N00173-23-R-GF07 0001.pdf

1300988622

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to provide Attachment 5 Questions and Answ ers, as w ell as edit the Solicitation as a result of the

Questions and Answ ers.

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 15

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 10-Mar-2023

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 N0017323RGF07

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

17-Feb-2023

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 1 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-Mar-2023

CODE

NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY

4555 OVERLOOK AVE SW

WASHINGTON DC 20375

N00173 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N0017323RGF07

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0002

The CLIN extended description has changed from:

Purchases related to CLIN 0001

To:

Purchases related to CLIN 0001, $1000,000.00 COST ONLY, not fee bearing

The cost constraint NTE has been added.

CLIN 1002

Purchases related to CLIN 1001

Purchases related to CLIN 1001, $1000,000.00 COST ONLY, not fee bearing

CLIN 2002

Purchases related to CLIN 2001

Purchases related to CLIN 2001, $1000,000.00 COST ONLY, not fee bearing

CLIN 3002

Purchases related to CLIN 3001

Purchases related to CLIN 3001, $1000,000.00 COST ONLY, not fee bearing

CLIN 4002

Purchases related to CLIN 4001

Purchases related to CLIN 4001, $1000,000.00 COST ONLY, not fee bearing

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The following have been modified:

Exhibit/Attachment Table of Contents

DOCUMENT TYPE DESCRIPTION PAGES

Exhibit A CDRLs 1

Attachment 1 Requirements for Onsite

Contractors

Attachment 2 Personnel Qualifications 3

Attachment 3 Quality Assurance

Surveillance Plan (QASP)

Attachment 4 Past Performance

Questionnaire

Attachment 5 Questions and Answers 6

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

L 5 Proposal Format

(a) The Offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by this Request for

Proposal (RFP) and it must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The proposal shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the RFP, SOW and Contract Data

Requirements List (CDRL). Non-conformance with the instructions provided in this RFP is a cause for rejection of the proposal and/or may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation.

(b) This proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government's requirements but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the

Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal.

(1) The proposal will consist of volumes as specified in the proposal organization table below.

Proposal Organization Table

Proposal

Volume Volume Contents

Page

Limit Format File Naming Structure

I Executive Summary 5 pages MS Word or

Adobe PDF

VOL I [Offeror

Name].pdf or doc.

II

Solicitation, Offer, and

Award, OCI Disclosure

Statement, and General

Documentation

Unlimited Adobe PDF VOL II [Offeror

Name].pdf

III Technical 30 pages MS Word or

Adobe PDF

VOL III [Offeror

Name].pdf or doc.

IV Past Performance 20 pages MS Word or

Adobe PDF

VOL IV [Offeror

Name].pdf or doc

V Cost/Price Unlimited

Section A - Cost

Spreadsheet MS Excel

VOL V [Offeror Name]

Cost_Unsantized.xls

Section B - Cost

Methodology

MS Word or

Adobe PDF

VOL V [Offeror

Name].Methodology_Un santized.pdf or doc.

Section C - Sanitized

Cost/Price Proposal

-Cost/Price

Spreadsheet_Sanitized

-Cost/Price

Methodology_Sanitized

MS Excel for

Cost Spreadsheet and MS Word or

Adobe PDF for

Cost

Methodology

VOL V [Offeror Name]

Cost_Santized.xls

VOL V [Offeror

Name].Methodology_Sa ntized.pdf or doc.

(c) Each volume shall be properly identified, numbered, and logically assembled. Each volume shall contain clearly identified sections and all pages shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date, and RFP (number) in the header and/or footer.

Page size shall be at no greater than 8 1/2" x 11". The narrative material in the proposal shall be single spaced, with font size no smaller than 12 point characters and 1 inch margins. Characters shall be set at no less than normal spacing and 100% scale. Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size not less than 8-point and may be landscape format. Line spacing shall be set at no less than single space. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. Page numbers, company logos, and headers and footers may be within the page margins ONLY, and are not bound by the 12-point font requirement. Footnotes to text shall not be used. Those pages that exceed the page counts provided in the above Table for each volume or attachment will not be evaluated.

(d) Cost/price summary shall be submitted using Microsoft Office Excel, fully executable with formulas shown, and rounded to the whole cent at the lowest cost level. This is in addition to the

Offeror completing their Section B pricing. Narratives related to cost/price summary data may be provided in MS Word or Adobe PDF.

