N0010422RFD15 sections L and M.pdf

N0010422RFD15 – Sections L & M

Section L - Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

L.1 INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

(a) This section contains general proposal submission instructions as well as specific proposal requirements for the manufacture of ten (10) NSN 1HS 5975 014552730 L1, ball valve parts kits.

(b) The United States Government (USG) intends to award a firm fixed price contract to the offeror whose proposal offers the overall best value to the USG, considering both non-price and price factors.

(c) Offerors are responsible for confirming with the Contracting Officer (KO) and/or Contracting Specialist

(CS) that the proposal submitted has, in fact, been received by the KO and/or CS.

(d) Offerors shall provide firm fixed pricing per unit. In the event only one offer is received, the USG reserves the right to require the submission of data (e.g., certified cost or pricing data and/or data other than certified cost or pricing data) necessary to validate the reasonableness of the offer, in accordance with DFARS

252.215-7008.

(e) The Government may award without discussions; accordingly, it is the offeror’s responsibility to submit a proposal that conforms to all of the terms and conditions of the solicitation and contains its best offer.

Any questions must be asked within ten (10) calendar days after the date of solicitation issuance. Amendments do not extend this deadline. The Government requires time to respond to all questions.

L.2 Proposal Instructions

(a) Proposals that do not contain information requested in sections L risk rejection. The Government intends to award one contract under this Request for Proposal (RFP).

(b) The proposal shall consist of the following sections:

Volume I – General

Volume II - Technical

Volume III – Past Performance

Volume IV - Small Business Utilization Factor

(c) Offerors shall provide electronic copies in Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel or Portable Document

Format (PDF) format. The Government considers quality of information more important than quantity with attention to clarity, brevity, and logical organization.

(d) The complete proposal, as described above, shall be electronically submitted to the Contract Specialist at jill.sabol@navy.mil no later than the closing date and time specified in the solicitation and any subsequent amendments. Proposals submitted by mail or hand-carried will not be evaluated. Electronic mail proposal submissions shall not exceed a size limit of 10MB. Separate emails are acceptable in order to not exceed the size limit. It is the Contractor’s responsibility to ensure their proposal was successfully received by the Contracting

Office.

(e) Alternate proposals are not authorized

L.3 Proposal Organization Instructions

Offeror(s) shall organize all information intended for the Government to consider, specific to each volume, within its designated volume. Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal volume. Proposals that do not contain the information requested risk the Government’s rating of unacceptable.

Volume I: General:

(a) The offeror shall provide the name, title and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

(b) Solicitation, Offer and Award - The SF 33 shall be submitted fully completed. The offeror is cautioned that the SF 33 must contain an original signature in block 17 of the form. The contractor shall acknowledge all amendments.

(c) Offerors must ensure all solicitation and/or amendment fill-ins and blanks that require information are completed and provided with their proposals.

(d) Section B shall be submitted fully completed and error free. It shall contain the offeror’s prices for the established Contract Line Items Numbers (CLINS).

(e) Section K (Representation, Certifications, and Other Statements of Offerors) – The offeror shall ensure that Section K is submitted thoroughly completed with all blocks in each certification/representation completed truthfully and completely.

(f) Offerors’ proposals shall remain valid for 120 days after the close of the RFP

Volume II: Technical:

(a) Offerors shall provide a Quality Assurance Manual. Only those sources with an acceptable Quality

Assurance Manual are eligible for award under this solicitation. The Navy has found from past experience that

Quality Control is essential to assure personnel safety in critical areas and to provide for the safe operation of submarines and certain systems on surface ships. If an offeror’s Quality Assurance Manual was not previously approved, review of an offeror's Quality Assurance Manual will be accomplished as part of the technical evaluation.

1. An offeror whose Quality Assurance Manual HAS previously been found acceptable by NAVSUP

WSS must submit proof with their offer that NAVSUP WSS has previously accepted their Quality

Assurance Manual (including the date), and (b) proof that NAVSUP WSS has the most current revision of their Quality Assurance Manual.

2. An offeror whose Quality Assurance Manual HAS NOT previously been found acceptable by

NAVSUP WSS must submit a copy of their current Quality Assurance Manual to Jill Sabol at jill.l.sabol.civ@us.navy.mil. If you do not receive a response, please contact Tiana Hammaker at tiana.k.hammaker.civ@us.navy.mil.

(b) The Level I/Subsafe/Deep Submergence Systems-Scope of Certification (DSS-SOC)/Fly-by-Wire

Programs require offerors to have a Quality System that meets the requirements of MIL-I-45208, MIL-Q-9858, or

ISO 9001:2000. As part of this Quality System, the offeror's calibration system must meet the requirements of

MIL-STD-45662A, ANSI/NCSL-Z540.3-2006, or ISO 10012-1. If an offeror uses a calibration system other than the three specified herein, that information must be included in the offeror’s technical submission under this sub-factor.

