N00024-18-R-6405-0002.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

See continuation pages.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

U 1 22

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 10-Apr-2018

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 N0002418R6405

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Mar-2018

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

10-Apr-2018

CODE

NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND (HQ)

1333 ISAAC HULL AVE SE

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD DC 20376-2050

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

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N0002418R6405

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

The purpose of this Amendment is to:

1. Update Section C-1 CLIN Description

2. Update Section C-2 Specific Requirements 2.4(b)(1) to match the CDRLs

3. Update Section M Paragraph 3.2 Volume II: Factor 5: Cost/Price evaluation

4. Update the Response to BQ 0001 Document

5. Update Section J Attachment 3 (GFE List)

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS

The following have been modified:

SECTION C-1 CLIN DESCRIPTION

The requirements of the MK54 Array Kit provided in the Technical Data Package (Attachment 1) include both performance specifications in addition to detail specifications at various levels of assembly. Performance specifications take precedence over the detail specifications. Compliance with only the detail specifications does not relieve the Contractor from meeting all performance specification requirements. In the event that the contractor's system engineering and design approach following the Performance Specifications necessitates updates to the detail specifications, the Contractor is required to submit necessary changes as described in paragraph 3.3.3.2.1

CHANGES TO & VARIANCES FROM THE CONTRACT BASELINE. Additionally, lower level technical drawings are provided as GFI in Attachment 2. All GFI is for informational purposes only. The Government does not warrant the ability to build compliant acoustic arrays using the GFI provided. The contractor is fully responsible and provided the design space to develop new or revised element, ceramic ring, and associated drawings, processes, and procedures to make compliant Array Nose Assemblies (ANA) to the top level detail and performance specification requirements. The contractor should not assume that the Government will revise the performance specification to allow non-fully compliant Array Kits to be delivered to the Government.

Item(s) 0001 – MK54 MOD 0 Array Kit, Proof of Manufacture (POM) For the purposes of this CLIN each MK54 MOD 0 Array Kit is comprised of an Array Nose Assembly (ANA) P/N

8418283, a transmitter (TX) Assembly P/N 8418343, and TX mounting hardware (Exhibit E). The Contractor shall perform nonrecurring engineering (NRE) design and redesign, fabricate and/or procure, assemble, test and deliver the MK54 MOD 0 Array Kit Proof of Manufacture (POM) units in the quantities specified herein in accordance with the requirements of the Attachment 1 Technical Data Package (TDP) which includes both performance specifications in addition to detail specifications at various levels of assembly. In particular the CLIN

0001 POM units must comply with the Array Nose Assembly (ANA) performance specification (7109301) and the

Transmitter performance specification (WS22038) in addition to the detail specification requirements. In situations where the detail specification contradicts the performance specification, the Contractor is required to submit necessary changes as described in paragraph 3.3.3.2.1 CHANGES TO & VARIANCES FROM THE

CONTRACT BASELINE.

POM units shall be equivalent to MK54 MOD 0 Array Kit production units procured under CLIN 0002 (0102, 0202, 0302, 0402); however, the POM units will be used for Qualification and Validation Testing purposes only.

Item 0001 will comprise of nine (9) each TXs, nine (9) each ANAs, and nine (9) each TX mounting hardware kits listed in Exhibit E. Element, ceramic ring and associated drawings, omitted from the TDP, and the technical reports and models that can assist in developing new element, ceramic and associated drawings have been provided for informational purposes only as part of the Attachment 2, Government Furnished Information (GFI). The

Contractor is required to update the GFI drawings or provide new drawings for the element, ceramic ring and associated drawings included in Attachment 2 and submit updates to the GFI-provided drawings to reflect the as-built configuration.

For purposes of this contract, the MK54 Array Kit POMs are Government first article units.

Item(s) 0002 and (IF OPTION EXERCISED) 0102, 0202, 0302 and 0402– MK54 MOD 0

Array Kits The MK54 MOD 0 Array Kit shall consist of two Functional Item Replacements (FIRs), the MK54 MOD 0 ANA

(P/N 8418283) and the MK54 MOD 0 TX (8418343), as well as TX mounting hardware (Exhibit E). The

Contractor shall fabricate, and/or procure, assemble, test and deliver the MK54 MOD 0 Array Kits in accordance with the requirements of the Attachment 1 TDP which includes both performance specifications in addition to detail specifications at various levels of assembly. In particular, the CLIN 0001 POM units must comply with the

Array Nose Assembly (ANA) performance specification (7109301) and the Transmitter performance specification

(WS22038) in addition to the detail specification requirements. CLIN 0002 and (IF OPTION EXERCISED) 0102, 0202, 0302 and 0402 units shall be equivalent to MK54 MOD 0 Array Kit POM units procured under CLIN 0001.

