Amendment_0003_to_RFP_N00024-16-R-6405.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this Amendment 0003 is to revise Section L, paragraph 4.4.3 Supporting cost and Pricing Data (Attachment 7A or 7B) subparagraph (c).

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

V 1 24

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 23-Mar-2017

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N00024-16-R-6405

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

24-Feb-2017

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

23-Mar-2017

CODE

NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND

STOP 2050, 1333 ISSAC HULL AVE SE

WASHINGTON DC 20376

N00024 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N00024-16-R-6405

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEROR(S)

1.0 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEROR(S)

1.1 Definitions. As used in this provision:

In writing or written means any worded or numbered expression which can be read, reproduced, and later communicated, and includes electronically transmitted and stored information.

Proposal modification is a change made to a proposal before the solicitation’s closing date-and time, or made in response to an amendment, or made to correct a mistake at any time before award.

Proposal revision is a change to a proposal made after the solicitation closing date, at the request of or as allowed by a Contracting Officer.

Time, if stated as a number of days, is calculated using calendar days, unless otherwise specified, and will include Saturdays, Sundays, and Federal legal holidays. However, if the last day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or Federal legal holiday, then the period shall include the next working day.

1.2 Amendments to the solicitation.

If this solicitation is amended all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged. Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment to this solicitation by the date and time specified in the amendment(s).

1.3 General.

One RFP will be issued for two competitively awarded contracts for engineering services to perform MK48 Heavyweight Torpedo maintenance at the Pearl Harbor IMA (SOW Section A) and for the IMA/TTC/PDLR at the Yorktown IMA (SOW Section B). Proposals may be submitted for either the Pearl Harbor IMA or Yorktown IMA, or both. If an offeror proposes for both IMAs, two separate proposals shall be submitted for evaluation. Proposals will be independently evaluated to meet the requirements at each IMA. The award(s) will be made to the responsible offeror(s) who represents the best overall value to the Government.

The Offeror’s proposal(s) shall be based on requirements contained in this RFP (including those documents, exhibits, and other attachments to the RFP identified in Section (J)). Section (J) lists all attachments for the RFP;

“A” attachments are applicable to the Pearl Harbor IMA, “B” attachments are applicable to the Yorktown IMA.

Some of the attachments have neither and A or B version, these are applicable to both locations.

Offerors are advised that the Government seeks proposals, which demonstrate the greatest technical merit at a reasonable cost. Accordingly, Offerors are advised that award may not be made to the Offeror with the lowest evaluated cost to the Government if award to an Offeror with a higher cost proposal affords the Government a greater overall benefit. Award will be made to the Offeror who meets the requirements of FAR subpart 9.1, “Responsible Prospective Contractors,” whose proposal conforms to the requirements of the solicitation and has been determined to be technically acceptable, and whose proposal is determined to offer the best value to the

Government in accordance with the evaluation criteria and factors set forth in Section M. In this competition, overall technical merit, including past performance, is considered significantly more important than evaluated cost;

however, the importance of cost will increase as the difference in overall technical merit among competing proposals decreases.

Comprehensive responses to this RFP are required to enable the Government to evaluate the Offeror’s understanding of the requirements, and capability and approaches to accomplish the stated requirements. Proposal(s) shall be submitted in accordance with the instructions in this RFP, any non-conformance with the specified required content may be cause to eliminate the Offerors proposal from consideration. Offerors are advised that information submitted in excess of that required herein will not be evaluated. The proposal shall be valid for no less than 365 days from the date of RFP closing for Pearl Harbor and no less than 425 days from the date of RFP closing for Yorktown. Offerors are required to submit a proposal encompassing all items listed in Section B pertaining to the applicable IMA (Pearl Harbor: CLINs 0001 – 4004/Yorktown: CLINs 5001 – 9003). The proposal shall provide comprehensive responses to the areas provided for in this section. The proposal shall be a complete response to the SOW and the requirements of this RFP including those documents, exhibits, and other attachments to the RFP identified in Section J, taking into consideration requirement and delivery schedules specified elsewhere in this solicitation. No award will be made to any Offeror who does not possess facility clearance issued by Defense Security Service at a SECRET level.

Offerors are hereby notified that from time to time the Government may post additional information via the internet site or URL https://www.fbo.gov/, relating to this solicitation (e.g., responses to questions, amendments, etc.). It is the Offeror’s responsibility to check the website for such information.

