Conformed_N00024-16-R-2321_-_Amendment_0010_(REDLINE).docx

N00024-16-R-2321

Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices

CLIN Number 0001

Program Management

CPAF

(See Notes B and C)

ESTIMATED COST

MAX AWARD FEE

TOTAL EST COST + FEE

CLIN Number 0002

Industrial Efforts and Material

ESTIMATED COST

MAX AWARD FEE

TOTAL EST COST + FEE

CLIN Number 0003

Industrial Efforts and Material

FFP

(See Note C)

MAX

NET AMT

CLIN Number 0004

Corrective and Preventative Maintenance

ESTIMATED COST

MAX AWARD FEE

TOTAL EST COST + FEE

CLIN Number 0005

Corrective and Preventative Maintenance

MAX

CLIN Number 0006

Fleet Industrial Efforts

ESTIMATED COST

MAX AWARD FEE

TOTAL EST COST + FEE

CLIN Number 0007

Fleet Industrial Efforts

MAX

CLIN Number 0008

Administrative/Financial Data

See DD Form 1432, Exhibit "A" (See Note A)

MAX

CLIN DELIVERY/TASK ORDER MINIMUM/MAXIMUM QUANTITY AND CLIN ORDER VALUE

As prescribed in FAR 16.504, Indefinite Quantity Contracts, the minimum guarantee for this contract is $60,000,000. This minimum guarantee will be provided through the issuance of delivery orders under CLINs 0001 and 0002 (Program Management and Industrial Efforts). The maximum value for orders placed under CLINs 0001 through 0007 of this contract is $TBD at Award.

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

NOTE A - Offeror shall complete the "Price Group" and "Estimated Total Price" blocks of each data item on the Contract Data Requirements List(s), attached hereto.

NOTE B – In accordance with DFARS 252.234-7002 EARNED VALUE MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (Deviation 2015-O0017) (SEPT 2015), an Earned Value Management System (EVMS) that complies with the EVMS guidelines in the American National Standards Institute/Electronic Industries Alliance Standard 748, Earned Value Management Systems (ANSI/EIA-748) (current version at time of solicitation) will only be applied to CPAF Completion individual orders (or group of related orders) over $20,000,000. A certified Earned Value Management System that has been determined to be acceptable by the Cognizant Federal Agency (CFA) will only be required for individual orders (or group of related orders) over $100,000,000.

NOTE C – The rates, by Government Fiscal Year (GFY), for each direct labor category, all subcontractor rates, all indirect rates, including but not limited to overhead, material burdens, support rates, G&A, FCCOM, and Profit/Fee percentages provided in Exhibit L0001 of Attachment J-8 Cost Exhibits of the Contractor’s proposal shall be the maximum GFY rates utilized for cost estimating during negotiations for all future scope/orders placed under this contract. The maximum GFY rates in Exhibit L0001 of Attachment J-8 Cost Exhibits of the Contractor’s proposal do not limit incurred costs on cost reimbursable orders. On CPAF orders, all allowable and allocable costs are reimbursable. The contractor will be limited to the rates in L0001 for future FFP scope/orders. For any subcontracts not included in Exhibit L0001 of the J-8 Cost Exhibit from the Contractor’s proposal, including subcontracts with OEM subcontractors (as designated in Attachment J-4), the Contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer’s written consent before placing the subcontracts. After obtaining the Contracting Officer’s written consent to place a subcontract, Exhibit L0001 will be updated with the subcontractor’s rate(s) for the purposes of negotiating future scope/orders.

DETERMINATION OF FEE (NAVSEA) (APR 2015)

(a) Minimum Fee

The base fee, as set forth in Section B of this contract, shall constitute a minimum fee to be paid for the performance of this contract. The Base Fee shall be paid in accordance with the clause of this contract entitled "FIXED FEE" (FAR 52.216-8).

(b) Award Fee

In addition to the minimum (or base fee) to be paid hereunder, if any, the Contractor may earn an award fee as determined by the Fee Determining Official (FDO). The Government's purpose in granting an award fee is to encourage and reward superior Contractor effort directed toward performance of this contract. The specifics for evaluation are set forth in paragraphs that follow.

(c) Award Fee Board

The Contractor's performance evaluation for each period will be conducted by an Award Fee Board (AFB) of not more than seven members consisting of:

CHAIRPERSON/CO-CHAIRMAN

DDG 1000 Program Office, Fleet Introduction / Post Delivery Director, PMS 500PD

OTHER VOTING MEMBERS

(1) Executing Administrative Contracts Representative

(2) Procuring Contracting Officer, NAVSEA 02233

(3) DDG 1000 Ship Design Manager (NAVSEA 05D)

(4) DDG 1000 Acquisition PAPM (PMS 500)

(5) DDG 1000 Post Delivery Hull Manager

(6) IWS 9.0 Mission Systems Activation Representative

(d) Fee Determining Official (FDO)

The FDO, Program Executive Officer, Ships, in consultation with the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO), will make determinations of the award fee due to the Contractor based upon the performance evaluation conducted by the Award Fee Board established pursuant to paragraph (c) above.