Element, ceramic ring and associated drawings, omitted from the technical data package, and technical reports and models that can assist in developing new element, ceramic and associated drawing has been provided for informational purposes only as part of the Attachment 2 GFI.

Applicable to Foreign Military Sales (FMS) units: The Contractor may, in accordance with DFARS 225.7303-2, submit their negotiated offset agreement to the PCO at the time of Letter of Offer and Acceptance (LOA) approval after contract award. With concurrence from PMS 404, the Contracting Officer will review and may approve adjustments to Contract Line Item Number/Sub-Line Item Number (CLIN/SLIN) FMS pricing in accordance with

DFARS 225.7303-2 for which the offset agreement has been negotiated between the Country and the Contractor.

Item(s) 0003 and (IF OPTION EXERCISED) 0103 0203, 0303, and 0403 – Other Direct

Costs The Contractor shall invoice as other direct costs the costs of supplies, materials, subsistence and transportation as authorized by Technical Instruction (TI) in accordance with (IAW) Section H clause 5252.242-9115 TECHNICAL

INSTRUCTIONS (APR 2015), for Engineering Services and Hardware Repair Services that are provided under

CLINs 0004, 0005, 0104, 0105, 0204, 0205, 0304, 0305, 0404 and 0405 in accordance with HQ C-1-0008 Support for Engineering Services (NAVSEA)(JUN 1992).

Item(s) 0004 and (IF OPTION EXERCISED) 0104, 0204, 0304, and 0404 – Engineering

Services and Support The Contractor shall, subject to Technical Instructions issued in accordance with (IAW) 5252.242-9115

TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONS (APR 2015), furnish qualified engineers to conduct studies, prototype hardware solutions, provide services, testing and/or analyses of design and/or production related issues for the hardware

CLINs. The engineering services shall be performed within the limits as to place(s) and period(s) specified within the Technical Instructions.

The maximum liability of the Government for each engineering service item shall not exceed the amount set forth in the individual TI. If, at any time, the Contractor has reason to believe that the costs it expects to incur in the performance of each engineering service task in the next succeeding sixty (60) days, when added to all costs previously incurred, will exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the amount set forth in the TI; or if, at any time, the

Contractor has reason to believe that the costs to the Government for the full performance of each engineering service task will be greater than or substantially less than that set forth in the TI, the Contractor shall notify the

Contracting Officer in writing, giving its revised estimate of the hours and costs for the performance of said task.

The Contractor shall not exceed the obligated amount for each engineering services TI, unless and until such amount has been increased in writing by the Contracting Officer.

Item(s) 0005 and (IF OPTION EXERCISED) 0105, 0205, 0305, and 0405 – Hardware

Repair Services The Contractor shall provide cost-reimbursable hardware repair services for Government Owned hardware under this contract not covered under the manufacturer's or a third-party warranty. The Government will provide to the

Contractor Government-furnished equipment (GFE) (Attachment 3) in need of rework or repair. The Contractor shall provide a cost estimate and schedule for rework or repair and retest to the Government within 15 days of receipt of GFE needing rework or repair. The Government will assess that information and notify the contractor in writing within 10 days as to whether or not the repair is authorized.

The Contractor shall, subject to TI(s) issued by the Government, repair the Government hardware under this contract as specified therein. Prior to the Contractor performing any hardware repair services the Contracting Officer’s designated Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) will authorize all repairs.

Item(s) (IF OPTION EXERCISED) 0006, 0106, 0206, 0306, and 0406 – Spares If option exercised, the Contractor shall fabricate and/or procure, assemble, test, and deliver the material specified in Exhibit C. Varying quantities of spares may be ordered dependent upon need and quantities ordered in CLINs

0002, 0102, 0202, 0302 and 0402 (if exercised) and shall be based upon per unit pricing set forth in Exhibit C.

Item(s) (IF OPTION EXERCISED) 0007, 0107, 0207, 0307, and 0407 – Production Support

Material If option exercised, the Contractor shall fabricate and/or procure, assemble, test, and deliver the material specified in

Exhibit D. Varying quantities of production support material may be ordered dependent upon need and shall be based upon per unit pricing set forth in Exhibit D.