If Offerors have any questions to any specific technical requirement of the SOW, specifications or any other terms and conditions of the RFP which, in the Offeror’s opinion, prevents it from responding fully to the RFP, the Offeror shall notify the Government in writing. Offeror’s questions shall identify each specific area of concern. The Government requests Offerors submit questions via e-mail within 21 days after issuance of this RFP to allow the Navy adequate time to prepare and issue responses to all offeror’s questions prior to the date and time set for receipt of proposals. Offerors may submit questions at any time prior to the date set for receipt of proposals. However, questions received after 21 days may not provide the Government adequate time to respond in a manner that may affect an Offeror’s proposal. If the Government determines that a specific change is in fact required, then an amendment to the RFP will be issued. In no event are Offerors to submit proposal that are not in accordance with the RFP. Offers which are found to deviate from the RFP may be rejected as unacceptable.

Each question shall include the document name, document date, specific page, paragraph, clause or other definitive citation requiring clarification. All questions shall be directed to the Contract Specialist, Ms. Traci Mercer with copy to the PCO, Mr. Peter Agyei-Sarpong. The preferred method of correspondence is via email. If an Offeror needs to ask a question of a classified nature, it shall express its desire to do so. An appropriate channel for questions will be established at which point the Offeror may pose its classified question.

Commander Naval Sea Systems Command

Attn: Traci Mercer, SEA 02642 1333 Isaac Hull Ave. SE Stop 2050 Washington Navy Yard, DC 20376-2050 traci.mercer@navy.mil Telephone Number: (202) 781-2931

Also to:

Commander

Naval Sea Systems Command Attn: Peter Agyei-Sarpong, SEA 02642 1333 Isaac Hull Ave. SE Stop 2050 Washington Navy Yard, DC 20376-2050 peter.agyei-sarpong@navy.mil Telephone Number: (202) 781-3600

Please label correspondence packaging “Do Not Open in Mail Room"

The solicitation will be issued through the internet at: https://www.fbo.gov/.

1.4 SOLICITATION RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS

Each Offeror shall submit proposal(s) in response to this solicitation subject to the following requirements.

Submit to:

Volume / Title Page Limit NAVSEA for

Pearl Harbor NAVSEA for

Yorktown PH YKTN I. Technical Proposal 60* 50* 5 paper 3 CDs 5 Paper 3 CDs II. Cost Proposal No Limit 5 Paper 3 CDs 5 Paper 3 CDs III. Contract Information No Limit ** 2 Paper 2 CDs 2 Paper 2 CDs

* Additional specific Technical proposal page limitation information provided in paragraph 3.0 below.

The CDs must be scanned for computer viruses.

Offerors shall submit a cover letter with its proposal which the Offeror has signed and included with its proposal.

However, the cover letter will not count towards the page limits. All amendments to the RFP must be identified on the Offeror’s SF33. One of the submitted copies of Volumes I, II, and III shall be marked as “original.”

The narrative in the proposal for both Volumes I and II shall be single spaced, typed on both sides of the page with type no smaller than Times New Roman 12 point size characters. A page is defined as one side of a sheet 8 1/2 by 11 inches, Header/Footer = 1.0 inch, Right/Left Margins = 1.0 inches.

Each volume shall be bound separately and shall not exceed the page limitation cited above. The page count shall include all printed matter and figures except cover pages, title pages, Table of Contents (TOC), lists of illustrations, tab pages, appendices, index and lists of tables. Pages excluded from the page count must contain only material pertinent to the page heading or be blank and marked "Intentionally Left Blank." Index pages and Tabs are required and shall be cross-referenced to the TOC. Every page, except those marked as blank, will be numbered. If the proposal exceeds the page limit identified above in either the paper copy or the electronic CD-ROM copy, the Government will remove all pages exceeding the specified page count from the back of the proposal prior to the evaluation. The CD-ROM should reflect the exact contents of the paper copy and should not contain any additional content not existing in the paper copy. These pages will not be removed from the index or appendices provided at the back of the proposal. Each volume of the proposal shall be bound in three ring binders to permit removal of sections with each major part tabbed.

The Offeror shall provide each volume on separate CD-ROMs. Each disc shall be labeled as follows:

• N00024-16-R-6405 and Location (i.e. Pearl Harbor, HI or Yorktown, VA)

• Volume #

• Offeror Company Name, City, State

• Offeror POC

• Offeror POC Phone #

• Security Classification of the CD-ROM

The cover page of each Proposal Volume shall contain:

• Location (i.e. Pearl Harbor, HI or Yorktown, VA)

• Volume Number and Title (e.g., Volume I - Technical Proposal) https://www.fbo.gov/

• Item Nomenclature and RFP Number

• Company Name of the Offeror

• Offerors Position on Disclosure of Proposal Data

• Security Classification of the Volume

• Serial Number/Copy Number

THE OFFEROR IS REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF COPIES OF VOLUME II

(COST/PRICE PROPOSAL) SEPARATE FROM THE TECHNICAL VOLUME.