(e) Award Fee Determination and Reclama Procedures

(1) Within ten (10) days after the end of each evaluation period, the Contractor shall furnish to the Award Fee Board their Award Fee Self-Assessment Report that details performance against each of the award fee evaluation criteria, to include such information as may be reasonably required, including an Earned Value Management System (EVMS) summary for each order under each contract line item under review, to assist the AFB in evaluating the Contractor’s performance during that evaluation period.

(2) The Award Fee Board evaluation will be scheduled within twenty (20) working days of the end of each evaluation period. The Board may consider reports, both oral and written, from all Government stakeholders. The Board will arrive at a consensus on the performance rating and advise the FDO of its recommendation including the reasons, rationale, and justifications. The Board findings will be presented to the Contractor who will then be provided an opportunity to provide written comments on the evaluation findings to the FDO within five (5) working days. In such case, these comments will be considered by the FDO in establishing the award fee earned.

(3) The FDO will provide the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) a final performance evaluation and determination of the award fee earned for that period within five (5) working days after receipt of the Board’s findings or the Contractor’s written comments, whichever is later.

(4) Within twenty (20) working days after receipt of the FDO’s final determination and the Procurement Request (PR), the Contracting Officer will issue a unilateral modification to the contract to provide for the award fee earned for that period.

(f) Fee Determining Official’s Determination

Determinations of the FDO with respect to the amount of the award fee to be paid to the Contractor and the methodology for determining the award fee are unilateral decisions made solely at the discretion of the Government.

(g) Evaluation Categories and Performance Objectives

During each evaluation period, the Contractor may earn award fee for exceeding performance objectives for work performed. The performance objectives will be weighted based on their relative importance.

The Government reserves the right to make changes in evaluation categories and performance objectives or weights assigned to performance objectives by unilateral modification. The Contractor may propose performance objectives for any period, however; only those received at least thirty (30) days prior to the start of an evaluation period will be considered for that evaluation period. The Contractor will be notified of changes in the performance objectives as well as adjustments to the weighting of objectives, if any, prior to commencement of each evaluation period. Unsatisfactory performance under an award fee criterion may result in increased weighting for that factor in subsequent evaluation periods.

Award Fee weighting for criteria determined by the Government to be non-applicable, during each respective evaluation period, will be reduced to zero and the weighting evenly distributed to the remaining award fee criteria.

The categories applicable to DDG 1000 and DDG 1001 are grouped by Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) and established as follows:

Delivery Orders will be established for CLINs 0001, 0002, 0004 and 0006 and the Contractor will be evaluated based upon the performance objectives provided below

(h) Program Management (CLIN 0001) Performance Objectives

The performance objectives are categorized in the following areas: management, schedule, technical, and cost. The relative importance is reflected by the weighting factors provided below:

(1) Management – Emphasis will be placed on the Contractor’s effective and efficient management of resources (manpower) in advanced planning, engineering, and ability to manage growth and new work in support of the post-delivery period. The Contractor will develop the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) that will be used during execution of the post-delivery period. The IMS will include shipboard validations, modifications, and installation efforts to integrate the Mission System Activation (MSA) prime contractor, Alteration and Installation Teams (AITs), and other outside activities. Timely and accurate submission of contract deliverables, particularly schedule and cost data crucial to Government oversight, is considered essential. The Contractor is to schedule major milestones to occur as early as possible to ensure a successful post-delivery execution. Active Contractor participation and preparedness for post-delivery Planning Meetings to discuss work packages, schedules and execution planning is required. Measures of success include:

