ATTACHMENT_1.pdf

ATTACHMENT 1

INSTRUCTIONS CONDITIONS AND NOTICES

TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1.1 The proposal instructions in this section are designed to assist offerors in preparing a complete response that reflects a full understanding of the approach proposed to accomplish all contractual requirements. Section M details how proposals will be evaluated.

1.2 Proposals shall be sufficiently detailed to enable the Government to perform an accurate and complete evaluation strictly from the proposal contents. However, in the area of Past Performance the

Government may use data obtained from other sources. The offeror’s proposal shall consist of five volumes. Files shall not contain classified data.

Volume I – Solicitation, Offer and Award Document, and Section K, Representations and

Certifications, Volume II – Technical, Volume III – Past Performance, Volume IV – Cost/Price, Volume V – Small Business Participation Plan

1.3 Offeror’s Best Terms

The Government may award without discussions however reserves the right to enter into discussions.

Therefore, the offeror’s initial proposal shall contain the offeror’s best terms for Technical, Past

Performance, and Cost/Price, and Small Business Participation Plan. If the Government contemplates award without discussions, the offerors may be given the opportunity in accordance with FAR 15.306 to clarify certain aspects of their proposals (e.g., the relevance of an offeror’s past performance information and adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond) or to resolve minor or clerical errors.

1.4 Competitive Range

If discussions are to be conducted, the PCO will establish a competitive range (as set forth in FAR

15.306(c)) based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria. If the PCO determines that an offeror’s proposal should not be included in the competitive range, the proposal will be eliminated from consideration for award and written notice of the decision will be provided to the unsuccessful offeror in accordance with FAR subpart 15.503.

If the PCO 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 PCO 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.

1.5 Final Proposal Revisions

If discussions are deemed necessary with offeror(s), upon completion of those discussions, the PCO will request that the offeror provide a Final Proposal Revision (FPR). Revisions to any volume(s) shall be submitted by providing two hard copies, one “clean” copy, and one with “track changes”. Matching CD-R copies shall also be submitted.

The offeror is advised that any changes to the proposal in the FPR shall be fully addressed and/or explained and reflected in the proposed price. Failure to comply with this requirement can adversely influence the evaluation of the proposal. The PCO will establish a common due date and time for submission of the FPR.

When final proposal revisions are requested, any revisions or non-compliance with contract terms and conditions submitted in the final proposal revision may not be subject to further discussion or negotiation and may render the offer unacceptable to the Government. This provision is not intended to restrict the offeror’s opportunity to revise figures, e.g., prices, discounts, or percentage rates. Rather, it is intended to preclude any misunderstandings by the Government that could result if new or revised terms and conditions submitted in the final proposal revision have not been fully disclosed, discussed, and understood during discussions or negotiations. Hence, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the final proposal revision, may render the offer unacceptable to the

Government.

1.6 Pre/Post Award Debriefings

Pre/Post award debriefings will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.505 and 15.506, respectively.

1.7 Errors/Omissions

If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, ambiguities, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the PCO in writing with supporting rationale no later than five (5) business days after release of this solicitation.

1.8 Mistakes

Mistakes in an offeror’s proposal discovered after award shall be handled in accordance with FAR

14.407-4 as referenced in FAR 15.508.

1.9 Request for Proposal (RFP) Revisions/Amendments

The Government reserves the right to revise or amend any portion of this solicitation. Such revisions or amendments will be available on the FedBizOpps website at https://www.fbo.gov/. Potential offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to

FedBizOpps. If such amendments require material changes, the proposal due date may be extended at the discretion of the PCO to enable an offeror to revise its proposal. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new proposal due date and time.

1.10 Contracting Officers Responsibility Determination

Prior to awarding a contract, the contracting officer must perform a responsibility determination for the selected contractor. The standards of contractor responsibility and the requirement for the Contracting

Officer to make and document a responsibility determination are set forth in FAR 9.104 and 9.105. To be determined responsible, a prospective contractor must:

Have adequate financial resources to perform the contract, or the ability to obtain them.