Each (Pearl Harbor or Yorktown) proposal submission shall be as follows:

All required copies shall be submitted at the place and at or before the time and date specified below:

Commander Naval Sea Systems Command Attn: Traci Mercer, SEA 02642 1333 Isaac Hull Ave. SE Stop 2050 Washington Navy Yard, DC 20376-2050 Traci.Mercer@navy.mil Telephone Number: (202) 781-2931

No Later than 2:00PM on April 21, 2017.

Volume I shall be compatible with Microsoft Office 2007 or greater, or be readable as a .pdf and stored on a compact disk (CD-ROM). Volume II financial data (e.g. Elemental Cost Summaries by CLIN for each CLIN and Consolidated Total) shall be provided using the Excel software application and shall have all formulas traceable to all cells, and no password protection applied. The Excel workbook(s) shall be provided on a compact disk (CD-

ROM).

No cost or pricing information shall be included in the Offeror's forwarding letter or in any part of its submitted volumes, except the Cost Volume. Forwarding letters are merely instruments for transmitting the submitted proposals; they are not part of the page count.

1.5 CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

The Government will evaluate each Offeror’s understanding of the Government’s requirements and ability to perform the work on the basis of its proposal. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to provide information and evidence that clearly demonstrates its ability to satisfactorily respond to the solicitation requirements. The Government intends to award two (2) contracts under this solicitation (one for the effort at Pearl Harbor, and one for the effort at Yorktown) as detailed in section M.

The solicitation will be issued through the internet at: https://www.fbo.gov/. Offerors shall submit all information required by this RFP. The Offeror must ensure that the technical, engineering, and administrative services meet Navy requirements. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the RFP may result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for award.

The performance of this contract requires that the Offeror have a SECRET facility clearance granted by a Military Department. If an Offeror has not been granted such a clearance and is otherwise entitled to award, a contract will be awarded contingent upon the Offeror receiving a facility clearance within 30 days of notice of award.

Solicitation Responsiveness. Offerors are advised to submit proposals that are complete, clear, and consistent in all respects without the need for additional explanation or information. Offerors are cautioned against the use of general, vague, or unsubstantiated statements, which prevent concise proposal evaluation. Each factor will be mailto:Traci.Mercer@navy.mil https://www.fbo.gov/ evaluated on how well the response meets the requirements of the solicitation. The response that completely addresses all of the solicitation requirements may be judged superior to the response that minimally addresses solicitation requirements under evaluation factors. The Offeror’s submission is not to be a restatement of information in Section C (Statement of Work).

Due to the nature and scope of the work encompassed by this solicitation, the Government requires that there be no conflict which would preclude the prime contractor and/or subcontractors from performing any portion of the Statement of Work, regardless of whether it intends to subcontract that portion. Due to the nature of the work outlined in Section C, the Government anticipates that organizational conflicts of interest (OCIs), including impaired objectivity OCIs, may arise for Offerors that perform under other contracts within the cognizance of PMS404 (Undersea Weapons Program Office) as prime contractor or subcontractor for the efforts that will be covered by this solicitation.

The Government is most concerned about potential OCIs in the following scenarios: (1) when a contractor’s work under one Government contract could entail its evaluating itself or a related entity, either through an assessment of performance under another contract or an evaluation of proposals (impaired objectivity OCIs); (2) when performance of the work under this solicitation would place an Offeror in a position to make technical, design, or programmatic recommendations that would include hardware, software, system design, integration, or production of systems provided by the Offeror’s organization; or (3) when the provision of the engineering and technical direction described in Section C and L would create the situation prohibited by FAR 9.505-1 because the Offeror is currently a prime contractor, subcontractor, or consultant on a contract for services or the supply of a system covered by this solicitation or any of its major components.

Therefore, if any Offeror may have an OCI, or if any Offeror has taken any steps to eliminate an OCI and the Offeror believes that the conflict no longer exists, the Offeror must notify the Government and must submit an OCI mitigation plan with its proposal (pages do not count against any page count restrictions). Failure by an Offeror that has identified a potential OCI, to submit an OCI mitigation plan with its proposal shall be considered grounds for disqualification from award. The Government will not accept mitigation measures for impaired objectivity OCIs or biased ground rules OCIs.

For any OCI, the Government will not accept mitigation or elimination measures: (1) that create an additional burden on the government to implement; (2) that involve directed subcontractors or creating separate lines of reporting or any modification to the Government/prime contractor relationship; or (3) that are deemed in the sole discretion of the contracting officer to provide insufficient organizational independence between the prime contractor or a subcontractor under this contract and a prime contractor or subcontractor for hardware, software, system design, integration, or production of the systems that will be covered by this solicitation.

This is not an exhaustive list of measures that will be considered inadequate to protect the Government. It is an illustrative list provided in an effort to ensure that all Offerors understand the Government’s expectations and intent to avoid OCIs.