Item(s) 0008 and (IF OPTION EXERCISED) 0108, 0208, 0308 and 0408 – Warranty on

Supplies If option exercised, the Contractor shall provide a warranty when required for items delivered under CLINs 0002, 0102, 0202, 0302, and 0402 in accordance with the warranty provisions of this contract as specified in Section I.

Item(s) 0009 – MK54 Array Kit Data The data to be furnished hereunder shall be prepared in accordance with the Contract Data Requirements List, DD

Form 1423, and Exhibit A.

Item(s) (IF OPTION EXERCISED) 0010 - Provisioned Items Orders The Contractor shall fabricate and/or procure, assemble, test, and deliver hardware and any associated software and firmware in support of the MK 54 MOD 0 Array Kits in accordance with “HQ C-1-0003 Provisioned Items Orders

(APR 1999)”. Varying quantities of spares may be ordered dependent upon needs.

SECTION C-2 SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS

2.1 ACCESS TO GOVERNMENT FACILITIES

(a) The Contractor will have access to the Government-owned facilities located at Naval Undersea Warfare Center

(NUWC) Division Newport, Rhode Island; NUWC Division Keyport, Washington; and NUWC Division

Keyport facilities located at Naval Submarine Base Bangor, Washington as required in support of the life-cycle of this procurement including production, testing efforts, troubleshooting, failure analysis, meetings etc. on a not-to- interfere basis.

(b) For utilization of Government facilities, the Contractor shall establish a Test Availability Plan (TAP) (submitted with the Test Plan CDRL A009) with the appropriate Government activity 90 days prior to planned use.

(c) The Government will not be responsible for conflicts, delays, or disruptions to any work performed by the

Contractor due to use of any or all of such property under this contract or any other contracts under which use of such property is authorized.

(d) The Contractor will require access to ‘For Official Use Only’ information.

(e) In performing this contract, the contractor may:

Receive and generate classified material

Fabricate, modify, or store classified hardware

Be authorized to use the services of defense technical information Center (DTIC) or other secondary distribution center

2.2 ACCESS TO CONTRACTOR'S FACILITIES

Without limiting the Government's rights or obligations set forth in this contract, the Contractor specifically agrees as follows:

(a) In addition to the cognizant Government Inspector(s) at the Contractor's plant(s), the Contractor shall permit representatives of Government Contract Laboratories and any Government activities as designated by PMS 404 to have badged access to the Contractor's plant(s) in order to observe and examine the Contractor's performance of this contract on a noninterference basis.

(b) The Contractor shall grant representatives of Advisory and Assistance Services Contractors in direct support of

PMS 404 access to the Contractor's plant(s) with the cognizant Government Inspector for purposes of reviewing and otherwise examining all relevant systems and procedures. The Contractor is responsible for entering into any nondisclosure agreement(s) with the other companies to protect its information from unauthorized use or disclosure.

(c) The Contractor shall flow down this requirement to its subcontractors and shall incorporate into each subcontract a provision which provides for access to the subcontractor plant(s) to the same extent as provided in accordance with paragraphs (a) and (b) above.

(d) Nothing in (a) through (c) above shall be deemed to require the Contractor (or any subcontractor) to grant (or agree to grant) access to any area or documentation requiring Security Clearance unless and until the person seeking such access has provided necessary evidence of an appropriate Security Clearance and demonstrated a

"need-to-know".

2.3 ON-SITE GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

The Contractor shall permit and provide facilities for up to one permanent on-site representative(s) of the PMS 404 program office, and/or its delegated representative. The Contractor shall provide office space, desks, chairs, tables, file cabinets, interoffice mail service, internet service, internal and external telephone access with FAX, copier access and computer terminal usage. The designated Government representatives shall be given unimpeded access to all Contractor facilities and technical data and information sources involved in MK54 MOD 0 Array Kit design, fabrication, production, and testing. The Contractor-provided space for the Government Representative shall be convenient to the Contractor’s program office space.

Fulfillment of the requirements of this contract, including procurement of material, assembly and test of any product delivered under this contract is the sole responsibility of the Contractor and shall not be performed by the

Government on-site representative(s).

2.4 DIMINISHING MANUFACTURING SOURCES AND MATERIAL SHORTAGES

(DMSMS) / OBSOLESCENCE MANAGEMENT

The Contractor shall be responsible for identification, resolution and implementation of all DMSMS/Obsolescence issues associated with production and delivery of hardware under this contract in accordance with this clause and the Statement of Work.