(e) Offerors shall have all subcontractors submit proposal information in a uniform format consistent with the above instructions.

NOTE: Each page of the Offeror’s proposal shall be labeled with the Offeror’s name and the solicitation number. However, the Offeror’s executed copy of the solicitation, if reprinted by the

Offeror, shall be reprinted on plain paper only. The cover page of each proposal shall contain the document number and title, solicitation number, and address of Offeror. Note: If the Offeror wishes to restrict the disclosure of its proposal, it must mark the proposal in accordance with paragraph (e) of FAR Provision 52.215-1.

Page Numbering: The Offeror shall use a standard page numbering system to facilitate proposal references. Number consecutive pages within sections. Charts, graphs and other insert materials shall be page-numbered as part of the page numbering system.

Page Limitations: Page limitations are identified for each volume/section of the proposal, as described above and will be treated as maximums. If exceeded, excess pages will not be read or considered in proposal evaluation. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Graphs, charts, and tables are included in the page count. The following are not included in the page limitations:

Title/Cover pages

Tables of Contents Glossaries of abbreviations and acronyms

Teaming agreements, letters of intent from key personnel or subcontractors/consultants, and subcontract agreements

Proposal Cross-Reference Tables

Resumes

Cover Page, Table of Contents, and Proposal Cross-Reference Table: Each proposal volume must include a Cover Page and a Table of Contents. The Cover Page shall identify the solicitation number, proposal volume and title, and the Offeror’s name. Volume I shall include a

Master Table of Contents and a Proposal Cross-Reference Table. The Proposal Cross-Reference

Table shall indicate the required proposal content and the section/page number where this content appears in the proposal. Cover Pages, Tables of Contents, and the Proposal Cross-

Reference Table will not count against page limitations.

Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms: Each volume shall contain a glossary that includes all abbreviations, acronyms and their corresponding definitions. Glossaries will not count against page limitations.

Cost and Pricing Information: No cost or pricing information of any kind shall be included in any volume except Volume V, Cost/Price Proposal. Offerors must submit all cost/price-related documentation required for Volume III. Cost/price summary and back-up spreadsheets must be submitted in MS Excel format. Note: should there be any discrepancy between the pricing submitted in Section B and the cost/price-related backup/summary documentation; the Offeror's

Section B pricing will take precedence.

Labeling: All appropriate markings, including those prescribed in accordance with FAR

52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

L 7 Proposal Organization

The proposal shall be organized as follows and in accordance with the table at Section L 6 of this solicitation.

(a) VOLUME I – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

(1) The Executive Summary Volume shall contain a synopsis of the information contained in proposal volumes, with the exception of cost/price information. The Offeror shall provide a summary of its capability and its proposed approach to execute and manage this contract, to include all assumptions, key aspects and challenges of the task(s), summary of necessary resources (personnel and materials), and major subcontracts required to support this requirement.

Offerors are reminded that the Executive Summary is an introductory summation of the proposal.

No information shall be in the Executive Summary that does not appear elsewhere in the proposal. The Executive Summary is for information purposes only and will not be evaluated.

(b) VOLUME II – SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENT, OCI

DISCLOUSRE STATEMENT, and GENERAL DOCUMENTATION

(1) The Offeror shall provide a complete copy of this RFP (including Sections L and M, less other attachments, with any amendments) with the original signature of an official authorized to contractually bind the Offeror in Block 17 of the SF 33. The Offeror must complete the following sections within the RFP:

(i)Section A (SF 33, Blocks 12 through 18): Offerors are required to complete and submit SF

33 as part of its proposal along with any amendment receipt acknowledgement(s). Completion of

SF 33 Blocks 12 through 18 is required. Signature and date by the Offeror on the SF 33 Blocks

17-18 constitutes an offer, which the Government may accept.

(ii) Section B, Offerors will populate the estimated cost/price values for quantity, unit and unit price for each CLIN. Provide the company’s street address, county, and facility code;

Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code; Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) number; Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN); and size of business under NAICS 541513.

(iii) Authorized Offeror Personnel: Provide the name, title, telephone number, and e-mail address of the company and division points of contact regarding decisions made with respect to the Offeror’s proposal. Additionally, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the

Government and who can obligate the Offeror contractually.

