N00174-17-R-0086-0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to provide questions and answ ers about the subject solicitation. See page 2 for details.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 14

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 16-Oct-2017

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

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N0017417R0086

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

14-Sep-2017

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

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

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 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

16-Oct-2017

CODE

NSWC IHD

ATTN: JESSICA SCALFARO

JESSICA.SCALFARO@NAVY.MIL

4072 N JACKSON RD., STE 132

INDIAN HEAD MD 20640-5115

N00174 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N0017417R0086

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

CONTINUATION PAGE

1. The following questions and answers concerning the subject solicitation are hereby provided:

Question #1: Can the Government provide drawings 9492 and 9186, which describe the paint and primer specifications? These drawings were not provided with the initial technical data package.

Answer #1: Interested offerors can obtain the documents per manufacturer call out. These documents are not considered part of the technical data package. The CAGE code and part number are provided in the technical data package drawing.

Question #2: Under Sub-Factor 1 of the solicitation (page 84), the Government is asking for a description of assembly and testing facilities. However, in looking at the solicitation and drawing package there are no assembly operations required (except for packaging). Additionally, after reading the QA requirements document there is no destructive or non-destructive testing required (apart from dimensional inspection and certificates of conformance). Did the Government mean to include assembly and testing in sub-factor 1 or was this an error? Please clarify

Answer #2: Dimensional inspection called out in the Statement of Work is considered testing. Applying cork insulation is considered an assembly process. The welding on 1030-5211 and 1030-5236 is considered an assembly.

Question #3: First Article Testing Requirements are unclear. Will FAT be required or is only Lot Acceptance Testing for the full production quantity required? If FAT is needed, how much time will be allotted for the Government to complete its review and approval of FAT parts & documentation? Besides inspection reports and certificates of conformance, will anything else be required for FAT?

Answer #3: There is no first article test called out in the Statement of Work. Only lot acceptance will be performed in accordance with the Statement of Work.

As a result of this question and answer the fourth technical subfactor in Section L Instructions to Offerors, and Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award is updated to remove the references to first article testing.

Updated versions of this information can be found at the end of this amendment.

Question #4: Does the Government intend for offerors to have submitted the past performance questionnaires to the references by the closing date of the solicitation or must the references submit the completed questionnaires by the closing date of the solicitation? Also, if subcontractors are submitting past performance questionnaires, must those be submitted by the closing date of the solicitation?

Answer #4: Interested offerors are directed to Section L Instructions to Offerors, Factor 2: Past Performance which states the following:

Using the Past Performance Matrix (as listed in Section J), the Offeror and all subcontractors shall provide a separate list of relevant contracts that were performed within the last five years.

Contracts that are listed in PPIRS are preferred. The list for the Prime shall contain no more than seven relevant contracts. In addition, each subcontractor shall complete a separate matrix and provide no more than seven relevant contracts. The identified relevant contracts shall focus on performance that is relevant to the current solicitation requirement (i.e., Booster Mk 70 Fin) cited in the Scope of this solicitation. Relevancy includes similarity of item, complexity and dollar value. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. If the Offeror has no relevant past performance within the last five years or cannot provide a list of relevant contracts, then the Offeror must provide an explanation.

The last sentence under Factor 2 states the following:

All questionnaires must be received by the closing date and time of the solicitation.

2. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

3. For additional information, contact Jessica Scalfaro at jessica.scalfaro@navy.mil.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

1.0 OVERVIEW

The purpose of this requirement is to provide for the design and manufacture of the Mk 70 Booster Hardware Kits used in the GQM-163A Coyote target Missile Program.

In accordance with FAR 52.219-14, the Offeror must demonstrate in its proposal that at least 50% of the cost of contract performance incurred for personnel shall be expended for employees of the Offeror. Any proposal that on its face fails to demonstrate that the Offeror’s personnel will be performing at least 50% of the contract work will be deemed technically unacceptable and therefore ineligible for award.

1.1 Contract Award

1.1.1 The Government intends to award a single Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract as a result of this solicitation in accordance with Section M, to the responsible Offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government, utilizing a trade-off process in accordance with the Factors and Sub-factors set forth in the solicitation.

1.1.2 The Government may reject any or all proposals if such action is in the Government’s interest.

1.1.3 The Government reserves the right to award a contract based on initial offers and without holding discussions, but reserves the right to hold discussions at the Government's discretion; therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a cost/price and technical standpoint.

2.0 NOTICES TO OFFERORS

Each Offeror must (1) submit an offer, (2) submit information that addresses the evaluation factors, and (3) submit supporting price data. The Government will evaluate each Offeror's understanding of the Government's requirements and ability to perform the work on the basis of its proposal. It is the Offeror's responsibility to provide information and evidence that clearly demonstrates its ability to meet the solicitation requirements. Unless otherwise allowed, all questions shall be submitted by 4:30PM EST within 10 business days from date of solicitation release, as time may not permit responses to questions received after that time.

3.0 INSTRUCTIONS FOR SUBMISSION OF OFFERS

3.1 Submission

3.1.1 Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals

(i) The Offeror shall submit the following information in both hard copy and electronic copy format;

failure to do so will render an offer ineligible for award:

1. Four (4) copies of the Technical Volume I.

2. Two (2) copies of Past Performance Volume II, including Past Performance Matrix, and Past

Performance Questionnaire.

3. One (1) copy of the Price Volume III, containing the completed and signed RFP package, with all representation certifications executed, and with prices in Section B.

(ii) Any proposal modification or revision not received/submitted by the exact time specified for receipt of offers is “late” and may not be considered. The solicitation will close at the exact date and time specified in the solicitation and Offerors will be unable to submit their proposal after that time.