The Government reserves the right to determine whether or not any mitigation plan provided by an Offeror is sufficient to protect the Government. The Government also does not intend to accept any mitigation measures that involve additional oversight or commitment of resources by the Government, such as agency review of contractor deliverables, internal review of task assignments for OCI before issuance, or formalized monthly reviews of work performed and projected. All Offerors are directed to review and comply fully with the OCI clauses included in Sections C and L of this solicitation (ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST (NAVSEA) (JUL 2000) and NOTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT(S) OF INTEREST (NAVSEA) (JUN 1994) respectively).

2.0 GENERAL CONTENTS OF THE PROPOSAL

The Offeror's proposal must include the following:

• Standard Form 33: Solicitation, Offer and Award, with blocks 12 through 18 completed by the Offeror, including authorized signature.

• RFP with all Offeror fill-ins completed as well as Section K, "Representation, Certification and Other

Statements of Offerors," completed by Offeror.

• Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if applicable). The Offeror’s attention is directed to Section I clauses

FAR 52.219-9 entitled “Small Business Subcontracting Plan”, FAR 52.219-16 entitled "Liquidated Damages—Subcontracting Plan", and DFARS 252.219-7003 entitled "Small Business Subcontracting Plan (DoD Contracts)”. As prescribed in FAR 19.708, Offerors other than small business concerns shall submit a subcontracting plan and that plan, once approved, shall be made part of any contract resulting from this solicitation.

• Technical Proposal: Offerors shall submit electronic and hard copies of their Technical proposal.

• Past Performance Information: Offerors shall submit the past performance information in the format specified.

• Cost and Other Information: Offerors shall submit cost and other information required.

• The Offeror shall not submit the Security Classification Specification as part of the proposal. The DD

Form 254 will, however, become a material part of any resultant contract.

• OCI Mitigation Plan, as applicable (Volume III).

The Offeror's proposal is the sole basis for evaluating the Technical merits, except for the past performance factor, of what is offered, the degree to which the Offeror's claims of performance capacity are supported and the ability of the Offeror to perform in accordance with the requirements. The Technical factors to be considered are discussed herein. Proposals submitted shall be sufficiently detailed to enable Government personnel to make a thorough evaluation of the proposal by factor, and to arrive at a sound determination as to whether the prospective Offeror will be able to perform in accordance with the requirements of the RFP.

The Offerors shall ensure consistency, defined as “free from variation,” between the technical proposal and cost proposal. During the course of evaluating the Technical and Cost Proposals, the Contracting Officer will validate that the technical proposal and cost proposal are consistent. Specifically, the costs proposed will be evaluated and verified using historical and current market information to confirm costs proposed are within reason and consistent with the technical approach. Any inconsistencies between the technical and cost proposals may be viewed as weaknesses and/or risks in the proposals, and the Offeror may, at the Government’s discretion, be considered unacceptable and eliminated from the competition for award.

The proposal shall be as specific, detailed, and complete as to clearly demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough comprehension of the total technical requirements, including all special provisions of the RFP. The Offeror shall include cross-referencing for traceability.

Offerors are advised to submit proposals that are complete, clear, and consistent in all respects without the need for additional explanation or information. Offerors are cautioned against the use of general, vague, or unsubstantiated statements, which prevent concise proposal evaluations. Each factor will be evaluated on how well the response meets the requirements of the solicitation. The response that completely addresses all of the solicitation requirements may be judged superior to the response that minimally addresses solicitation requirements under evaluation factors. General statements that the Offeror understands the problem and can or will comply with the requirements of the RFP will be considered inadequate. The proposal shall be sufficiently complete to demonstrate the manner in which the Offeror will comply with the applicable requirements of the solicitation.

Offerors must comply with specific information submission requirements found in this Section L. Failure of the Offeror to comply with all aspects of the solicitation requirements may, at the Government’s discretion, render the proposal unacceptable, and the Offeror may be eliminated from the competition for award.

The Offeror need not repeat information within the same volume required in the response to two or more proposal requirements. Such information shall be presented in detail in one area of the volume where it contributes most critically to the discussion. In other areas where discussion of the same information is necessary, the Offeror shall refer to the initial discussion and identify its location within the proposal volume.

The PCO intends to award two (2) contracts under this solicitation (one for the effort at Pearl Harbor, and one for the effort at Yorktown) based on initial proposals. In accordance with FAR 15.306, if an award is not made on the basis of initial proposals, the Contracting Officer with the approval of the Source Selection Authority will make the determination as to which proposals are in the "Competitive Range." The competitive range shall be determined based on the results of the evaluation of initial Technical and Cost Proposals, considering all evaluation criteria, and shall include the most competitive proposals. The number of proposals within the competitive range may also be reduced if the Contracting Officer determines the number of most competitive proposals that might otherwise be included within the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted.