(2) Financial Capability Statement: A successful Offeror is subject to a responsibility evaluation in accordance with FAR Subpart 9.1. The Offeror shall indicate if it has the necessary financial means, working capital, and other resources to perform the contract without assistance from any outside source. If not, indicate the amount required and the anticipated source.

(3) Potential Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) – Disclosure Statement: The Offeror shall make affirmative statement if OCI exist or does not exist, as specified at paragraph L4 above.

(c) VOLUME III –TECHNICAL (FACTOR 1)

(1) The technical volume will consist of the following subfactors:

(i) Subfactor A - Technical Understanding and Approach: The Offeror shall clearly describe and demonstrate its understanding and approach, in executing all the technical requirements in the Statement of Work. The Offeror shall discuss in detail its approach for accomplishing the requirements, to include assumption used, discussion of key aspects/challenge, and required personnel mix/hours, materials, other direct cost, and subcontractors required to accomplish the requirements. The Offeror shall describe their company’s resources and organizational capability in executing the work required in the SOW. The Offeror shall demonstrate its methods, processes, and techniques in organizing and staffing the contract support, as well as its plan to retain qualified personnel at the management and operational levels to support all the technical requirements specified the SOW.

(ii) Subfactor B – Personnel Qualifications: The Offeror shall demonstrate it possesses the personnel with qualification, experience and capability to support and manage all aspect of the work required by SOW. Offerors shall submit documentation, including required resumes that demonstrate the proposed personnel meets the required qualifications as stated in the RFP’s

Personnel Qualifications (Section J, Attachment 02), including experience (both general and project specific), education, and security clearance. Offerors shall submit documentation indicating availability of key personnel and their commitment to supporting the contract.

Commitment proof may include but is not limited to commitment letters for all key personnel or proof of current employment with the company. If current employment proof is submitted, the company may include a corporate commitment letter where the company plans to maintain the proposed key personnel for the duration of the tasks they have been proposed for. While not required, these commitment documents will help solidify a favorable rating. Offerors shall submit documentation indicating immediate availability for all proposed personnel who are not currently contractor employees. This documentation may include, but not limited to, commitment letters and/or subcontract/consultant agreements.

(d) VOLUME IV – PAST PERFORMANCE (FACTOR 2)

(1) Offerors shall provide no more than 5 and no less than 3 Past Performance Questionnaires with their proposal for all recent and relevant efforts it has performed. The Past Performance

Questionnaires form is attached in Section J as Attachment 04. For the purpose of evaluation, recent effort is defined as any past performance that has occurred within three (3) years of the proposal submission due date. The effort is considered relevant if it is of similar scope, complexity, dollar value, and contract type of specified in this RFP. The Prime Offeror shall also submit no more than 5 and no less than 3 Past Performance Questionnaires for each proposed Subcontractor effort valued 10% of their total current offering or more.

(2) In order to expedite the assessment process, the Offeror may complete the "Contract

Information" portion of the Past Performance Questionnaire for the convenience of the past effort Point of Contact (POC). The Offeror shall not, however, complete any other section of the Past Performance Questionnaire. The questionnaire shall be provided to the past effort

POC with instructions to complete and submit it directly to the Contracting Officer, Tracie

Rustin at tracie.rustin@nrl.navy.mil and the Contract Specialist, Graham Fisher, at graham.fisher@nrl.navy.mil, on or before the proposal due date. Electronic submission is required. The Offeror's past performance volume shall contain copies of the first page of the

Customer's Questionnaire and the transmittal letters.

(3) The Government reserves the right to limit or expand the number of references it decides to contact and to contact other references than those provided by the Offeror. The

Government reserves the right to consider any questionnaire received after the due date and contact those offices that do not respond to the questionnaire.

(4) Previous Contracting Effort Narratives:

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

Name of contracting organization

Contract number

Contract type mailto:tracie.rustin@nrl.navy.mil mailto:graham.fisher@nrl.navy.mil

Period of Performance

Total contract value

Description of the contract work and how the scope for this past contract/task order relates to this effort in scope and complexity

Description of achievements for the most recent period for which performance measures have been applied to each contract.

The performance measures should be specific and show the target performance levels that are set forth under the applicable contracts as well as the level of performance achieved. The Offeror shall describe the tools and/or methods used to collect metrics data and the frequency of data collection and reporting.