(a) Development of IMS for Post-Delivery Execution (35%) The AFB will assess the schedule, as defined in the IMS, to ensure critical path tasks and work sequencing are accurately identified and tied to appropriate milestones. A score of excellent will be achieved by presenting an IMS which correctly identifies, sequences, and mitigates conflicting Work Items that support the critical path and milestones in the post-delivery Work Packages (to include but not limited to start of post-delivery, space turnovers, system activations, light-offs, compartment close out, Production Completion Dates, preps for and actions leading up to LOA, Sea Trials, and the start of MSA testing). The Contractor shall coordinate with Prime MSA Contractor, Alteration Installation Teams (AITs), and ship's crew to integrate their efforts into a DDG 1000 and DDG 1001 post-delivery unified IMS. Work items incorrectly sequenced or missing will adversely affect the total score.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Integration of the MSA Contractor and other Government AITs (35%) A score of excellent will be achieved by the Contractor proactively coordinating with the MSA Prime Contractor and other Government AITs during PDA/MSA period to support the timely integration, activation, and test of the Mission System Equipment. The Contractor shall complete the critical industrial work required to support and start MSA testing as early as practical for each system. The Contractor shall manage the integration of the MSA contractor, AITs, and the ship's crew in scheduling, production, installation, and the decision-making process such that all stakeholder interests are properly represented in the IMS and throughout execution. The Contractor shall utilize the production planning process to integrate work, provide access to the vessel, and support the MSA Prime Contractor and Government sponsored AITs without disruption to schedule.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(c) Accuracy and Timely delivery of CDRL Deliverables (15%) Measure the percentage of CDRL deliverables expected during the evaluation period accepted as adequate, sufficient, and of good quality that require no revision or update and provided on time (by the due date) throughout the post-delivery Execution evaluation period to total number of CDRL deliverables scheduled to be delivered during that evaluation period.

· >90% (Excellent)

· < 90% but > 80% (Very Good)

· < 80% but > 70% (Good)

· < 70% but > 60% (Satisfactory)

· < 60% (Unsatisfactory)

(d) Preparation for Planning Meetings (15%) The AFB will assess the Contractor’s preparedness for and their contribution to the Planning Meetings. The AFB will measure preparedness based on criteria outlined in the Planning Meetings agenda letter.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(2) Schedule – Emphasis will be placed on the Contractor’s planning efforts towards a successful and timely execution of the post-delivery period, including the ability to manage growth and new work. The AFB expects the Contractor to support timely negotiation and definitization of changes, including prompt and timely submission of proposals, notification to the Government of any identified problems, reasonableness of estimates, and provision of information required by the Government for negotiations. Measures of success include:

(a) Incorporation of New Work (50%) Assess the incorporation of growth and new work within the overall schedule by measuring the percentage of growth and new work items rejected by the Contractor during the evaluation period to the final overall total number of growth and new work items submitted during that evaluation period.

· < 2% (Excellent)

· > 2% but < 3% (Very Good)

· > 3% but < 4% (Good)

· > 4% but < 5% (Satisfactory)

· > 5% (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Timeliness of Cost Estimates (35%) Assess the Contractor’s submission and timeliness of a complete proposal package. A complete proposal package includes ROMs for execution of work items and final cost estimates with supporting documentation. During the evaluation period, assess the percentage of backlogged cost estimates that were not proposed within the mutually agreed timeline, that still meet post-delivery milestones, to the total number of cost estimates submitted during the evaluation period.

· < 10% (Excellent)

· > 10% but < 15% (Very Good)

· > 15% but < 20% (Good)

· > 20% but < 25% (Satisfactory)

· > 25% (Unsatisfactory)

(c) Timeliness and Accuracy of Technical Documentation (15%) Assess the timely submission of all updates required to all Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) documentation (PMS, Technical manuals, AEL’s, APL’s, outfitting of spares, etc) affected by the work performed on the ship. This will be measured by the overall completion percentage in accordance with the delivery schedule specified per the technical documentation CDRL requirements.

· >97% (Excellent)

· < 97% but >95% (Very Good)

· < 95% but >92% (Good)

· < 92% but > 90% (Satisfactory)

· < 90% (Unsatisfactory)

(3) Technical –The Contractor’s ability to clearly identify shipboard production and test problems will be monitored. Protection of the ship and equipment during an intrusive industrial environment is considered an important element of post-delivery execution. Prevention of equipment damage and contamination from industrial debris is to be accomplished through proactive protection including application of appropriate covers and proper utilization of storage facilities. Maintenance of safe and clean work areas free from accumulated industrial debris and rubbish is essential. Measures of success include:

(a) Adequate Protection (35%) The AFB will assess the Contractor’s plan to adequately protect shipboard equipment, systems, and spaces impacted by the industrial availability. The AFB will consider the number, severity, and timeliness of correction of Contractor responsible protection deficiencies that are documented on the Daily Safety Inspections, identified by the Hull Manager, and protection mishaps that occur over the course of the availability. Deficiencies not corrected within 24 hours will continue to count towards the total number of deficiencies each additional day the deficiency is uncorrected.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Final Contract Trial Support (15%) Assess the Contractor’s Final Contract Trial Support by assessing the timely incorporation of newly identified trial card deficiencies into the post-delivery schedule. The AFB will assess the Contractor’s responsiveness to accepting and incorporating trial cards identified during final/special contract trials into the schedule.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(c) Workload Management to meet Post-Delivery Schedule and Cost requirements (35%) Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the workload management plan for the post-delivery period by the AFB’s assessment of actual manning to projected manning for the duration of the availability. In cases where the Contractor's CPI is greater than 1, the AFB expects a relatively lower ratio because the Contractor achieved greater efficiencies than planned and required fewer resources to complete the project.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(d) Safety (15%) The AFB will assess the Contractor’s plan to effectively manage safety and to prevent safety mishaps and to identify and quickly resolve safety risks. The AFB will consider the number, severity and speed of correction of Contractor responsible safety deficiencies that are documented on the Daily Safety Inspections, identified by the Hull Manager, and safety mishaps that occur over the course of the availability. Deficiencies not corrected within 24 hours will continue to count towards the total number of deficiencies each additional day the deficiency is uncorrected.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

(4) Cost – The Contractor is required to provide realistic cost estimates and negotiate work that support Navy milestones. Accuracy of actual cost incurred to negotiated cost is considered a reflection of cost control. Accurate cost accounting (labor, materials, management) of both prime and subcontractors is required. Proactive identification of cost problems, to include timely variance analysis, and Contractor effectiveness in problem resolution will be evaluated. Implementation of cost savings techniques will be viewed favorably.

(a) Program Management Cost performance during post-delivery (100%) Assess cost performance for post-delivery program management by evaluating realistic cost estimates and negotiations that support Navy milestones. Accuracy of actual cost incurred to negotiated cost is considered a reflection of cost control. Accurate cost accounting (labor, materials, management) of both prime and subcontractors is required. Proactive identification of cost problems, to include timely variance analysis, and Contractor effectiveness in problem resolution will be evaluated. Implementation of cost savings or avoidance techniques will be viewed favorably.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(i) Industrial Efforts and Materials (CLIN 0002)

The performance objectives are categorized in the following areas: management, schedule, technical, and cost. The relative importance is reflected by the weighting factors provided below:

(1) Management – Timely and accurate submission of contract deliverables, particularly schedule and cost data crucial to Government oversight is considered essential.

(a) Accuracy of CDRL Deliverables (50%) Measure the percentage of CDRL deliverables accepted as adequate, sufficient, and of good quality in the evaluation period that require no revision or update to the total number of CDRL deliverables scheduled to be delivered during that evaluation period.

· >90% (Excellent)

· < 90% but > 80% (Very Good)

· < 80% but > 70% (Good)

· < 70% but > 60% (Satisfactory)

· < 60% (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Timely delivery of CDRL Deliverables (50%) Measure the percentage of CDRL deliverables provided on time (by the due date) throughout the post-delivery Execution performance period to total number of CDRL deliverables scheduled to be delivered during that evaluation period.

· >90% (Excellent)

· < 90% but > 80% (Very Good)

· < 80% but > 70% (Good)

· < 70% but > 60% (Satisfactory)

· < 60% (Unsatisfactory)

(2) Schedule – Emphasis will be placed on the Contractor’s efforts toward execution of the integrated master schedule (IMS) developed to include shipboard validations as well as AITs or other outside activity installation modifications. Adherence to or improvement upon scheduled key events and major production milestones is considered essential. The Contractor will be required to incorporate growth and new work within the overall schedule. Measures of success include:

(a) Adherence to Post-Delivery Work-Scope using Schedule Performance Index (SPI) (30%) Assess adherence to or improvement upon scheduled completion of the post-delivery work-scope by evaluating the cumulative SPI (in hours) at the end of each award fee period. The schedule and work scope is defined as the original Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) that incorporates all work items tasked for execution at the start of post-delivery. In the case of work package changes after the start of post-delivery, the contractor will notify the Navy of any schedule impacts. If these schedule impacts are approved by the Navy the modified IMS will be used for future SPI calculations.

· SPI > 1 (Excellent)

· SPI .95 - .99 (Very Good)

· SPI .90 - .94 (Good)

· SPI .80 - .89 (Satisfactory)

· SPI < .80 (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Adherence to Post-Delivery Schedule milestones (70%) The AFB will assess the Contractor’s efforts to meet or exceed post-delivery Schedule milestones, as per the IMS at the start of post-delivery, comparing planned dates to actual dates. In the case of work package changes after the start of post-delivery, the contractor will notify the Navy of any schedule impacts. If these schedule impacts are approved by the Navy the modified IMS will be used for future planned to actual milestone date comparisons.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(3) Technical – Emphasis will be placed on accomplishing the post-delivery execution work packages with quality workmanship and minimal re-work. The Contractor’s ability to clearly identify and resolve shipboard production and test problems will be monitored. Protection of the ship and equipment during an intrusive industrial environment is considered an important element of the availability. Prevention of equipment damage and contamination from industrial debris is to be accomplished through proactive protection including application of appropriate covers and proper utilization of storage facilities. Maintenance of safe and clean work areas free from accumulated industrial debris and rubbish is essential. Measures of success include:

(a) Quality Workmanship (35%) Assess the quality of work by measuring the percentage of rejected shipboard tests and inspections during the evaluation period that are not corrected within 24 hours of identification to the overall total tests and inspections listed in the Contractor's Test and Inspection Plan planned to be completed during the evaluation period.