If discussions are held, all Offerors selected to participate in discussions shall be advised of significant weaknesses, deficiencies, and negative past performance information, at a minimum, in their proposals, and shall be offered a reasonable opportunity to correct or resolve such deficiencies, weaknesses and risks and to submit such technical and cost information, or other revisions to their proposal, that may result from such discussions.

When discussions are completed, the PCO will close discussions and request FPRs. Any changes as a result of discussion questions shall be incorporated into any subsequent FPR. Page limitations associated with this revision will be announced during the time which discussions may be held.

Each volume shall be written to the greatest extent possible on a standalone basis so that its content may be evaluated with a minimum of cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. Information required for proposal evaluation that is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal.

Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with a definition for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

In the event that any portion of the technical proposal is written by someone who is not a bonafide employee of the offeror who is submitting the proposal, a certificate to this effect shall be signed by a responsible officer of the offeror and shall show the person's name, employment capacity, the name of his firm, the relationship of that firm to the offeror's, and the portion of the technical proposal written by that person.

It is the preference of the Government for Offerors, and subcontractors thereto, to use commercial items to the maximum extent practicable in fulfilling the Government's requirements covered by this procurement. Offerors should set forth in their proposal any terms and conditions of the RFP that the Offeror finds inapplicable due to the commerciality of a particular item and provide an explanation of why.

The format and content of the proposal shall contain a response to the evaluation categories noted below.

Information presented shall appear in the same order as outlined. A master index identifying major subsections by number, title, page number and volume shall be provided in each volume.

Documents, exhibits, and other attachments that form a part of this RFP, that will become part of any resultant contract are identified in Section J. Section K will be incorporated by reference, while Sections L and M will not become a part of any resultant contract.

3.0 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION/OUTLINE

The format and content of the proposal must contain a response to each of the evaluation categories noted below.

The Offeror must also address the clauses that require a response. Information presented shall appear in the same order as outlined. A separate index or matrix which correlates proposal information to the RFP elements shall be provided. Proposal information shall be referenced to the proposal’s outlines and page numbers, and RFP elements shall be cited by page numbers. The outline presented below represents required subject matter to be developed and the Offeror shall employ the following structure and provide technical information in an orderly arrangement, and easy to follow format.

Offerors are cautioned that, in accordance with the "Instruction to Offerors-Competitive Acquisitions" clause (FAR 52.215-1), the Government intends to award two contracts on the basis of initial proposals received, without discussions. Therefore, each proposal shall contain the Offeror’s best terms from a cost and technical standpoint.

Offerors are to ensure that all Technical information is contained within Volume I and that no cost information has been included in this volume.

Offerors are to include all cost supporting data within Volume II and must be submitted in MS Excel format.

Proposals shall be organized as follows:

Pearl Harbor IMA FACTORS SUBFACTORS Attachment PAGE

LIMIT

1. Technical Approach A. Technical Capability & Experience 20 B. Management Experience and Approach 15 C. Personnel Staffing 9A No Limit 12A 18

2. Past Performance (None) Contracting

Narrative 6 (2/ref)

Reference List

3. Total Evaluated Cost

(TEC)

(None) Cost Narrative

No Limit

6A/7A No Limit

Yorktown IMA FACTORS SUBFACTORS Attachment PAGE

LIMIT

1. Technical Approach A. Technical Capability & Experience 19 B. Management Experience and Approach 14 C. Personnel Staffing 9B No Limit 12B 10

2. Past Performance (None) Contracting

Narrative 6 (2/ref)

Reference List

3. Total Evaluated Cost

(TEC)

(None) Cost Narrative

No Limit

6B/7B No Limit

Contract Information required under Volume III including Solicitation Fill-ins, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, and OCI Mitigation Plan, if applicable, has no page limit.

The evaluation factors are divided into two categories: Non-Cost Factors (Factors 1 and 2) and Cost Factors (Factor

3). Factor 1 (Technical Approach) is more important than Factor 2 (Past Performance). Factors 1 and 2, collectively, are significantly more important than Factor 3 (Total Evaluated Cost); however, as competing proposals approach non-cost (Factor 1 and 2) equality, Factor 3 will increase in importance. Within Factor 1, Subfactor A is more important than Subfactor B, which is more important than Subfactor C. There are no Subfactors for Factor 2 or Factor 3.

4.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT

4.1 OFFER

The completion and submission to the Government of an offer shall indicate the Offeror's unconditional agreement to the terms and conditions to this solicitation.

