to locate small business concerns; and

(5) Demonstrate (Large Businesses only) that its SB Utilization Strategy is consistent with its SB Subcontracting Plan. If the Offeror is a participant in the DoD Comprehensive Subcontracting Test Program specified in DFARS 219.7, or if the Offeror submits a Commercial Subcontracting Plan for this proposal, then the Offeror shall describe how SB participation on this contract will contribute to its overall Comprehensive or Commercial Subcontracting Plan goals.

b. Small Business (SB) Subcontracting Plan - Large Business Offerors shall provide their Small Business Subcontracting Plan conforming to the requirements of FAR 19.7 and DFARS 219.7 as part of Annex X. The SB Subcontracting Plan of the successful Offeror(s) shall be reviewed and approved by the PCO prior to contract award. See FAR 19.702(a)(1) Statutory requirements, regarding failure of the apparent successful Offeror to negotiate and submit a SB Subcontracting Plan or submit a Comprehensive or Commercial SB Subcontracting Plan acceptable to the Contracting Officer. The successful Offeror’s approved Subcontracting Plan will be incorporated into the resultant contract.

3.0 VOLUME 3 - PAST PERFORMANCE

Note: This volume shall not contain any reference to the price aspects of the offer

The following is a list of Section L Attachments that the Offeror shall utilize to provide information for this volume:

For this volume, the Offeror shall identify relevant contracts, or those portions of a relevant contract, whose performance is within five years of the proposal due date and contains efforts similar to those efforts (e.g., end product or service, type effort, contract tasks, contract type, contract dollar value, etc.), required by this solicitation for the Prime, principal subcontractors, critical subcontractors, and JV team members, identified in Table ES-1 (Offeror Summary). Offerors shall also identify relevant contracts within the past five years that had any show-cause notices, cure notices, or termination for default.

Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) and Questionnaires will be the primary customer feedback data used to evaluate the Offeror’s past performance. The Past Performance Information Reporting System (PPIRS) will be the primary paperless method used to retrieve the CPARS for this source selection. For all contracts identified that do not have a CPARS, the Offeror shall forward a copy of Attachment L-3 Past Performance Questionnaire to that contract’s Procuring Contracting Office (PCO), Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO), and Program Manager (PM); or commercial contractor equivalents. Please forward all questionnaires within two weeks from this solicitation’s release date to allow adequate time for the recipient to respond. Note that the Offeror should not reference this solicitation’s number when distributing the past performance questionnaires to customers. The Offeror shall include instructions for the customers to send completed questionnaires within two weeks of its receipt via e-mail to Mr. Jamie Billig, PCO/Contract Specialist, at jamie.billig@navy.mil or via fax to (301) 866-4432. The Offeror shall ensure that all points of contact are current and include an email address and phone number. The Offeror shall not conduct follow-up actions with regard to this questionnaire, other than to confirm receipt by the recipient. The Government may contact customers identified by the Offeror to obtain follow-up Past Performance Information as needed.

Offerors are reminded that the Government reserves the right to use information to evaluate past performance obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror. The Government may send additional questionnaires and/or obtain information from sources identified by the Government evaluation team.

0. Authorization Letter(s)

Within this section, the Offeror should submit a signed “Release of Adverse Past Performance Authorization Letter(s)” with written consent from each participating principal subcontractor, critical subcontractor, JV team member, authorizing the release of adverse past performance information to the prime. This authorization letter allows the Government to coordinate past performance issue(s) with the Prime Offeror. For any subcontractors or JV team members that do not provide an authorization letter with such written consent, the Offeror shall state that adverse past performance issues shall be coordinated directly with the subcontractor and past performance contact information shall be provided. The point of contact information shall include a name, address, phone number, and email address for each subcontractor, or JV team member, with whom the Government may coordinate any issues and obtain responses as needed. Offerors are advised that if Offerors do not submit the Release of Adverse Past Performance Authorization Letters with written consent, then the Government will address any past performance issues directly with the subcontractor or JV team member, and the Offeror will forfeit the opportunity to participate in any related discussions.

3.2 Relevant Contract Data

For each contract identified for past performance in Table ES-2 (Relevant Contract Summary) provided in Attachment L-1 (Executive Summary Tables), the Offeror shall complete Attachment L-4 Table PP-1 (Past Performance Contract Data), following the instructions provided within the attachment and submit it within this section and as a separate electronic file. Please note that this form is a summary of the prime’s, principal subcontractors’, critical subcontractors’, and JV team members’ relevant contract data. All detailed information and comparative analysis of the past performance references to this solicitation’s requirements shall be provided in Volume 3, Section 3.3 (Evaluation), of the Offeror’s proposal. The contract references designated in Table ES-2 (Relevant Contract Summary) shall be used in completing this Volume and all contract references shall be numbered the same throughout all of the Offeror’s proposal volumes (i.e. the contracts identified as P1, S1, T1 etc.)

In general, recent performance will be considered more relevant than older performance. Commercial contracts may be included. If the Offeror is proposing as a JV, the Offeror should provide the relevant contracts for the JV as a whole, and for each team member of the JV.

Table PP-1 Past Performance Contract Data

3.3 Evaluation

The burden of providing thorough and complete…