(a) Definition.

DoD Regulation 4140.1-R defines DMSMS as the loss or impending loss of manufacturers or suppliers of items or raw materials that cause material shortages that endanger a weapon system’s or equipment’s development, production, or post-production support capability.

(b) Scope.

DMSMS/Obsolescence issues and their resolutions shall be prepared and submitted as set forth in paragraph (c) below:

(1) 45 Days After Contract Award (DAC) and throughout performance of this contract the Contractor shall perform a detailed evaluation of all technical data associated with this contract. Such evaluation shall include, but not be limited to, analysis, identification, and recommended corrections for problems associated with DMSMS/Obsolescence.

(2) The Contractor shall provide solutions to identified DMSMS/Obsolescence which assures that all components, assemblies, and parts thereof, can be produced, fabricated, and assembled in accordance with the requirements of the technical data, corrected as required by this clause.

(c) Notification and Relief.

In the event that the Contractor determines under paragraph (b) above that one or more parts involved in the procurement and/or production of any of the requirements contained in this contract are DMSMS as defined in paragraph (a) above, and reflect a positive or negative cost impact that is greater than or equal to five percent (5%) of the cost proposed for the CLIN unit price in the Contractor’s proposal Offeror Fill-In dated Offeror Fill-In, the

Contractor shall (1) stop procurement and/or production activity for such part(s), and (2) provide written notice to the Contracting Officer within fourteen (14) days after discovering the DMSMS/Obsolescence. The notice shall include the following:

(1) The Contractor’s proposal for performance of the requirements of the contract despite the

DMSMS/Obsolescence.

(2) A description of the difference between the existing contractual requirement and the Contractor’s proposal, the comparative advantages and disadvantages of each, a justification when the proposed solution uses an item that has one or more function(s) or characteristic(s) that is different from the

DMSMS/obsolete item, the effect of the change on the end item’s performance, and any pertinent objective test data.

(3) A list and analysis of the contract requirements that must be changed if the Contractor’s proposal is accepted, including any suggested specification revisions.

(4) Identification of the unit to which the change applies.

(5) The Contractor shall submit a separate, detailed cost estimate for the affected portions of the existing contract requirement. The cost impact associated shall take into account the Contractor’s allowable development and implementation costs, including any amount attributable to subcontracts under the

Subcontracts paragraph of this clause.

(6) A description and estimate of costs the Government may incur in implementing the change.

(7) A prediction of any affects the proposed change would have on collateral costs to the agency.

(8) A statement of the time by which a contract modification accepting the change must be issued in order to achieve the maximum cost reduction, noting any effect on the contract completion time or delivery schedule.

(9) Identification of any previous submissions of a proposal to address the DMSMS/Obsolescence issue, including the dates submitted, the agencies and contract numbers involved, and previous Government actions, if known.

(d) Approval/Rejection Requirements.

The Contractor shall notify the Government in writing of OEM or other obsolescence notices within 15 days of receipt or gaining knowledge of an obsolete part, including the last order date. The Government will either approve or reject all DMSMS/Obsolescence proposals by providing written notice to the Contractor within forty-five (45) days after receipt of the notice required by section (c) above by the Contracting Officer. The Government will provide explanation for any rejection. Where the Contracting Officer provides notification of approval, the

Contractor’s obligations relating to such DMSMS/Obsolescence proposal shall be discharged to the extent that the deficiency is corrected. If in the judgment of the Government the incorporation of such approved

DMSMS/obsolescence change does not correct the deficiency, the Contractor shall remain responsible for resubmitting and obtaining acceptance of a proposal to resolve the DMSMS/Obsolescence issue.

(e) Schedule and Cost.

The identification of DMSMS/Obsolescence issues and the necessary correction thereof shall not automatically constitute a change as identified under the Changes clause identified herein or result in either schedule or cost relief to the Contractor.

(f) DMSMS/Obsolescence Disputes.

Failure of the parties to agree upon any determination of the necessity for, or the designation of, a change to be made under this provision within 90 days after the Government rejection determination cited above in paragraph

(b) shall be a dispute within the meaning of the “Disputes” clause of this contract.

(g) Rights and Remedies.

The rights and remedies of the Government provided in this provision are in addition to and do not limit any rights afforded to the Government by any other clause of this contract.

(h) Subcontracts.