Contracting Officer and telephone number

Contracting Officer’s representative, program manager, or similar official’s name and telephone number

NOTE: The Government reserves the right to use contract performance data provided in the

Offeror's proposal and additional contract performance data obtained from other sources, such as the Government's CPARS data base, personnel knowledge and from the points of contact identified by the Offeror in its proposal.

(e) VOLUME V- COST/PRICE (FACTOR 3)

(1) The Offeror shall provide fully disclosed price proposal for performance of the contract. 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 Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition does not exist, the Government will require certified cost or pricing data (see FAR 15.406-2, Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data).

(2) The Cost/Price volume shall consist of three subsections as detailed below.

(i) Volume V- Section A – Cost/Price Spreadsheet (Microsoft Excel): The cost spreadsheet shall be provided in the Microsoft Excel format and must contain all formulas used in developing the proposal. All cells of the spreadsheet must be unlocked and without password protection.

The first tab of the spreadsheet shall be a summary to include a top level rollup of the costs by cost element: labor category, skill level, hours, fringe and overhead (as applicable), materials, other direct costs (ODCs), General and Administrative (G&A) (as applicable), profit/fee and total contract cost. Separate tabs shall be used address different cost elements, and for each subcontractor/teaming partners.

(ii) Volume V - Section B. Cost/Pricing Methodology Volume (PDF): The Pricing

Methodology volume shall contain a thorough and concise narrative description of the pricing methodology and the manner in which the total cost was derived.

(A) For each proposed cost element, to include but not limited to direct labor hours, direct labor rates, indirect labor rates, material burden, General and Administrative (G&A), Facilities

Capital Cost of Money (FCCOM), etc., Offerors shall provide narrative on the basis of estimate for each for the purposes of realism analysis. All proposed direct and indirect rates must by supported and substantiated. Additionally, Offerors are required to submit their most recent

Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA), if applicable, or a copy of DCMA’s latest Forward

Pricing Rate Recommendation (FPRR). If neither an FPRA nor FPRR exists, Offerors shall submit their most recent Forward Pricing Rate submissions to DCAA and/or DCMA, including the associated cover letters. Additionally, Offerors shall provide the addresses and telephone numbers of their cognizant DCAA and DCMA offices (including those for any Teaming

Partners, if known). Offerors shall state whether the distribution has been reviewed and/or accepted by DCMA/DCAA.

(B) The Offeror shall identify all proposed teaming partner/subcontractor(s), and the contract type (i.e. FFP, T/M, CPFF, etc.) the Offeror has with each. Within the Pricing

Methodology Volume, Offerors shall clearly identify and state if teaming partners/subcontractors were selected on a competitive basis and provide their rationale for any sole source decisions. In addition, the Methodology Volume shall provide price analysis/rationale to demonstrate the competitive basis of subcontractor selection and proof that competition exists (e.g., competitive bids or the RFQ). In the absence of such information, the Government reserves the right to request certified cost and pricing data for the subcontractor. Also, this volume shall include the

PoP for each subcontractor/teaming partner. It is noted that the teaming subcontractor PoP start date should coincide with the Offeror’s start date and completion date cannot exceed the PoP for the order. Any variance should be explained.

(iii) Volume V – Section C - Sanitized Cost/Price Proposal: This volume shall be organized identical and contain all data that is in Sections a. and b., but shall not include:

Labor rates

Indirect rates

Total cost by cost element

Total cost of the proposal

(3) The contractor shall furnish a copy of the cost proposal to their cognizant DCAA office.

The cover page of the proposal shall clearly indicate the RFP Number, the Contracting Officer’s name and phone number and the following statement:

“The Contracting Officer has directed that this advance copy be sent to you in anticipation of the

RATE CHECK that will be requested in order to determine cost realism in accordance with FAR

15.305 and 15.404(d).”

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M 2 Evaluation Factors and Subfactors for Award

(a) The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below.

(1) Factor 1 - Technical Factor: The Technical factor is composed of the two (2) subfactors listed below in a descending order of importance. Subfactor ratings will be rolled up for a consensus Technical Factor rating. If the Offeror achieves a Marginal or Unacceptable rating for any of the subfactors, the overall Technical Factor will be rated Marginal or Unacceptable. To be eligible for award, an evaluation of at least “Acceptable” must be achieved for this factor.