· < 1% (Excellent)

· > 1% but < 2% (Very Good)

· > 2% but < 3% (Good)

· > 3% but < 5% (Satisfactory)

· > 5% (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Workload Management to meet Post-Delivery Schedule and Cost requirements (50%) Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the workload management for the post-delivery period by the AFB’s assessment of actual manning to project manning for the duration of the availability. In cases where the Contractor's CPI is greater than 1, the AFB expects a relatively lower ratio because the Contractor achieved greater efficiencies than planned and required fewer resources to complete the project.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(c) Adequate Protection (15%) The AFB will assess the Contractor’s adequate protection for shipboard equipment, systems, and spaces impacted by the industrial availability. The AFB will consider the number, severity, and timeliness of correction of Contractor responsible protection deficiencies that are documented on the Daily Safety Inspections, identified by the Hull Manager, and protection mishaps that occur over the course of the availability. Severity will be evaluated by the AFB assessing the magnitude to correct damage if the identified deficiency were to lead to a mishap assessed against the probability that the deficiency could lead to a mishap. In the case where a Contractor responsible Protection deficiency resulted in an actual mishap, the cost to correct the damage will be used. Deficiencies not corrected within 24 hours will continue to count towards the total number of deficiencies each additional day the deficiency is uncorrected.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

(4) Cost – The most significant goal in this performance objective is accomplishment of work within the negotiated cost. Accuracy of actual cost incurred to negotiated cost is considered a reflection of cost control. Accurate cost accounting (labor, materials, management) of both prime and subcontractors is required.

(a) Cost performance during post-delivery using CPI (100%) Assess cost performance for post-delivery by evaluating the Cost Performance Index (CPI), including any Estimate at Completion at the end of each award fee evaluation period.

· CPI > 1.00 (Excellent)

· CPI > 0.95 but < 1.00 (Very Good)

· CPI > 0.90 but < 0.95 (Good)

· CPI > 0.85 but < 0.90 (Satisfactory)

· CPI < 0.85 (Unsatisfactory)

(j) Corrective Maintenance and Preventative Maintenance (0004)

The performance objectives are categorized in the following areas: management, schedule, technical, and cost. The relative importance is reflected by the weighting factors provided below:

(1) Management – Timely and accurate submission of contract deliverables, particularly schedule and cost data crucial to Government oversight is considered essential.

(a) Accuracy of configuration updates (50%) Measure the percentage of configuration updates evaluated as inadequate, insufficient, or of poor quality that require a revision or update during the evaluation period to the total number of configuration updates submitted during the evaluation period.

· < 1% (Excellent)

· > 1% but < 2% (Very Good)

· > 2% but < 3% (Good)

· > 3% but < 5% (Satisfactory)

· > 5% (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Timely delivery of Exception Reports (50%) Measure the percentage of Exception Reports provided on time (by the due date) throughout the post-delivery Execution performance period to total number of Exception Reports scheduled to be delivered during each evaluation period.

· >90% (Excellent)

· < 90% but > 85% (Very Good)

· < 85% but > 80% (Good)

· < 80% but > 75% (Satisfactory)

· < 75% (Unsatisfactory)

(2) Schedule – Emphasis will be placed on the Contractor’s efforts toward execution of the integrated master schedule (IMS) developed to include shipboard validations as well as AITs or other outside activity installation modifications. Adherence to or improvement upon scheduled key events and major production milestones is considered essential. The Contractor will be required to incorporate growth and new work within the overall schedule. Measures of success include:

Assess adherence to or improvement upon scheduled completion of the post-delivery work-scope by evaluating the cumulative SPI (in hours) at the end of each award fee period. The schedule and work scope is defined as the original Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) which incorporates all work items tasked for execution at the start of post-delivery. In the case of work package changes after the start of post-delivery, the contractor will notify the Navy of any schedule impacts. If these schedule impacts are approved by the Navy the modified IMS will be used for future SPI calculations.