Be able to comply with the required or proposed delivery or performance schedule, taking into consideration all existing commercial and governmental business commitments.

Have a satisfactory performance record. A prospective contractor shall not be determined responsible or non-responsible solely on the basis of a lack of relevant performance history, except as provided in FAR 9.104-2.

Have a satisfactory record of integrity and business ethics.

Have the necessary organization, experience, accounting and operational controls, and technical skills, or the ability to obtain them (including, as appropriate, such elements as production control procedures, property control systems, quality assurance measures, and safety applicable to materials to be produced or services to be performed by the prospective contractor and subcontractors).

Have the necessary production, construction, and technical equipment and facilities, or the ability to obtain them.

Be otherwise qualified and eligible to receive an award under applicable laws and regulations.

2.0 Proposal Content

2.1 Proposal Acceptability

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as factors or sub-factors to be eligible for award. By submission of its offer, the offeror consents and agrees to all solicitation requirements and identified constraints. Non-conformance with the instructions provided may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation, or rejection of an offeror’s proposal, rendering it ineligible for award.

2.2 The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation by the Government and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet the areas to be evaluated. Offerors shall assume that the

Government has no prior knowledge of their experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror's proposal. The offeror’s proposal shall demonstrate that the offeror possesses the technical expertise, management experience, and successful record of past performance to perform all requirements of the SOW.

The offeror’s proposal shall include all of the information requested and shall comply fully with these n L instructions. Failure to do so may cause the offerors proposal to be eliminated from consideration for award. Offerors are reminded to properly mark their proposal documents which contain proprietary or restricted information.

2.3 All offeror’s proposal(s) shall be valid at least 180 days after the RFP closing date. The offeror shall make a clear statement that the proposal is valid until the applicable date as referenced above and in the RFP. NOTE: IF THE PROPOSAL IS NOT RECEIVED BY THE DUE DATE/TIME SPECIFIED, THE OFFEROR’S PROPOSAL IS CONSIDERED LATE IN ACCORDANCE WITH FAR 52.215-1.

3.0 Proposal Organization

3.1 In presenting material in the proposal, the offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. It is the responsibility of the offeror to present enough information to allow the various technical and management approaches, as well as price, to be meaningfully evaluated without discussions.

The offeror must include any data necessary to illustrate the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

3.2 The offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table below. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified. The volumes identified in the table should be separately bound in three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the Proposal Organization paragraphs as noted in the table below.

3.3 Each proposal volume shall be unclassified. Each volume shall be written in Standard English and be complete in and of itself.

3.4 Table 1 shall serve as the offeror’s guide for proposal organization and content by volume.

Proposals shall be limited to five volumes and delivered as follows:

Table 1: Proposal Organization and Content

PROPOSAL

VOLUME

VOLUME CONTENTS PAGE

LIMITATION

REQUIRED # OF

HARD COPIES

DIGITAL

COPIES

Volume I Solicitation, Offer and

Award Document, and

Section K, Representations and Certifications

Unlimited Original 1 CD-R

Volume II Technical 75 Original +3 1 CD-R

Volume III Past Performance 20 Original +1 1 CD-R

Volume IV Cost/Price NA Original +1 1 CD-R

Volume V Small Business

Participation Plan

10 Original +1 1 CD-R

NOTE: Volume Cover Pages, Table of Contents, Tabs/Dividers, List of Tables and Figures, Glossaries/Acronym List, and blank pages are not included in the total page count. Proposals shall be limited in the number of pages specified in the above table. Those pages that exceed the page count in the table for each volume will not be evaluated.

3.5 Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document and any non-narrative sections (e.g. tables, graphs, charts, figures, etc.), the text size shall be no less than Microsoft Word Times New Roman 12 point font, single spaced. Use at least 1-inch margins on the top and bottom and 1-inch side margins. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. In the event the offeror creates an ambiguity, the Government may exercise its own discretion in counting pages. Special considerations will not be given for colors, pictures, or unnecessary graphics.

Other than the electronic media solicited, audio and video recordings, or any other electronic media will not be accepted.