(i) Subfactor A – Technical Understanding and Approach: Offerors will be evaluated based on their ability to demonstrate their complete understanding of the technical requirements and its approach for fulfilling all the technical tasks set forth in the SOW. A simple statement of understanding or playback of the SOW will not be considered as responsive. The proposal shall provide documentation, which demonstrates the soundness of approach by a feasible and workable program or each task requirement. In addition, the proposal shall demonstrate credibility, realism, and logic to the proposed tasking requirements and required deliverables.

The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent the company has fully demonstrated its corporate capacity and resources to manage and execute all the SOW requirements. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the soundness of the methods, processes, and techniques used to organize and staff the contract support as well as its plan to retain qualified workers at the management and operational levels to support the contract requirements.

(ii) Subfactor B – Personnel Qualifications: The Offeror will be evaluated based on their ability to demonstrate the proposed personnel meet the requirement qualification as stated in the

RFP’s Personnel Qualifications (Section J, Attachment 02), including experience (both general and project specific), education and security clearance.

Offerors will also be evaluated based on documentation indicating availability of key personnel and their commitment under any resulting contract. The two key personnel are the Senior

Computer Systems engineer and Mid-Level Computer Systems Specialist positions.

Commitment proof may include but is not limited to commitment letters for all key personnel or proof of current employment with the company. If current employment proof is submitted, the company may include a corporate commitment letter where the company plans to maintain the proposed key personnel for the duration of the tasks they have been proposed for. While not required, these commitment documents will help solidify a favorable rating. Offerors shall submit documentation, indicating immediate availability for all proposed personnel who are not currently contractor employees. This documentation may include, but not limited to, commitment letters and/or subcontract/consultant agreements.

(iii) Technical Factor Ratings: The following ratings and definitions shall be used for the technical factor. The Offeror’s technical solution will be rated separately from the risk associated with its technical approach.

Table A: Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding

Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength.

Green Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable.

Table B: Technical Risk Rating

Adjectival Rating Description

Low

Proposal may contain weakness (es) which have 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.

Moderate

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may 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.

High

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which 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.

Unacceptable

Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

(v) Definition: The following definition will be used to assist with evaluation of the factors.

Strength: 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: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness. A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Deficiency: 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.

(2) Factor 2 – Past Performance: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s recent, relevant, quality of performance records to ascertain the degree of confidence the Government has in the Offeror’s ability to successfully perform this requirement. The Government will assign a past performance confidence assessment rating to the Offeror.

(i) For the purpose of this evaluation, the Offeror’s past performance is considered recent if performance has occurred within three (3) years of the proposal submission due date. Past performance effort is considered relevant if it’s of similar scope, complexity, dollar value, and contract type of specified in this RFP.

(ii) The Past Performance Factor evaluation will focus on the following:

(A) The extent to which the Offeror's past performance reflects knowledge, technical and managerial proficiency.

(B) The extent to which the Offeror's past performance reflects effective methods to control schedule and cost to meet all project objectives in their past performance.

(C) The extent the end users is satisfy with contract deliverables and overall contractor's service.

(D) Offeror’s compliance with previous contract requirements, accuracy and timeliness of reports, technical excellence, and quality. The extent to which past performance reflects good operational support, reliability, and responsiveness to technical direction, initiative, and adequacy of resources will be evaluated.

(iii) Past Performance Ratings. Past Performance Ratings. Past Performance will be evaluated using the following ratings in Table C and D below. Table C provides rating definitions concerning the relevancy of past performance information. Table D provides rating definitions reflecting the confidence level of the past performance information. The Government will assign a single consensus performance confidence assessment for the Offeror, selecting the most appropriate rating from the Table D below.

Table C. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings

Adjectival

Rating Description

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 similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat

Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Table D. Performance Confidence Assessments

Adjectival

Rating Description

Substantial

Confidence

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

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

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

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 Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

(3) Factor 3 – Cost/Price: The proposed price will be evaluated to determine reasonableness and realism using procedures from FAR 15.4. To the degree that the Government's most probable cost estimate differs from the Offeror’s proposed cost, the Government may adjust the proposed cost for purposes of evaluation based upon an evaluation of cost realism.