· SPI > 1 (Excellent)

· SPI .95 - .99 (Very Good)

· SPI .90 - .94 (Good)

· SPI .80 - .89 (Satisfactory)

· SPI < .80 (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Adherence to Post-Delivery Schedule milestones (70%) The AFB will assess the Contractor’s efforts to meet or exceed post-delivery Schedule milestones, as per the IMS at the start of post-delivery, comparing planned dates to actual dates. In the case of work package changes after the start of post-delivery, the contractor will notify the Navy of any schedule impacts. If these schedule impacts are approved by the Navy the modified IMS will be used for future planned to actual milestone date comparisons.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(3) Technical – Emphasis will be placed on accomplishing the post-delivery work packages with quality workmanship and minimal re-work. The Contractor’s ability to clearly identify and resolve shipboard production and test problems will be monitored. Protection of the ship and equipment during an intrusive industrial environment is considered an important element of the availability. Prevention of equipment damage and contamination from industrial debris is to be accomplished through proactive protection including application of appropriate covers and proper utilization of storage facilities. Maintenance of safe and clean work areas free from accumulated industrial debris and rubbish is essential. Measures of success include:

(a) Quality Workmanship (35%) Assess the quality of work by measuring the percentage of rejected shipboard tests and inspections during the evaluation period that are not corrected within 24 hours of identification to the overall total tests and inspections listed in the Contractor's Test and Inspection Plan planned to be completed during the evaluation period.

· < 1% (Excellent)

· > 1% but < 2% (Very Good)

· > 2% but < 3% (Good)

· > 3% but < 5% (Satisfactory)

· > 5% (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Workload Management to meet Post-Delivery Schedule and Cost requirements (50%) Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the workload management for the post-delivery period by the AFB’s assessment of actual manning to project manning for the duration of the availability. In cases where the Contractor's CPI is greater than 1, the AFB expects a relatively lower ratio because the Contractor achieved greater efficiencies than planned and required fewer resources to complete the project.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(c) Adequate Protection (15%) The AFB will assess the Contractor’s adequate protection for shipboard equipment, systems, and spaces impacted by the industrial availability. The AFB will consider the number, severity, and speed of correction of Contractor responsible protection deficiencies that are documented on the Daily Safety Inspections, identified by the Hull Manager, and protection mishaps that occur over the course of the availability. Severity will be evaluated by the AFB assessing the magnitude to correct damage if the identified deficiency were to lead to a mishap assessed against the probability that the deficiency could lead to a mishap. In the case where a Contractor responsible Protection deficiency resulted in an actual mishap, the cost to correct the damage will be used. Deficiencies not corrected within 24 hours will continue to count towards the total number of deficiencies each additional day the deficiency is uncorrected.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(4) Cost – The most significant goal in this performance objective is accomplishment of work within the negotiated cost. Accuracy of actual cost incurred to negotiated cost is considered a reflection of cost control. Accurate cost accounting (labor, materials, management) of both prime and subcontractors is required. Proactive identification of cost problems, to include timely variance analysis, and Contractor effectiveness in problem resolution will be evaluated. Implementation of cost savings techniques will be viewed favorably.

(a) Cost performance during post-delivery using CPI (100%) Assess cost performance for post-delivery by evaluating the Cost Performance Index (CPI), including any Estimate at Completion at the end of each award fee evaluation period.

· CPI > 1.00 (Excellent)

· CPI > 0.95 but < 1.00 (Very Good)

· CPI > 0.90 but < 0.95 (Good)

· CPI > 0.85 but < 0.90 (Satisfactory)

· CPI < 0.85 (Unsatisfactory)

(k) Fleet Industrial Efforts (CLIN 0006)

The performance objectives are categorized in the following areas: management, schedule, technical, and cost. The relative importance is reflected by the weighting factors provided below:

(1) Management – Timely and accurate submission of contract deliverables, particularly schedule and cost data crucial to Government oversight is considered essential.

(a) Accuracy of CDRL Deliverables (50%) Measure the percentage of CDRL deliverables accepted as adequate, sufficient, and of good quality in the evaluation period that require no revision or update to the total number of CDRL deliverables scheduled to be delivered during that evaluation period.

· >90% (Excellent)

· < 90% but > 80% (Very Good)

· < 80% but > 70% (Good)

· < 70% but > 60% (Satisfactory)

· < 60% (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Timely delivery of CDRL Deliverables (50%) Measure the percentage of CDRL deliverables provided on time (by the due date) throughout the post-delivery Execution performance period to total number of CDRL deliverables scheduled to be delivered during that evaluation period.