The terms and conditions of this clause flow down to all subcontracts at all tiers.

(i) Resolution and Funding.

If any DMSMS/Obsolescence issues arise as a result of a Government issued change, the provisions of FAR 52.243-

1 CHANGES – FIXED-PRICE or 52.243-2 CHANGES – COST REIMBURSEMENT (as applicable) shall be followed.

(j) Production Methods and Processes.

Changes to the TDP deliverable, which are recommended solely to permit performance in accordance with the

Contractor’s or subcontractor’s production methods or processes shall not be submitted under this clause.

Engineering Change Proposals (ECP) shall not be submitted under this clause but shall be submitted in accordance with the ECP requirements of this contract.

(k) Rights in Technical Data.

Any and all data submitted by the Contractor as required under paragraph (c) of this clause, shall be provided to the

Government with rights in accordance with the applicable data rights clauses of this contract.

2.5 CONTRACTOR USE OF COMMERCIAL COMPUTER SOFTWARE, INCLUDING

OPEN SOURCE SOFTWARE

(a) Contractor Use of Commercial Computer Software, including Open Source Software. Open source software is often licensed under terms that require the user to make the user's modifications to the open source software or any software that the user ‘combines’ with the open source software freely available in source code form pursuant to distribution obligations in the license.

(1) The Government accepts the terms of the licenses for the Commercial Computer Software listed in the

Attachment 4 Use of Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) / Commercial Computer Software (CCS) List of this Contract and any associated CCS documentation.

(2) In cases where the Contractor proposes to use open source software while performing under a Government contract, regardless of whether the open source software is delivered, the Contractor shall not: (i) create, or purport to create, any Government distribution obligations with respect to the Government computer software deliverables; or (ii) grant, or purport to grant, to any third party any rights to or immunities under

Government intellectual property or Government data rights to the Government Computer Software deliverables.

(3) In addition to paragraph (a)(2), prior to using any CCS that is not listed in Attachment 4, the Contractor shall additionally evaluate each license for CCS, including open source software, and confirm that each of the following requirements are satisfied:

(i) a license for a particular CCS shall be compatible with all other licenses for other CCS that are or will be linked to, integrated with, or associated with the particular CCS, including when the particular commercial computer software and the other CCS are used with the same computer program;

(ii) a license for CCS shall not impose a Government distribution obligation on computer software linked to, or integrated with, or associated with the commercial computer software;

(iii) a license for CCS shall not impose a future Government distribution obligation that is foreseeable by the Contractor;

(iv) a license for CCS shall not be terminated by the Contractor’s use of the commercial computer software in performing under the contract; and

(v) the Contractor’s cost to comply with this requirement presents no additional cost to the Government.

(4) If, as a result of the Contractor’s evaluation, the Contractor is able to affirmatively make all of the determinations in paragraphs (a)(2) (i) through (a)(3)(v) above, then the Contractor may immediately begin using the CCS. Within thirty days, the Contractor shall notify the contracting officer in writing that the

Contractor has evaluated the CCS use and the CCS license and made each determination required in paragraphs (a)(3)(i) through (a)(3)(v) above. This notification shall also include all information regarding the identification and proposed use(s) of the CCS in the format required by Attachment 4.

(5) If the Contractor is unable to satisfy all of the requirements in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (a)(3)(v) above for a particular CCS license, then the Contractor may not use the CCS covered by the particular license without prior approval by the Contracting Officer. The Contractor shall request approval to use the otherwise prohibited subject CCS from the Contracting Officer by providing a written notification in the format provided in Attachment 4, addressing (i) the name and version number of the software; (ii) the name of the applicable license(s); (iii) a brief description of the technical use and implementing approach; (iv) a

“yes/no” indication of whether the Contractor has made, or will make, any modifications to the source code;

(v) the software website; and in addition (vi) an identification of the reason(s) that the Contractor was unable to make the determinations in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) through (a)(3)(v) above. The Contractor shall attach a copy of the subject CCS license to its request.

(b) The Contracting Officer will incorporate CCS for which the necessary determinations are made by the

Contractor, or which are otherwise approved by the Contracting Officer, into Attachment 4 by modification to the contract.

(c) Open source software meets the definition of “commercial computer software” in accordance with DFARS

252.227- 7014 and DoD CIO memorandum dated October 16, 2009.

2.6 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

The Contractor shall manage all Government Furnished Property (GFP) in accordance with FAR 52.245-1. The

Contractor shall provide accountability, security and storage for the GFP provided. The Contractor shall inspect and inventory all GFP received and identify and report any discrepancies/ and deficiencies.