(i) Cost Realism means that the costs in an Offeror's proposal are realistic for the work to be performed; reflect a clear understanding of the requirements; and are consistent with the various elements of the Offeror's technical proposal. The cost realism evaluation includes an analysis of the adequacy of the hours, labor mix, and other direct costs to perform the work as proposed in the technical proposal as well as the proposed labor and indirect rates.

(ii) Any proposal which is evaluated by the Government as significantly unrealistic in cost, maybe deemed unacceptable, as such, the proposal may be considered by the Government to reflect a lack of technical competence to accomplish the Governments requirements, or a failure to understand the Governments requirements, or both.

(iii) Options will be evaluated IAW clause FAR 52.217-5.

(iv) FAR clause 52.217-8 will be included in the resulting contract. As part of the cost evaluation, the Government will evaluate the Option to Extend Services under FAR Clause

52.217-8 by adding one-half of the Offeror's final option period cost to the Offeror’s total proposed cost. Thus, the Offeror's total cost for the purpose of evaluation will include the base period, first through fourth options, and one-half of the fourth option. Offerors are required only to propose cost for the base and four options, and are not required to submit cost information for the potential one-half year extension of services period.

(End of Summary of Changes)

Attachment 5

Questions and Answers

N00173-23-R-GF07

Q1. Section L 7 (d)(1) states, “Offerors shall provide Past Performance Questionnaires with their proposal all recent and relevant efforts it has performed.”

Will the Government please define a minimum and maximum number of past performance references to be included in the proposal submission?

A1. Offerors shall submit no less than 3 and no more than 5 past performance questionnaires for the Prime Offeror. Section L 7(d)(1) has been updated to reflect this.

Q2. L 7 (d)(1) states, “The Prime Offeror shall also submit Past Performance

Questionnaire for each proposed Subcontractor effort valued 10% of their total current offering or more.”

Please clarify the minimum and maximum number of past performance references required for subcontractors whose effort is valued at 10% or more of the total cost.

A2. Offerors shall submit no less than 3 and no more than 5 past performance questionnaires for each proposed Subcontractor whose effort is valued at 10% or more of the total cost. Section L

7(d)(1) has been updated to reflect this.

Q3. Section M 2 (a)(1) states, “The Technical factor is composed of the three (3) subfactors listed below in a descending order of importance.”

Section L 7 (c) (1)(i) lists only two subfactors, “Technical Understanding and Approach” and “Personnel Qualifications.”

Please resolve the discrepancy between Section M 2 and Section L 7.

A3. Section M 2(a)(1) has been updated to reflect only the 2 subfactors listed in Section

L7(c)(1)(i).

Q4. L 7 (e) (2) (i) states, “The cost spreadsheet shall be provide [sic] in the Microsoft Excel format and must contain all formulas used in developing the proposal.”

L 7 (e) (2) (iii) states, “This volume shall be organized identical and contain all data that is in

Sections a. and b.”

Will the Government please provide an Excel spreadsheet template for the sanitized and unsanitized cost submissions?

A4. There is no template for the sanitized and unsanitized cost submission.

Q5. L 5 (e) states, “No cost or pricing information of any kind shall be included in any volume except Volume III, Cost/Price Proposal.”

Per the Proposal Organization Table, Cost/Price is Volume V.

Please resolve this discrepancy.

A5. Section L 5(e) has been updated to reflect that “No cost or pricing information of any kind shall be included in any volume except Volume V, Cost/Price Proposal.”

Q6. The instructions do not specify if subcontractors are required to submit unsanitized pricing to the Government.

Please clarify the pricing submission requirement for subcontractors.

A6. Unsanitized pricing for subcontractors shall be included as part of the unsanitized pricing submitted by the Prime Offeror.

Q7. Offerors are required to submit their most recent FPRA or DCMA’s latest FPRR so the Government can perform cost realism analysis. If a business has not previously performed cost reimbursable contracts and has not submitted incurred cost reports, will the Government, as an alternative, accept an explanation of how the offeror’s accounting system segregates direct costs from indirect costs and develops indirect cost burdens applied to pricing in the proposal; or will the Government accept a letter from an independent CPA stating that the offeror’s accounting system has been audited within the past year and found compliant with DFARS 252.242-7006 Accounting System

Administration for Collecting and Segregating Costs?

A7. In accordance with DFARS 242.7502 (c) the contracting officer can determine that a contractor’s accounting system is adequate if it is demonstrated to comply with the system criteria listed at DFARS 252.242-7006.