4.2 VOLUME I, FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL APPROACH

4.2.1 SECTION 1 Technical Capability/Experience (Sub-factor A)

The Offerors shall demonstrate their specific capability and relevant experience to perform the requirements addressed in Section C (SOW). This is not to be a restatement of information in Section C (SOW).

Offerors shall demonstrate a comprehensive technical understanding of the requirements/tasks contained in the Statement of Work. This section shall discuss, in detail, the Offeror’s understanding of the goals and technical complexities of the effort required. Additionally, the Offeror shall provide detailed relevant experience in performing the goals and technical complexities of the effort required.

Offeror’s proposal(s) shall demonstrate the following areas:

a)An understanding of the work, including technical knowledge, understanding, and experience related to managing and supporting Ordnance Operation and Maintenance activities at the Intermediate and/or Progressive Depot level on Naval Weapons Systems or DOD weapons systems of a similar nature to that which would be performed under this contract.

b) An understanding of the work, including knowledge and understanding of the Performance of Torpedo Operation and Maintenance at the Intermediate and Progressive Depot level.

c) Competence to meet the requirements to the required level of quality. Offerors shall describe their technical understanding and plan to meet the level of quality, including guidance set forth in SW510-AJ-PRO-010 TORPEDO INTERMEDIATE MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY QUALITY SYSTEM: DESCRIPTION AND PROCEDURES and for offerors submitting a proposal for work at Pearl Harbor, technical understanding and plan to meet the guidance set forth in SUBTORPIMAINST 4855.1, QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN.

d) Relevant experience and approach to working dynamic schedules and requirements, including a discussion of logistics, schedule, and any other issues of which the Government should be made aware.

e) Experience in identifying potential problem areas, identifying the root cause, recommending solutions to these problems, and the feasibility of these solutions to these problems.

f) List and explain any assumptions made by the Offeror.

4.2.2 SECTION 2 Management Experience and Approach (Sub-factor B)

Offerors shall describe their management plan and approach. The proposal shall demonstrate the Offeror's unambiguous management approach (clear chain-of-command or responsible individual) to controlling and integrating the diverse efforts required by the SOW. Offerors shall describe their corporate structure and ability to manage resources. Offerors shall describe procedures in place for providing quality assurance of work products.

Offeror’s management plan shall address the following:

Management Experience and Approach: The Offeror shall describe processes and procedures to ensure successful accomplishment of the SOW tasking including the following:

• Overall management experience and approach o Offerors shall address in sufficient detail the adequacy of corporate management and corporate resources to support the technical requirements of the solicitation and ability to function as a viable and productive partner with the Government.

• Recruitment of personnel o Offerors shall describe their experience and approach to recruitment of personnel for initial start-up of a contract, including the approach to recruitment of qualified, previously qualified, and/or personnel with the knowledge/skills/abilities to attain required qualifications/certifications as outlined in the SOW and the various GFI documentation.

o Offerors shall describe their experience/approach to recruitment of additional personnel to deal with attrition over the life of the contract.

• Quality contract execution and compliance o Offerors shall describe the management approach to quality and how it will be accommodated in the contract execution. Additionally, the Offeror shall provide information on its corporate experience in quality management systems such as ANSI Z540.3, ISO 17025:2005 and ISO 9000:2008, including the offeror’s plan for early identification and resolution of problems. The management approach to quality should describe how the requirements of SW510-AJ-PRO-010 (Common QAS) will be adhered to by the offeror.

o The Offeror shall describe how management, quality and engineering services teams are integrated to overcome risks from scheduled, programmatic and operational requirements changes.

• Resolution of contractual and technical problems o Offerors shall describe corporate experience relevant to those tasks required by the SOW.

Offerors shall demonstrate their recent experience with work of a similar nature, scope, magnitude, complexity, and difficulty to that under this contract. Offerors shall demonstrate their experience performing similar work within the structure, systems, and legal/regulatory requirements of DoD and DoN. This can be demonstrated by the contractor’s or proposed subcontractor’s own experience or corporate experience in providing similar contractor support as required to meet the tasks outlined in the SOW.

o The Offeror should address how their management approach will meet the cost, schedule, and performance requirements of the contract. Finally, the Offeror shall describe its. Offerors shall identify and address performance and schedule risk that may occur under the resultant Contract and discuss its approach for managing and mitigating the identified risks.

• Transition planning o Offerors shall describe their approach to transition that describes their transition experience to validate basic capabilities, qualifications, and certifications that at a minimum meet the technical performance specifications of the SOW.

o The Offeror shall describe an overall program transition plan showing how the schedule required by the solicitation will be accomplished.

o Present a detailed work certification plan and schedule, including key milestones, identifying the specific tasks (events) required to support the Pearl Harbor IMA or the Yorktown IMA.