· >90% (Excellent)

· < 90% but > 80% (Very Good)

· < 80% but > 70% (Good)

· < 70% but > 60% (Satisfactory)

· < 60% (Unsatisfactory)

(2) Schedule – Emphasis will be placed on the Contractor’s efforts toward execution of the integrated master schedule (IMS) developed to include shipboard validations as well as AITs or other outside activity installation modifications. Adherence to or improvement upon scheduled key events and major production milestones is considered essential. The Contractor will be required to incorporate growth and new work within the overall schedule. Measures of success include:

Assess adherence to or improvement upon scheduled completion of the post-delivery work-scope by evaluating the cumulative SPI (in hours) at the end of each award fee period. The schedule and work scope is defined as the original Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) which incorporates all work items tasked for execution at the start of post-delivery. In the case of work package changes after the start of post-delivery, the contractor will notify the Navy of any schedule impacts. If these schedule impacts are approved by the Navy the modified IMS will be used for future SPI calculations.

· SPI > 1 (Excellent)

· SPI .95 - .99 (Very Good)

· SPI .90 - .94 (Good)

· SPI .80 - .89 (Satisfactory)

· SPI < .80 (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Adherence to Post-Delivery Schedule milestones (70%) The AFB will assess the Contractor’s efforts to meet or exceed post-delivery Schedule milestones, as per the IMS at the start of post-delivery, comparing planned dates to actual dates. In the case of work package changes after the start of post-delivery, the contractor will notify the Navy of any schedule impacts. If these schedule impacts are approved by the Navy the modified IMS will be used for future planned to actual milestone date comparisons.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(3) Technical – Emphasis will be placed on accomplishing the post-delivery work packages with quality workmanship and minimal re-work. The Contractor’s ability to clearly identify and resolve shipboard production and test problems will be monitored. Protection of the ship and equipment during an intrusive industrial environment is considered an important element of the availability. Prevention of equipment damage and contamination from industrial debris is to be accomplished through proactive protection including application of appropriate covers and proper utilization of storage facilities. Maintenance of safe and clean work areas free from accumulated industrial debris and rubbish is essential. Measures of success include:

(a) Quality Workmanship (35%) Assess the quality of work by measuring the percentage of rejected shipboard tests and inspections during the evaluation period that are not corrected within 24 hours of identification to the overall total tests and inspections listed in the Contractor's Test and Inspection Plan planned to be completed during the evaluation period.

· < 1% (Excellent)

· > 1% but < 2% (Very Good)

· > 2% but < 3% (Good)

· > 3% but < 5% (Satisfactory)

· > 5% (Unsatisfactory)

(b) Workload Management to meet Post-Delivery Schedule and Cost requirements (50%) Assess the efficiency and effectiveness of the workload management for the post-delivery period by the AFB’s assessment of actual manning to project manning for the duration of the availability. In cases where the Contractor's CPI is greater than 1, the AFB expects a relatively lower ratio because the Contractor achieved greater efficiencies than planned and required fewer resources to complete the project.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

· (Satisfactory)

· (Unsatisfactory)

(c) Adequate Protection (15%) The AFB will assess the Contractor’s adequate protection for shipboard equipment, systems, and spaces impacted by the industrial availability. The AFB will consider the number, severity, and speed of correction of Contractor responsible protection deficiencies that are documented on the Daily Safety Inspections, identified by the Hull Manager, and protection mishaps that occur over the course of the availability. Severity will be evaluated by the AFB assessing the magnitude to correct damage if the identified deficiency were to lead to a mishap assessed against the probability that the deficiency could lead to a mishap. In the case where a Contractor responsible Protection deficiency resulted in an actual mishap, the cost to correct the damage will be used. Deficiencies not corrected within 24 hours will continue to count towards the total number of deficiencies each additional day the deficiency is uncorrected.

· (Excellent)

· (Very Good)

· (Good)

(4) Cost – The most significant goal in this performance objective is accomplishment of work within the negotiated cost. Accuracy of actual cost incurred to negotiated cost is considered a reflection of cost control. Accurate cost accounting (labor, materials, management) of both prime and subcontractors is required. Proactive identification of cost problems, to include timely variance analysis, and Contractor effectiveness in problem resolution will be evaluated. Implementation of cost savings techniques will be viewed favorably.

(a) Cost performance during post-delivery using CPI (100%) Assess cost performance for post-delivery by evaluating the Cost Performance Index (CPI), including any Estimate at Completion at the end of each award fee evaluation period.

· CPI > 1.00 (Excellent)

· CPI > 0.95 but < 1.00 (Very Good)

· CPI > 0.90 but < 0.95 (Good)

· CPI > 0.85 but < 0.90 (Satisfactory)

· CPI < 0.85 (Unsatisfactory)

(l) Evaluation Periods/Award Fee Pool

(i) Award Fee Period

The following evaluation periods are hereby established. The Government reserves the right to adjust the evaluation period and allocation of award fee pool available for each period by unilateral contract modification, which shall be issued, if at all, prior to the start of the affected evaluation period(s). The “Award Fee Available” in the table below will be updated at the end of each evaluation period.