Volume III: Past Performance Factor:

(a) The Government considers past performance a predictor of future contract performance. The

Government bases its degree of confidence the offeror will complete the requirements in accordance with the contract terms on the offeror's demonstrated record of recent, relevant performance. Each offeror shall submit its past performance information no more than two (2) contract examples with its initial proposal representing recent, relevant performance under Government and/or commercial contracts.

1. Offerors should limit examples to those involving its performance as a prime or first tier subcontractor only. The Government is not required to interview any points of contact identified by offerors. The

Government reserves the right to use data provided in the offeror’s proposal and data obtained from any other sources of information to evaluate Past Performance including the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting

System (CPARS) or the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure the problems it finds in the information provided by the offeror. The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information remains with the offeror.

2. Recent contracts are those that produced deliverables under prime contracts, task orders, delivery orders, subcontracts, within three (3) years prior to issuance of this solicitation, as well as contracts that continue today. The Government reserves the right to consider any significant past performance after the solicitation closing date and prior to award.

3. Relevant means performance that demonstrates the offeror’s successful performance on current and/or prior efforts involving the same or similar manufacturing and quality assurance processes. Other factors of potential consideration to determine relevance include the degree to which the contracts are comparable with regard to the complexity of the manufacturing processes, size of the production quantities or total dollar value to the solicited effort. In-house performance holds greater relevance and therefore, a greater predictor of success than outsourcing.

4. The Government determines which information is relevant for evaluation purposes, though the offeror may highlight those efforts it feels are most similar in scope and magnitude of effort and complexities to the requirements of this solicitation. The Past Performance information submitted in this Volume shall include contract descriptions with at least the following information:

(i) Contract number, Award date, Total contract dollar value.

(ii) Item description, nomenclature, NSN, Part Number, quantity, and period of performance.

(iii) Name and reference point of contact at the government or commercial entity for where the contract performed.

(iv) Original delivery date of the contract at time of award as well as the final delivery date and an explanation of any difference between these two dates.

5. The Past Performance Factor consists of timeliness of delivery. Offeror shall provide evidence of how it met interim milestones, controlled supplier performance, provided reliable delivery, was responsive to technical direction, and completed work on time.

Volume IV: Small Business Participation Factor:

(a) The offeror shall submit a Small Business Participation plan. As required by DFARS 215.304, Small

Business Participation is an evaluation factor in this acquisition. Small Business Participation is evaluated in order to support the Government policy that Small Businesses be provided maximum practicable opportunities in

Government acquisitions. This section applies to all offerors (large and small). The Government will evaluate the degree to which the offeror's Small Business Participation plan demonstrates the offeror's commitment to maximizing opportunities for small businesses. The Government will consider both the degree to which an offeror meets or exceeds any single socio-economic category, as well as the number of socioeconomic categories that an offeror meets or exceeds. Small businesses can claim their own self-performance as part of the small business percentage. This is NOT an assessment of a small business subcontracting plan (IAW FAR 19.7). The government will consider the following:

1. Proposed Small Business Participation

a. Definitions:

i. Participant, as used in this factor, includes the offeror as well as any subcontractor.

ii. Participation, as used in this factor, includes the work (dollars and %) to be performed by the offeror, as well as the work (dollars and %) to be performed by subcontractors.

b. Proposed Small Business Participation\

i. The Government has established the following objectives for this procurement, based on the estimated contract value (using the estimated quantity for each ordering period):

Small Business Minimum Quantitative Requirement (MQR) – 100%

ii. The offeror's proposed percentage of participation identified in the Contract

Participation Plan will be evaluated against the Government's MQR for each category.

2. The Government may, at its discretion, evaluate any additional information provided by the offeror in its small business participation proposal.

SECTION M.1 - Basis for Award: Evaluation Factors for Award (Section M)

The Government will evaluate proposals submitted in accordance with this section and will make a determination considering the following factors: (1) Technical (2) Price (3) Past Performance (4) Small Business Utilization

The Government plans to award one contract to the offeror that communicates the best value in its proposal. The tradeoff determination seeks to identify each proposal’s relative strengths, and weaknesses. This means the

Government may award the contract to an offeror that does not offer the lowest price. Selection decisions consider an evaluation of the factors indicated above using an adjectival rating system that grades an offeror’s non-price factors. Price will be evaluated, but not adjectivally rated.

SECTION M.2 - Order of Importance

All evaluation factors other than price when combined are significantly more important the price. Within the non-price factors, technical acceptability is the most important. Vendors not meeting the technical requirements will not be considered. Past performance is more important than small business utilization.

The Government reserves the right to make the award to an offeror other than the offeror that submits the lowest overall evaluated price, using a Best Value trade-off analysis method of procurement. Offerors must receive a rating of Acceptable or better on the small business participation factor and on the technical evaluation factor to be eligible for award. Offerors must receive a rating higher than no confidence on past performance to be considered.

SECTION M.3 – Evaluation Factors

The purpose of the proposal evaluation is to ensure competitive proposals are examined impartially and comprehensively. The evaluators may verify any statements and representations made in the offeror’s proposal.

Each proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the criteria set forth below.