3.6 The Government may need to conduct exchanges with offerors which will be in the form of an

Evaluation Notice (EN). The PCO has the authority to release ENs and provide any clarifications to industry after the legal advisor and SSEB Chairperson have reviewed the ENs or clarification content.

Page format and specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the

ENs to the offerors. ENs may be sent electronically (i.e., via email) at the discretion of the Government.

The EN will request an email or a hardcopy response, and offerors must submit their responses by the time and date specified in the letter. If a hard copy is requested, the EN response shall not be submitted on standard white bond paper. If a hard copy response is requested, the EN responses shall be submitted on a light colored paper to distinguish between the original and clarifications.

3.7 Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics.

Foldout pages may not be used for pages of text. Legible tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, schematics and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Each printed side of a foldout will count as two pages. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the font shall be no smaller than 10 point. All information (except documentation numbers, classification markings, and page numbers) shall be contained within an image area of 9 x 15 inches. Foldout pages shall fold so that the Government can read and evaluate them without removal from proposal binder.

Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume.

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

3.9 Each volume shall contain detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. A Master Table of Contents, contained in Volume I, shall contain a consolidation of the individual Table of Contents for all Volumes (I through V).

3.10 Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections within each Volume. The offeror shall index the sections identified in the Volume Organization outlined in each Volume. Tabs do not count against the page limitations for their respective Volumes.

3.11 Tables and figures can be used to illustrate quantitative or qualitative data. Tables and figures are not required. If provided, each volume shall contain a list of all tables and figures within that volume. The

List of Tables and Figures will not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

3.12 Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Each response to each sub-factor shall be self-contained.

3.13 All copies (original unbound, hard copy, and electronic copy) of an offeror’s proposal must be submitted together in accordance with the scheduled submission date for the particular volumes. All

Prime and team member information must be incorporated into one coherent submittal. Be sure to identify appropriate markings such as the legend at FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data.

3.14 One hardcopy of each volume shall be clearly identified as “original”. The “original” shall be formatted as follows:

1. Clearly marked as “Original”

2. Unbound

3. Printed head-to-foot so that each page can be read when placed in a standard 2-hole file folder

(Note: two-sided pages should be printed in order to flip pages up)

4. Each volume shall have a cover sheet, clearly marked as volume number, “ORIGINAL”, Offeror’s name, solicitation title, and solicitation number.

3.15 Each hard copy volume of the proposal, with the exception of the original, should be separately bound in a three-ring loose-leaf binder, which shall permit the volume to lie flat when open. Staples shall not be used. A cover sheet should be bound in each book, clearly marked with volume number, copy number, offeror’s name, solicitation title, and solicitation number.

3.16 A label should be placed in the spine of each binder clearly identifying the solicitation number, volume number and name, copy number, and offeror’s name.

3.17 Complete electronic volumes shall be submitted in Microsoft Office 2010 or compatible format.

Offerors are permitted to submit documents such as signed letters (i.e., OCI, Consent and Client

Authorization Letters), ORCA and embedded graphics (if applicable) in .pdf format, with the exception of pricing. Pricing spreadsheets should be submitted using MS Excel 2010 or compatible. If files contain links, the links must be intact and maintained through all revisions. Electronic copies will not be password protected. All data and formulas shall be visible/viewable and no fields or data may be hidden.

All electronic copies shall be submitted on CD-R in a protective sleeve. The CD-R and protective sleeve shall be clearly marked as to volume number, offeror’s name, solicitation title, and solicitation number.

Electronic file directory titles and organization shall reflect the titles and organization of these instructions. Each directory shall contain a Microsoft Word file with the Master Table of Contents for that directory. Offerors shall ensure electronic copies on CD-R are virus free.

3.18 The MS Office copies of the proposal shall be an exact duplicate of the “original” paper proposal.

The CD-R’s will also be used for proposal evaluation. The Government will not perform a word-by-word check of the “original” vs. the .doc and .xls versions. If discrepancies are identified between the electronic proposal and the “original” paper proposal, the paper proposal shall prevail.