Q8. Item no 0002 implies that the contractor may be required to purchase and provide materials under the contract, but there is no Bill of Materials in the solicitation.

Accordingly, offerors must assume that Item 0002 will provide an option for the

Government to obtain materials if needed during performance under a cost reimbursable basis. To ensure consistency in pricing among all proposals for a reimbursable materials

CLIN, can the Government provide an estimated value for this CLIN for pricing purposes, e.g. $1000.00?

A8. Items 0002, 1002, 2002, 3002, and 4002 will be provided as a Not to Exceed (NTE) COST line item for which $1,000,000.00 each year will be provided. Section B has been updated to reflect this.

Q9. Factor 1 mentions there are three (3) technical subfactors that make up the factor rating, but there are only two (2) subfactors listed; 1. Tech Understanding/Approach & 2.

Personnel Qualifications. Will the Government please clarify if there are only two subfactors, or is there a third subfactor missing?

A9. There are only the two listed subfactors (Technical Understanding/Approach and Personnel

Qualifications). Sections L and M have been updated to reflect this.

Q10. This requirement reads, “Offerors shall provide Past Performance Questionnaires with their proposal all recent and relevant efforts it has performed.”

Should this instead read, “Offerors shall provide Past Performance Questionnaires with their proposal for all recent and relevant efforts it has performed?”?

A10. Yes. Section L 7(d)(1) has been updated for clarity.

Q11. Will the Government please clarify the “transmittal letters” that are required to be submitted in the past performance volume? Is this referring to a transmittal letter from the

Quoter to their customer to complete the PPQ, or a transmittal letter from the Quoter’s

Customer to the Government when submitting their PPQ?

A11. Transmittal letters refer to the email to the past effort Point of Contact (POC) requesting they complete the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ).

Q12. Will the Government please clarify whether the copies of PPQs and transmittal letters are inclusive of the 20-page limit for Volume IV – Past Performance?

A12. The PPQs and transmittal letters are included in the 20 page limit for Volume IV, Past

Performance.

Q13. Will the Government confirm if there are incumbent personnel supporting this effort?

A13. There is an incumbent, Peraton.

Q14. Is there a percentage or number breakdown of on-site vs remote work? For example 2 days on-site, 3 days remote.

A14. The Naval Research Laboratory Radar Division anticipates a 3 day on-site minimum;

however, as needs evolve 5 days on-site may become mandatory.

Q15. Does the prime contractor need to have a facility clearance?

A15. No.

Q16. Just to confirm, is the place of performance U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, 4555

Overlook Ave., SW Washington, DC 20375?

A16. Confirmed, for onsite work the place of performance will be the U.S. Naval Research

Laboratory, 4555 Overlook Ave., SW Washington, DC 20375. Remote work is authorized and must be performed on NRL-issued computers.

Q17. Is it required that the prime contractor is classified under a specific NAICS code on sam.gov for submission? The NAICS code 541513 is listed on sam.gov, however, the NAICS code 541715 is listed on page 61, ii, Section B of the RFP.

A17. The NAICS relevant to this RFP is 541513. The RFP has been updated to reflect this.

Q18. We have CPARS reports with the feedback included from various Federal level clients for whom we have provided similar services. Can we provide those relevant CPARS reports in lieu of the PPQs?

A18. CPARS reports may be submitted as part of the Past Performance Volume, and CPARS reports will be considered when preparing the overall Past Performance rating. However Past

Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) or lack thereof may also impact the overall Past

Performance rating.

Q19. Is there an incumbent contractor currently performing this work, and if so are they able to bid?

A19. The incumbent is Peraton.

Q20. What is the current level of effort?

A20. The Naval Research Laboratory Radar Division estimates 2 full time equivalents can fulfill this requirement, however it is up to each Offeror to propose how they plan to successfully perform all aspects of the Performance Work Statement.

Q21. Can you please provide the attachments noted in solicitation section J?

A21. The attachments are included in the PDF of the RFP attached to the SAM.gov posting.

Q22. In Section M of the RFP, is found the sentence “The proposal shall provide documentation which demonstrates the soundness of the approach by a feasible and workable program of each task requirement.” Is the government looking for specific documents to corroborate that soundness, or does it mean exposition of capabilities in the normal proposal sense? If corroborating documents are required, what are they?

A22. There are no specific documents required.