The transition approach shall include a staffing plan for hiring personnel after contract award.

o The approach shall include schedule for hiring ramp up and timeframe when staffing actions will be completed which shall be not later than four weeks after contract award. The approach shall include but not be limited to start date, end date, and detailed Plan of Action & Milestones (POA&M) with measurable elements.

o The approach shall also address proposed procedures and processes for the transfer and storage of all archived PMS404 (Undersea Weapons Program Office) programmatic documentation.

o The transition approach shall also detail how the awarded contractor will coordinate communications with the incumbent contractor and Government staff and how it will ensure uninterrupted workflow during the transition process.

• Subcontracting approach (if applicable) o The Offerors management approach shall include the prime and subcontractors (if any) organizational structure, functional relationships, responsibilities and coordination among the prime team members.

o Offerors shall define/describe/explain the usage of Teaming, Personnel, and Subcontractors including:

Offerors shall present their knowledge of the personnel and subcontractor qualifications necessary to perform the work

Offerors shall address any teaming arrangements for accomplishing the proposed work.

Offerors shall reveal the extent of involvement in the performance of their subcontractors (if applicable); including Subcontract Management detailing how each subcontractor will be managed to ensure cohesive integration into the overall management approach that all contract objectives are met.

Offerors shall describe how their team will integrate the teaming partners into their management approach in the following areas and how the Offeror will leverage their strengths to bring value to the Navy: Technical Leadership, Quality Assurance, and Process Improvement.

The Offeror shall specifically address in the Subcontracting Plan, how and why selected subcontractor(s) were chosen, which knowledge and skills they will be acquiring through each subcontract, the level of subcontract effort expected, and how the Offeror will maintain control during the performance of work.

o Each prime Offeror shall submit a narrative demonstrating their ability to manage the successful completion of that portion of the effort not performed by the prime Offeror, i.e.

through subcontractors. At a minimum, the following issues shall be addressed:

Describe the identity, organization and responsibilities of the group performing subcontractor management

Describe their knowledge and experience in performing this role Describe any established practices, processes, software aides, etc. to be utilized in performing subcontractor management Describe the extent to which potential subcontractors have previously performed in that role with the prime Offeror Describe the basis on which subcontractors will be added to, or dropped from, the team after award Recruitment/Retention: The Offeror’s management plan shall identify recruitment/retention and workforce improvement procedures for attracting, retaining, and upgrading the skills of highly trained and motivated personnel.

Offerors shall explain approaches for maintaining technical competence in the maintenance and operations field

4.2.3 SECTION 3 Personnel Staffing (Sub-factor C)

4.2.3.1. Key Personnel.

Key Personnel and qualifications are identified in Attachments 12A and 12B.

The Offeror shall provide a detailed resume for each of the Key Personnel that best demonstrate the Offeror's ability to successfully meet the requirements of this contract.

Resumes shall demonstrate the individual’s depth of experience and qualification to perform the scope of work required. Each resume shall provide, at a minimum, the following information:

1. Name, Years of relevant experience, training, unique or special qualifications, current level of security clearance, positions held and tenure with the firm.

2. Degrees held or other pertinent education as required by the Key Personnel Qualifications in Attachment 12A or 12B. Include date(s) of all degree(s) and the college or university from which the degree(s) were received.

3. The work history as it relates to the Statement of Work task(s) expected to be assigned to that individual. Include dates for the various kinds of experience shown.

The Offeror shall propose one full-time equivalent for each of the following key positions (a or b).

a. The 9 Pearl Harbor IMA Key Positions are:

Technical Program Manager Lead Production Planner Off-Line Technical Lead (2)

• Assembly (ABBU, Tailcone, Engines, Accessories)

• Disassembly (Tear-down/Tankage)

On-Line Technical Lead Yard/Bay/TMD Technical Lead PDLR Technical Lead Night Shift Technical Lead Environmental/Safety/Health (ESH) Lead.

b. The 5 Yorktown IMA Key Positions are:

Technical Program Manager Guidance and Control Lead Test Equipment Lead PDLR Lead Quality Assurance Specialist

Key Personnel shall meet or exceed the qualifications for the position they are expected to fill found in Attachment 12 A or 12 B of the solicitation. Key Personnel should be identified as either present employees (PE), or contingent hires (CH). There should be consistency between the information provided and the Personnel Resumes.

4.2.3.2 Staffing Plan (Attachment 9A or 9B)

Using MS Excel, Offerors shall provide a Staffing Plan/Personnel List by task area, of all proposed labor category personnel supporting each of the task areas specified in the statement of work. The Offeror shall provide their Staffing Plan in the format described by Attachment 9A or 9B, which consists of the following information set:

• Labor Category/level

• Whether the individual is a key or non-key personnel

• Employer (employee's company name)

• The functional area of the Statement of Work, target Work-Center and sub-Work-Area

• Whether the individual is employed by a sub-contractor who will be performing on this contract

• Number of labor hours proposed for each base and option year, in accordance with Attachment 6A or 6B -

Cost Summary Format

• Employees should be identified as either present employees (PE), or contingent hires (CH) or unidentified

‘to be hired’ (TBH). Key personnel shall only be designated as PE or CH.