4.0 VOLUME I – SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENT, AND

REPRESENTATIONS AND CERTIFICATIONS

The offeror shall provide a complete copy of this RFP (including any clause filled in, reps and certs, and any amendments) with the original signature of an official authorized to contractually bind the offeror.

The offeror must complete the following sections within the RFP:

• SF1449 (Blocks 12, 17, 23, 24, 30)

• CLINs, Offerors will populate the estimated price values for FFP CLINs.

• Representations, Certifications and other Statements

Offerors will complete representations, certifications, acknowledgments and statements via the System for Award Management at https://www.sam.gov. A hardcopy shall be included in the Contract Documentation volume. Any additional information shall also be included in this section.

5.0 VOLUME II – TECHNICAL PROPOSAL

The following information is required for evaluation of your technical proposal. Note that Factor 1 is more important than Factor 2. Within Factor 1, all sub-factors are of equal importance.

Factor 1 – Technical Approach

Sub-factor 1.1: Channel Emulator/RF Matrix https://www.sam.gov/

Sub-factor 1.2: Software Defined Radios

Sub-factor 1.3: RF Enclosures

Factor 2 - Contractor Qualifications and Experience

Factor 1: Technical Approach

(a) Sub-factor 1.1: Channel Emulator/RF Matrix

Degree to which the offeror supports mesh networking and input/output port flexibility in the channel emulator/RF matrix (Specification 3.1.1 - 3.1.6)

Degree to which the offeror supports integration with the NRL EMANE emulator, including degree to which channel parameters are supported (Specification 3.1.11)

Degree to which the offeror supports external mobility control of the emulation, including specification of node location, velocity and orientation (Specification 3.1.12)

Degree to which the offeror supports various RF channel models and propagation characteristics

(3.1.10, 3.1.4)

Degree to which the offeror allows for expansion of the number of nodes supported beyond the minimum requirement

Degree to which the offeror supports integration of GPS emulators into the RF matrix

Degree to which the offer meets the threshold key performance parameters

Degree to which the offer meets the objective key performance parameters

Degree to which the channel emulator/RF matrix can be configured to support the maximum number of nodes with the widest bandwidth reasonable while still supporting all of the other functional requirements (specification, 3.1)

Degree to which the channel emulator/RF matrix can be controlled using external controllers via a documented API (Specification, 3.1)

(b) Sub-factor 1.2: Software Defined Radios

Degree to which offeror supports compatibility with the GNU Radio SDR framework, including support for drivers for the Linux operating system

Degree to which the offeror meets the threshold key performance parameters

Degree to which the offeror meets the objective key performance parameters

Degree to which the offeror supports one or more wideband receivers, including support for instaneous bandwidth beyond 500 MHz

(c) Sub-factor 1.3: RF Enclosures

Degree to which the RF enclosures support isolation beyond 80 dB across the supported frequency range

Degree to which the RF enclosures support fitting software defined radios beyond a single Ettus

Research X310

Factor 2: Contractor Qualifications and Experience

The offeror shall clearly state and provide detailed rationale for its proposed technical approach in meeting the requirements of the SOW. The government will assess the relevance and breadth of the offeror’s experience with regard to work in efforts that are of the same complexity and scope as those required to perform the requirements of the contract. Additionally, the government will assess if the offeror possesses experience to meet security (physical, information, etc.) compliance requirements for the requirement.

6.0 VOLUME III – PAST PERFORMANCE

6.1 Offerors shall submit a list of all Government (Federal, State, and local) and private industry contracts (prime and major subcontracts) in performance or awarded during the past 3 years, which are relevant to the efforts of this solicitation. If applicable, Past Performance Information (PPI) should be submitted only for the major subcontractors expected to perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to the overall successful performance. “Major Subcontractor” is defined as a subcontractor whose proposed effort provides at least 10% of the proposed total price of the contract and/or a subcontractor that performs a critical function in the performance of the resulting contract, whether it is technical or financial, and/or have important roles in any high or medium risk areas identified in the offeror’s proposal. Team Members are the entities that make up a joint venture or any other partnership or teaming arrangement that is formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation. PPI can reflect experience at either the Prime contractor or subcontractor level. Offerors must demonstrate how the offeror’s and subcontractors’ past performance meets the relevancy definition in Section M.