2.7 WORK FOR PRIVATE PARTY AGREEMENTS

The Contractor may enter into Work For Private Party Agreements (WFPPAs) with Government test facilities to support the requirements identified in this contract. WFPPAs are separate contractual instruments. The Government shall not be responsible for conflicts, delays, or disruptions to any work required under this contract related to the

WFPPAs.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

1. BASIS FOR AWARD

The contract will be awarded in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.215-1. The

Government intends to make one award under this solicitation which will be made to the responsible, responsive

Offeror who represents the best overall value to the Government, considering the factors identified below. In making its best value determination, the Government considers the non-price factors (Volume I of the proposal), to be significantly more important than price (Volume II of the proposal). However, the significance of price as an evaluation factor will increase with the degree of equality in the overall technical merit of proposals. The

Government reserves the right to award the contract to the Offeror with the higher total evaluated price; if a higher technical rating and/or past performance assessment would yield the best value to the Government.

The contract will be awarded to a responsible Offeror who has been granted a SECRET facility security clearance by a military department and whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, represents the best value to the

Government, price and other factors considered. “Other factors” shall include all of those evaluation factors that are described in this Section M.

The offers must be both realistic in technical approach and reasonable in the total evaluated price. Offers that are unrealistic in terms of technical approach or are unrealistically low in price for CPFF CLINs, may indicate a lack of understanding of the complexity and risk associated with the contract requirements. Unrealistic offers may not be considered for award. The ability of the Offeror to perform all aspects of the anticipated contract from inception to completion will be considered as part of the overall “cost realism” evaluation for Cost and CPFF items and “price reasonableness” for FFP and FPI items.

Pursuant to FAR 52.215-1(f), Instructions to Offerors-Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2017), the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award the contract without discussions. Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost or price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

The Government will review the information required by Section L to determine if the Offeror has met the minimum submission requirements. No award will be made to an Offeror that fails to submit required documents.

Offers submitted on a basis other than Free on Board (F.O.B.) Origin shall be rejected as non-responsive.

Proposals will be evaluated on how well the proposals meet or exceed the requirements of the solicitation based on the Factors set forth below. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to provide information that clearly demonstrates its ability to satisfactorily respond to the solicitation requirements and the factors listed below.

Each factor will be evaluated on a stand-alone basis; however, information contained in one factor of the proposal may be used to assist the Government in evaluating other factors of the proposal.

In accordance with FAR 52.217-5, except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the

Government’s best interest, the evaluated price will include options; however, the evaluation of options does not in any way obligate the Government to exercise any option.

2. EXPLANATION OF RATINGS

2.1 Definitions

Strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies may be identified for any portion of an Offeror’s proposal.

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

Strength is an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Weakness means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Risk, as it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Performance Confidence Assessment is an evaluation of the likelihood (or Government’s confidence) that the offeror will successfully perform the solicitation’s requirements; the evaluation is based upon past performance information.

Recency, as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the time that has elapsed since the past performance reference occurred. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant.

Relevancy, as it pertains to past performance information, is a measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance.

2.2 Adjectival Ratings for Technical Approach, Quality Approach, and Management

Approach Factors

The "Adjectival Ratings" to be used for evaluating all Technical Factors except for Past Performance are listed below. A proposal need not have all aspects of the rating description to be rated accordingly.

Outstanding: An outstanding proposal meets requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements. The proposal contains multiple strengths and no deficiencies.

Good: A good proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal contains at least one strength and no deficiencies.

Acceptable: An acceptable proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements. Proposal has no strengths or deficiencies.

Marginal: A marginal proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Unacceptable: An unacceptable does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable.

2.3 Risk Ratings for Technical Approach, Quality Approach, and Management

Approach Factors

Each technical factor except for Past Performance will be evaluated for the risk associated with the proposed approach and will receive a separate risk rating utilizing the definitions below. A proposal need not have all aspects of the rating description to be rated accordingly.

High: Is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Moderate: Can potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

Low: Has little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

2.4 Adjectival Ratings for Past Performance Factor

There are two (2) aspects to the Government’s evaluation of an Offeror’s Past Performance: relevancy and performance confidence. Initially, the Government will determine the relevancy of an Offeror’s past performance and issue an “Adjectival Rating” for relevancy. Then the Government will then issue a second “Adjectival Rating” for the confidence level for successful performance of the contract based on the Offeror’s past performance. Thus, the overall Past Performance rating will be a combination of the relevancy rating and the performance confidence rating. For example, an Offeror could have a past performance rating of very relevant, substantial confidence.