1 – Past Performance Factor Evaluation:

The Government considers past performance information a predictor of future contract performance. The

Government bases its degree of confidence it has that the offeror will successfully complete the requirements in accordance with the contract terms on the offeror's demonstrated record of recent and relevant performance.

This evaluation is separate and distinct from the Contracting Officer’s responsibility determination. Assessment of the offeror’s past performance translates a means of evaluating the relative capability of the offeror(s) to achieve the RFP’s requirements.

The Government may consider the recency, degree of relevance, source and context of the past performance information it evaluates as well as general trends in performance, and demonstrated corrective actions. A significant achievement, problem, problem resolution, or lack of relevant data can become an important consideration in the assessment process. A negative finding may result in a lower past performance confidence assessment rating.

Absent any recent and relevant past performance history, the Government assigns an Unknown Confidence

(Neutral) Past Performance rating to the offeror. Without past performance information, the Government does not consider the offeror’s past performance favorably or unfavorably.

The Government may use information obtained from other sources to conduct past performance evaluation, or it may use information with regard to other contracts performed by the offeror of which it has knowledge, whether or not those contracts are disclosed to the Government by the offeror.

The Government will rate each offeror on its recent and relevant contractual information. The definitions for recent and relevant are provided in Section L of the solicitation. The Government will assign a relevant rating in accordance with the below table.

Recency Assessment:

The Government will conduct an assessment of the past performance information to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be on-going with at least six (6) months of performance history or must have been performed during the past three (3) years preceding the issuance date of this solicitation. For contracts that began more than three years before the date of solicitation issuance, only the year(s) that were partially or completely performed in those three years will be evaluated as recent. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be further evaluated.

Relevancy Ratings:

Relevancy of the past performance information will be determined as follows:

Only information determined to be relevant (any level of relevancy) and meeting the standard for recent as defined in Section L will be further considered in the past performance evaluation.

Performance Confidence Assessment:

The Government will assess how well the offeror performed on recent and relevant contracting efforts. The

Government will use information presented in the offeror’s Past Performance proposal volume in addition to information independently obtained from outside sources, to include assessment reports, databases, interviews, and other sources. An overall Past Performance factor rating will be assigned according to the table below.

The Government may use additional, external sources to evaluate past performance. These sources include, but are not limited to, PPIRS, FAPIIS, or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and the Defense Contract Management Agency. The Government also has the right to consider information regarding an offeror’s past performance up to date of award. It is the responsibility of the offeror to provide complete past performance information and thorough explanations as required by Section L. The Government is not obligated to make another request for the required information.

Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a No Confidence rating, since problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems. The offeror is required to demonstrate management actions employed in overcoming any problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified, clearly.

2 - Small Business Participation Factor

As required by DFARS 215.304, Small Business Participation is an evaluation factor in this acquisition. The offeror shall submit a Small Business Participation plan. Small Business Participation is evaluated in order to support the

Government policy that Small Businesses be provided maximum practicable opportunities in Government acquisitions. This section applies to all offerors (large and small). This is NOT an assessment of a small business subcontracting plan (IAW FAR 19.7). The Government will evaluate the degree to which the offeror's Small

Business Participation plan demonstrates the offeror's commitment to maximizing opportunities for small businesses. The Government will consider both the degree to which an offeror meets or exceeds any single socio-economic category, as well as the number of socio-economic categories that an offeror meets or exceeds. Small businesses can claim their own self performance as part of the small business percentage.

The offeror's proposed percentage of participation (goals) identified in the Contract Participation Plan will be evaluated against the Government's objective for each category. An offeror proposing goals less than the objectives listed below will not automatically receive an unacceptable rating. Small Business – 100%

The Government will develop one overall Small Business Participation rating for the offeror based on the evaluation criteria described above. Small Business Participation will be rated as follows:

3 – Technical Evaluation Factor

The Quality Assurance Manual will be evaluated based on offerors documented procedures and records for product verifications (including calibration records for inspection and equipment), documented review of sub-tier supplier capability and a documented process for managing non-conforming material. These requirements are for a minimum acceptable quality system for NAVUP WSS L1/SOC contracts in accordance with MIL-I-45208. Offerors with a documented quality system will be evaluated to verify each element meets the ISO 9001 standards.

The Technical Factor evaluation provides an assessment of the offeror’s capability to satisfy the Government’s minimum requirement.

The Technical Factor will receive one of the adjectival ratings defined below. The sub factor ratings will be used to determine an overall rating for the factor.

Table A-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

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

4 – Price Evaluation Factor

The Government considers the Price Factor Evaluation factor but will not use an adjectival rating to rate offerors.

The Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requires the Government award contracts at fair and reasonable prices.

The Government uses price analysis to determine price reasonableness, balance, and whether proposals reflect an understanding of the required effort required. The Primary Contracting Officer may use additional analysis techniques as needed. In accordance with DFARS clause 252.215-7008, the Government reserves the right to require Certified Cost, Certified Pricing Data, or data other than certified cost and pricing data in the event this solicitation garners only one offer.

Except when it is determined in accordance with FAR 17.206(b) not to be in the Government's best interests, the

Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).