6.2 Past Performance Information (PPI): A maximum of ten PPIs may be submitted for the entire team. The team consists of the Prime offeror, its proposed subcontractors and/or joint ventures.

6.3 Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment 3): The offeror is responsible for sending the

PPQ to respondents of their choice who will subsequently submit information to the Government. The offeror shall provide a list of the proposed respondents with two points of contact, current e-mail address and phone numbers in their Past Performance Volume. The Government reserves the right to contact these sources if they do not submit responses by the RFP closing date and to consider them in making a past performance assessment.

6.4 Even though the evaluation of acceptability of Past Performance is separate and distinct from

Determination of Responsibility required by FAR Subpart 9.1, past performance information may be used to support the Determination of Responsibility for the successful offeror. Information provided on the

Past Performance Questionnaires assists the evaluation team in determining the acceptability for past performance.

6.5 Offerors are reminded that while the Government may elect to consider data from other sources, the burden of proving low performance risk rests with the offerors. In the case of offerors for which there is no information on past contract performance or where past contract performance information is not available, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). In this case, the offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of

“neutral.”

7.0 VOLUME IV – COST/PRICE

Failure to comply with RFP requirements for pricing information may result in an adverse assessment of an offeror’s proposal which may reduce or eliminate its chance of being selected for award. When an offeror fails to completely and accurately provide all pricing information required by the RFP, the offeror bears full responsibility for any adverse impact upon the evaluation of its proposal. Price analysis will be utilized to determine a fair and reasonable price. The Cost/Price Factor is weighted, but it is not scored.

7.1 Offeror and Major Subcontractor Compliance Requirements

Prime offeror and major subcontractors must provide hard copies of the cost/price volume in the quantities stated in Table 1. Prime offerors and major subcontractors must also provide electronic copies of their cost/price volumes.

On CD-R disks which must have an external label indicating (1) the name of the offeror and (2) the RFP number. Labeling the CD-R case only does not fulfill this requirement. The CD-R itself must be labeled. The use of a permanent marker to label the CD-Rs by hand is acceptable.

Readable by Microsoft Office Excel and Word 2010.

The Excel Pricing Workbook (EPW) must be provided in Microsoft Excel format and contain all formulas used in developing the proposal. All cells within the EPW must be “unlocked” and without password-protection. All data and formulas shall be visible/viewable and no fields or data may be hidden.

In a case where the Prime offeror’s Cost Volume does not contain full cost information for a specific major subcontractor, the major subcontractor must forward an un-sanitized cost/price volume directly to the Government no later than the closing date of the solicitation. When a cost/price volume submission is made directly to the Government, the major subcontractor must clearly identify the Prime offeror and

RFP to which their submitted cost data applies. Also, all major subcontractor cost/price volume submissions made directly to the Government must include both an electronic and hard copy submittal for inclusion into the offeror’s Cost/Price Volume. Major Subcontractor submissions must conform to the same compliance standards set forth as applicable to the Prime offeror (including electronic submissions).

Alternatively, in lieu of direct submission to the Government, major subcontractors may provide un-sanitized electronic and hard copy submittals in a sealed envelope to the Prime offeror for inclusion with the Prime offeror cost/price volume submittal to the Government. The envelope(s) or package(s) must remain sealed and be placed within or attached to the Prime offeror’s cost volume.

The offeror must include proposed price, by Contractor Fiscal Year (CFY) and detailed by Contract Line

Item Number (CLIN). The offeror must define its CFY (for example January – December).

Prime offerors and major subcontractors must propose in accordance with the CLIN structure.

7.2 Cost or Pricing Data Requirements

It is anticipated that pricing of this action will be based on adequate price competition; therefore, Prime offerors and major subcontractors are not required to submit certified cost or pricing data. If after receipt of proposals, the PCO determines that adequate price competition does not exist, the Government may require certified cost or pricing data (see FAR 15.406-2, Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data).