The "Adjectival Ratings" to be used for evaluating the Past Performance factors are listed below. A proposal need not have all aspects of the rating description to be rated accordingly.

2.4.1 Relevancy Ratings

Very Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved much of the magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and

Not Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and

2.4.2 Performance Confidence Ratings

Substantial Confidence: A Substantial Confidence rating indicates that based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence: A Satisfactory Confidence rating indicates that based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence: A Neutral Confidence rating indicates no recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence: A Limited Confidence rating indicates that based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence: A No Confidence rating indicates the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

3. GENERAL

In selecting the offer that represents the best overall value to the Government, the following will be evaluated:

Factor 1: Technical Approach

Factor 2: Quality Approach

Factor 3: Past Performance

Factor 4: Management Approach

Factor 5: Government Total Evaluated Price (GTEP)

The factors are listed in descending order of importance. The Government considers the non-price factors, to be significantly more important than price. However, the significance of price as an evaluation factor will increase with the degree of equality in the overall technical merit of proposals.

3.1 VOLUME I: TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The technical merit evaluation will be based upon the following factors.

3.1.1 CHAPTER 1.0 – Factor 1: Technical Approach

The Offeror’s proposed technical approach will be evaluated based upon the information submitted by the Offeror.

All information will be reviewed in detail to ascertain the quality and depth of the responses to the information required by Section L. The evaluation will consider how well the information demonstrates the adequacy of the

Offeror’s technical approach including: transition to production; technical data; obsolescence; Highly Accelerated

Stress Screen (HASS)/ Proof of Life (POL) testing; manufacturing processes, throughput, & facilities; Electrostatic

Discharge (ESD) control program; and experience. The evaluation will consider the capability of manufacturing and delivering MK 54 MOD 0 Array Kits and other required deliverables which are expected to meet or exceed the specified performance and other requirements of the solicitation.

3.1.1.1 Transition to Production

The Offeror’s approach for implementing their manufacturing processes for production and meet the specified performance requirements will be evaluated to determine the degree to which the Offeror addresses a general understanding of the level of effort necessary to produce and test the deliverables requested on this contract. The

Offeror’s Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) will be evaluated for its completeness to address the requirements of Section C, Section L, and Exhibit A. The Offeror’s Systems Engineering Management Plan

(SEMP) will be evaluated on its sufficient evidence that the SETRs will accomplish the requirements in this solicitation.

3.1.1.2 Technical Data

The Offeror’s approach to validate and deliver products in accordance with the Technical Data Packages (TDP) for this contract, will be evaluated for understanding and ability to meet the contractual requirements. This includes maintaining updates to the TDPs. Any proposed alternatives to specifications or standards will be evaluated to determine the degree to which the alternative specifications or standards meet the requirements of the MK 54 MOD

0 Array Kits.

The proposal will be evaluated on the extent to which proprietary or otherwise limited or restricted components, subsystems, interfaces, and software are used. Rights in technical data/computer software/computer software documentation (TD/CS/CSD) will be evaluated to determine the degree to which the proposal provides the level of technical data rights (commercial and non-commercial) and rights in computer software that will enable the Navy to adequately sustain the MK 54 MOD 0 Array Kit over their expected life cycle to include maintainability, reparability, and competitive re-procurement.

If an Offeror proposes to deliver any commercial or noncommercial TD/CS/CSD with less than Government

Purpose Rights (GPR), the Offeror shall describe the impact on the Government’s ability to use, modify, release or disclose such TD, CS, or CSD. The use of proprietary algorithms, designs, processes or interfaces shall be described. The Offeror shall provide justification and rationale for all intellectual property and data rights assertions.

3.1.1.3 Obsolescence

The strategy to manage obsolescence during the contract’s period of performance will be evaluated. Proposed designs and associated risks to address obsolescence issues (Attachment 1 –Contract Baseline and Attachment 2 –

GFI) will be evaluated based upon their accuracy, realism, and completeness. The list of all items at risk of becoming obsolete during the contract period and its technical approach to address this obsolescence risk will be evaluated for completeness and for how the data was obtained. The Offeror’ obsolescence strategy and any proposed redesign tasks will be evaluated to ensure that the Offeror has assessed their relationship to the

Government acquisition approach detailed in this solicitation, the proposed design, the Offeror risks, and the

Government proposed schedule as well as their impact to the Government acquisition approach.