(ii) Award Fee Pool

(1) The Award Fee Pool shall be determined on each order for the applicable award fee period. For Level-of-Effort orders the amount of award fee available shall be directly proportionate to the level-of-effort hours delivered during the evaluation period.

For completion orders, at least 40 percent of the award fee will be available for the final evaluation (as applicable to each order), in accordance with DFARS 216.405-2.

(2) There shall be no rollover of unearned award fee.

(m) Performance Ratings

(i) In evaluating Contractor performance, the following adjective and numerical ratings will be used:

Award-Fee Adjectival Rating

Award-Fee Pool Available To Be Earned

Description

The Award Fee Grade calculated as shown below shall be applied to the awarded/exercised CPAF Orders’ Award Fee Pools for each CPAF CLIN to determine the Award Fee earned for each CLIN. For each CLIN, the Award Fee earned by the Contractor for the evaluation period shall be calculated as follows:

(ii) Program Management (CLIN 0001) Award Fee Calculation

Step 1: A Fee contribution will be calculated for each of the performance objectives multiplying the weighting factor for each metric times the Performance Level earned by the Contractor.

Management

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

Schedule

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

Technical

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

COST

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE POOL (%)

(b) Step 2: Award Fee contribution for each performance objective is calculated by multiplying the total grade calculated in Step 1 for each of the performance objectives times the weighting factor of the performance objective. The sum of all three Award Fee contributions is the Total Award Fee (%) for CLIN 0001.

AWARD FEE GRADE CLIN 0001

Award Fee Rating

Weighted Grade

THE SUM IS THE AWARD FEE GRADE (%)

CORRESPONDING AWARD FEE ADJECTIVE RATING

(iii) Industrial Efforts and Materials (CLIN 0002) and Award Fee Calculation

Step 1: A Fee contribution will be calculated for each of the performance objectives multiplying the weighting factor for each metric times the Performance Level earned by the Contractor.

MANAGEMENT

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

SCHEDULE

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

TECHNICAL

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

COST

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE POOL (%)

(1) SA Planni

(b) Step 2: Award Fee contribution for each performance objective is calculated by multiplying the total grade calculated in Step 1 for each of the performance objectives times the weighting factor of the performance objective. The sum of all four Award Fee contributions is the Total Award Fee (%) for CLIN 0002.

AWARD FEE GRADE CLIN 0002

Award Fee Rating

Weighted Grade

THE SUM IS THE AWARD FEE GRADE (%)

CORRESPONDING AWARD FEE ADJECTIVE RATING

(iv) Corrective Maintenance and Preventative Maintenance (CLIN 0004) Award Fee Calculation

Step 1: A Fee contribution will be calculated for each of the performance objectives multiplying the weighting factor for each metric times the Performance Level earned by the Contractor.

MANAGEMENT

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

SCHEDULE

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

TECHNICAL

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

COST

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE POOL (%)

(2) SA Planni

(b) Step 2: Award Fee contribution for each performance objective is calculated by multiplying the total grade calculated in Step 1 for each of the performance objectives times the weighting factor of the performance objective. The sum of all four Award Fee contributions is the Total Award Fee (%) for CLIN 0004.

AWARD FEE GRADE CLIN 0004

Award Fee Rating

Weighted Grade

THE SUM IS THE AWARD FEE GRADE (%)

CORRESPONDING AWARD FEE ADJECTIVE RATING

(v) Fleet Industrial Effort (CLIN 0006) and Award Fee Calculation

Step 1: A Fee contribution will be calculated for each of the performance objectives multiplying the weighting factor for each metric times the Performance Level earned by the Contractor.

MANAGEMENT

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

SCHEDULE

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

TECHNICAL

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE RATING (%)

COST

Award Fee Rating Earned (%)

Weighted Grade

AWARD FEE POOL (%)

(3) SA Planni

(b) Step 2: Award Fee contribution for each performance objective is calculated by multiplying the total grade calculated in Step 1 for each of the performance objectives times the weighting factor of the performance objective. The sum of all four Award Fee contributions is the Total Award Fee (%) for CLIN 0006.

AWARD FEE GRADE CLIN 0006

Award Fee Rating

Weighted Grade

THE SUM IS THE AWARD FEE GRADE (%)

CORRESPONDING AWARD FEE ADJECTIVE RATING

(n) Maximum Fee

For each individual order, the Offeror shall propose a base fee between 0% and 3% (base fee cannot exceed 3%).