The Government requires all Prime offerors and major subcontractors provide data other than certified cost and pricing data using the EPW along with an accompanying narrative and any necessary information to substantiate the cost reasonableness. Note that minor subcontractors are not required to provide EPW and accompanying narratives. However, Prime offerors and major subcontractors must include minor subcontractor prices in the EPW Formats. If necessary, the Government may request additional minor subcontractor cost data during discussions.

7.3 Price/Cost Reasonableness

The offeror must provide sufficiently detailed offers to demonstrate price/cost reasonableness. The burden of proof for price/cost reasonableness of proposed price/costs rests with the offeror.

Price/Cost will not be scored or rated, but will be evaluated to determine whether it is reasonable.

Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate competition, but may also be determined through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404-1. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by performing a price evaluation of the offerors received. Using the guidelines found in

FAR Subpart 15.404-1(b)(2)(i), 15.404-1(b)(2)(v), and 15.404-1(b)(2)(vi) Price analysis will be conducted by comparing the individuals proposed prices and a comparison of the individual proposals with the Independent Government Costs Estimate (IGCE).

7.4 Excel Pricing Workbook (EPW)

In order to achieve standardization, the EPW must be included in one workbook/file. This workbook must be automated to the greatest extent possible. It must include the pricing tabs discussed below.

The goal of the automated EPW format is to provide a comprehensive working model of the offeror’s cost/price volume. An error free EPW is essential to ensure a correct and timely evaluation of proposed cost/prices. All formulas used in the workbook must be clearly visible in the individual cells and verifiable. Whereas linking among the spreadsheet tabs is anticipated, the use of external links (to source data not provided in the workbook) is prohibited. The EPW must contain no macros or hidden cells. The EPW must not be locked/protected or secured by passwords.

7.5 Pricing Volume Narrative (Word Doc)

To substantiate the EPW the offeror must provide an accompanying narrative in MS Word format. The narrative should be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate the reasonableness of proposed prices/cost.

8.0 VOLUME V – SMALL BUSINESS PARTICIPATION PLAN

In order to gather data to assess the contractor’s small business participation in accordance with FAR

52.219-8, the contractor shall develop and submit a Small Business Participation Plan. The Small

Business Participation Plan is separate from the FAR requirement for a Small Business Subcontracting

Plan and is required from both small and large businesses. The contractor shall ensure that Small Business

Subcontracting Plan submissions are consistent with the Small Business Participation Plan information.

This Small Business Participation Plan shall reference the portion of the Small Business Subcontracting

Plan that provides specific details of how the contractor will utilize small business participation at the first tier subcontract level throughout the period of performance of the contract. The Small Business

Participation Plan shall provide percentage and total price/cost of subcontract small business participation expressed in terms of total contract value for all small business subcontracts, segregated by base period.

The Small Business Participation Plan will be incorporated into the contract upon contract award.

In addition to complying with the clause at FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Oct

2015) with its Alternate II (Oct 2001), proposals must include information to permit evaluation of the extent of participation of small businesses and historical black colleges or universities and minority institutions in performance of the contract. Participation to be identified may be in the form of a joint venture, teaming arrangement, or subcontract. Small business concerns that are not required by FAR

52.219-9 to submit a subcontracting plan must indicate the extent to which proposed joint ventures, teaming arrangements, or subcontracts are with historically black colleges or universities and minority institutions. Information provided should include the extent of participation of such firms in terms of the value of the total acquisition and the complexity and variety of the work such firms are to perform.

Table 2: Small Business Participation Dollars and Percent

TOTAL CONTRACT VALUE - $

Category Subcontractor

Name Proposed SB Percent of

Total Contract Value

Proposed SB

Participation Dollars

Small Business

HUBZone Small Business

Veteran Owned Small Business

Service-Disabled Veteran- Owned Small

Business

Small Disadvantaged Business

Women-Owned Small Business