3.1.1.4 Highly Accelerated Stress Screen (HASS) and Proof of Life (POL) Testing The Offeror’s plans to implement Highly Accelerated Stress Screen (HASS) and Proof of Life (POL) testing will be evaluated for its ability to meet performance requirements and realism of schedule, justification that test equipment resources are available to meet delivery schedule, and the adequateness of the throughput analysis of the one-hundred percent (100%) HASS for production factory acceptance test in identifying chokepoints and ability to meet delivery quantities proposed.

3.1.1.5 Manufacturing Processes, Throughput, & Facilities

The Offeror’s Manufacturing Production Throughput Analysis and the Offeror’s facilities descriptions will be evaluated for the ability to meet delivery requirements of Section F, Attachment 8, Shipping Instructions Data. The

Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of production processes, procedures, collection and storage of test data, material handling and controls, and evaluate their knowledge in regards to the critical manufacturing procedures and ceramic element manufacturing processes involved in MK 54 MOD 0 Array Kit production. The

Offeror’s Material and Manufacturing Process Flow Chart will be evaluated for completeness and technical merit.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s GFE Factory Test Equipment maintenance, sparing and engineering approach to support throughput analysis for its ability to meet production requirements.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of Offeror’s production level documentation and component level assembly for technical completeness.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s existing manufacturing facility and how that facility will be used, any specialized test facilities for environmental testing and associated goals, physical manufacturing test capabilities for production verification and factory acceptance testing, and the outsource testing capabilities plan if required.

3.1.1.6 Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) Control Program

The Offeror’s Electrostatic Discharge (ESD) control program will be evaluated for effectiveness to minimize effects to ESD sensitive components, assemblies, and equipment.

3.1.1.7 Technical Experience

The Offeror’s experience will be evaluated in regards to similarities between previous manufacturing efforts including critical processes such as fabrication of ceramic items with an emphasis on ceramic ring manufacturing, element assembly manufacturing, element and element mount epoxy bond manufacturing, and critical manufacturing procedures experience.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s provided explanations and determine relevancy for how previous experiences would allow the Offeror to meet requirements and minimize risk of this contract.

The Government will evaluate the Key Personnel resumes and narratives provided in Volume 1 to when evaluating the experience of the Offeror.

The Government will evaluate the offeror's previous experience for relevancy to developing software of similar size and complexity as that being proposed with this solicitation, The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s response for knowledge of and thorough response to paragraphs (a) and (b) of HQ L-2-0017 SOFTWARE

DEVELOPMENT AND CMMI OR EQUIVALENT EXPERIENCE.

3.1.2 CHAPTER 2.0 – Factor 2: Quality Approach

The Offeror’s approach to quality will be reviewed to assess to what extent it meets requirements to the information required by Section L. The evaluation will consider the Offeror’s quality approach and its merits for success to provide consistent high quality and compliant product deliveries that meet or exceed the requirements of the solicitation. The Quality Approach Factor includes the following significant sections:

Process Quality

Quality Management System

Failure Resolution

Quality Process Flowdown

3.1.2.1 Process Quality

The Offeror’s process flow diagrams and associated details will be evaluated to determine the degree to which the

Offeror addresses a general understanding of the test and inspection points for each Functional Item Replacement

(FIR). The Offeror’s explanation of the Offeror’s continuous process improvement to reduce manufacturing defects will be evaluated for adequacy to meet program quality requirements.

The Offeror’s quality personnel will be evaluated to the degree to which the proposal demonstrates that the quality personnel can manage a quality system and explains the quality personnel roles and responsibilities in regards to manufacturing and product assurance activities. The Offeror’s explanation of their quality personnel’s authority and ability to independently operate and the anticipated line of communication to senior company management will be evaluated for overall effectiveness.

3.1.2.2 Quality Management System

The Offeror’s quality assurance methods and processes will be evaluated to validate design, manufacturing processes, and product assurance to meet all requirements. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated on the degree to which the proposal demonstrates the conformation to ISO or AS9100C certifications.

The Offeror’s Quality Program Plan (QPP) will be evaluated to ensure that deliverables will meet Quality

Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP), Attachment 7, criteria. Proposed Key Quality Indicators (KQIs) will be evaluated for completeness and…