Note 1: The data contained in the Staffing Plan shall not conflict with the data provided in the Key Personnel List.

Note 2: A copy of a signed offer letter indicating acceptance by the individual shall be provided for each contingent hire.

Note 3: In the event that Offeror has not identified a firm candidate for proposed non-key personnel positions, the Offeror’s Staffing Plan submittal shall:

(1) Include the word, “Pending” in lieu of an individual’s name, and the designation TBH

(2) Identify the applicable Labor category/level consistent with the CONOPS (Attachment 2A or Attachment 2B)

(3) Identify the number of hours that position is expected to contribute to the effort.

Offerors should attempt to minimize the number of proposed unidentified candidates.

4.2.3.3 Labor Mix Discussion

The staffing plan shall also address the Offeror’s proposed labor mix, the rationale used in selecting the mix and should explain any difference between the Offeror’s proposed labor mix and the Government’s estimated labor mix (as provided in the CONOPS, Attachment 2A or Attachment 2B). Offerors are encouraged to propose to the Government estimated labor mix. In the event that the proposed labor mix or allocation of personnel resources differs in any category from the Government’s estimated labor mix (found in the CONOPS, Attachment 2A (Enclosure 1) or Attachment 2B (Figure 2 and Figure 3)), the Offeror shall provide the rationale used in selecting the proposed labor mix or allocation.

Offerors are cautioned that staffing plans for all proposed tasks must propose the same mix and amount of hours as that of the cost proposal. Any discrepancies are subject to technical and/or cost realism adjustments.

4.3 VOLUME I, FACTOR 2 PAST PERFORMANCE

This section shall identify and describe past performance in fulfilling contracts and subcontracts that reflect work of similar scope or technical complexity as that in the solicitation, performed within the past five (5) years. The contractor shall submit at least three references, from the most recent and related efforts as a prime contractor and/or a subcontractor. Offerors shall submit the Past Performance of major subcontractor(s) who will be performing a significant portion of the effort under this contract. “Major” is defined as those with a total contract value of $1,000,000.00 or more for the base and all options. References should be able to provide information about the firm’s performance during the past 5 years (from the issue date of the solicitation) regarding: Quality of Service, Timeliness of Service, Ability to manage cost/control cost, and Responsiveness to customers. The following information must be provided along with each reference: Contract/Delivery Order Number, contract value, short description of service, contract award date, point of contact (POC), phone number for each POC and an E-mail address (if available).

For each of the Past Performance Efforts submitted, the Offeror shall also provide a Previous Contracting Effort Narrative detailing the following information:

(a) Description of how the scope for the contract/contract relates to this effort in scope and complexity.

(b) Description of the significant achievements, challenges or obstacles that were encountered during contract performance and the measures taken to overcome them.

(c) Description of achievements for the most recent period for which performance measures have been applied to each contract. The performance measures should be specific and show the target performance levels that are set forth under the applicable contracts as well as the level of performance achieved. The Offeror shall describe the tools and/or methods used to collect metrics data and the frequency of data collection and reporting.

(d) Quality of Service (element of Past Performance) - a synopsis of quality of service provided. Include compliance with contract requirements; frequency, completeness, and accuracy of reports.

(e) Timeliness of Service (element of Past Performance) - a synopsis of schedule successes and slippages per contract. Discuss the reasons for changes in the schedule and whether modified schedules were met; CDRLs delivered in a timely manner; replacement of key personnel in a timely manner; effective planning and managing of program.

(f) Ability to manage cost/control cost (element of Past Performance)- describe efforts to control cost under previous contracts. Include any cost overruns experienced with explanations.

(g) Responsiveness to customers (element of Past Performance)- describe efforts to provide effective management, businesslike correspondence, responsive to contract requirements, prompt notification of problems, reasonable/cooperative behavior, flexible, proactive, effective contractor recommended solutions and timely award and management of subcontracts.

The Government reserves the right to use past performance information obtained from these sources or from sources other than those identified by the Offeror, such as the Navy's Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), PPIRS, Federal, State, and local databases.

Since the Government may not necessarily interview all sources provided by the Offeror, it is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided. If the Offeror is aware of any situation that may negatively impact its past performance rating the Offeror shall discuss the situation and how it was remedied. The Offeror must either provide the above information or state that no past performance history exists.

4.3.1 Past Performance…