(iii) Proposals may be withdrawn by written notice to the Contracting Officer provided such notice is received prior to contract award. Withdrawals are effective upon receipt of notice by the Contracting Officer.

Failure to submit a complete proposal prior to the solicitation closing date and time may render the proposal unacceptable.

3.2 Offer Expiration Date

Proposals in response to this solicitation shall be valid for 180 calendar days.

4.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT

4.1 General

Offerors must comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposal; proposals that do not comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposal may be considered non-responsive and may render the Offeror ineligible for award. Format shall comply with the following information:

8.5 x 11 inch paper Single-spaced typed lines 1 inch margins 12-point Times New Roman Font text

Offerors are instructed to clearly label all files with Volume number, company name and a unique identifying name which is reflective of the contents of the file (i.e., VOL. III, ABC COMPANY, PRIME COST PROPOSAL). Please keep the file names consistent for all volumes.

The Offeror shall submit proposals in hard copy to:

NSWC IHEODTD –

4081 N. Jackson Road Bldg 841 Indian Head, MD 20640-5115 Code 022DR Attn: Devon Renner

The Offeror shall also submit one proposal in electronic copy to:

devon.renner@navy.mil

4.1.1 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.

4.1.2 Page Limitations

Page limitations are identified for each volume/section of the proposal, as described in paragraph 5.0 below 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:

(i) Title/Cover pages

(ii) Tables of contents

(iii) Glossaries of abbreviations and acronyms

(iv) Subcontracting agreements, letters of intent, resumes, and subcontract agreements

(v) Proposal Cross-Reference Tables

4.2 Cover letter, provided as a separate file, of the proposal must provide the following:

(i) The solicitation number;

(ii) Cage Code;

(iii) The name, address, e-mail address, and telephone and facsimile numbers of points of contact for the Offeror and teaming subcontractors;

(iv) Names, titles, and telephone and facsimile numbers (and electronic addresses if available) of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation;

(v) Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal.

(vi) A statement that the Offeror consents, meets and agrees with all terms, conditions, requirements, provisions, and amendments included in the solicitation. Offerors must meet all requirements at the time of proposal submission; or provide with their cover letter an acceptable plan to meet the requirements by the start date of the contract performance. Failure to meet all requirements at the time of proposal submission or provide an acceptable plan to meet the requirements by the start date of the contract performance may remove the Offeror from consideration of award. The following elements of the technical proposal shall be addressed in the cover letter:

Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Certification/Mitigation Plan: The Offeror shall certify compliance with the OCI clause HQ L-2-0005 - Notification Of Potential Organizational Conflict(s) Of Interest (NAVSEA) (JUN 1994). If a potential conflict of interest exists at any tier, each potential prime Offeror is requested to notify the Contracting Officer within 14 days of the date of this solicitation and present an acceptable plan to neutralize any potential organizational conflict of interest. Those Offerors deemed to have a conflict of interest may be ineligible for award.

4.3 Cover Page, Table of Contents, 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, amendment 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 by solicitation section/page number and the section/page number where this content appears in the proposal.

4.4 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

Each volume shall contain a glossary which includes all abbreviations, acronyms and their corresponding definitions.

4.5 Price Information

No cost or pricing information of any kind shall be included in any volume except Volume III, Price Proposal. Offerors must submit all cost related documentation required for Volume III.

5.0 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

Factors are listed in descending order of importance.

Volume I - TECHNICAL (Factor 1)

1. Facilities

2. Manufacturing Processes

3. Quality Assurance (QA) Plan

4. Management and Schedule

Volume II - PAST PERFORMANCE (Factor 2) Past Performance

Volume III - PRICE (Factor 3) Price Proposal

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL

The Offeror shall address each subfactor listed below, which are of equal importance. The technical proposal shall not exceed 50 single sided pages, not less than 12 point Times New Roman. The technical proposal shall not contain any hyperlinks or electronically imbedded links or cost/price information. If the technical proposal exceeds 50 single-sided pages, only the first 50 pages will be evaluated. The Offeror’s technical proposal must demonstrate an understanding of all requirements covered in the Statement of Work (SOW) and RFP terms and conditions.

The technical proposal shall contain information/documentation in sufficient detail to enable evaluation based on the factors/sub-factors listed in Section M, Clause entitled Best Value Evaluation and Basis for Award and as detailed below. To this end, each technical proposal shall be specific, detailed and complete as to clearly and fully demonstrate that the prospective contractor has a thorough knowledge and understanding of the requirements and has valid and practical solutions for technical problems. Statements that paraphrase the specifications or attest that standard procedures will be employed are inadequate to demonstrate how the Offeror will comply with the requirements of the specifications, and this clause.

The Offeror shall describe how it plans to accomplish the tasks associated with the following subfactors:

SUB-FACTOR 1: FACILITIES

The Offeror shall describe the facility(ies) that the Offeror plans to use to accommodate the flow of manufacturing for the prime and any Subcontractors; including the capability for assembly, testing, and storage. The Offeror shall describe the fabrication, assembly, and test facilities and provide an overall floor plan of these facilities.

SUB-FACTOR 2: MANUFACTURING PROCESSES

The Offeror shall describe the overall manufacturing approach including production processes, procedures, material handling and controls for the fabrication of the hardware kit including, but not be limited to, a description of such items as jigs, fixtures, instruments and facilities required during the manufacturing process. The Offeror shall specifically address the processes for the following critical processes expected during manufacture of the hardware kits:

a. Machining close tolerance metal parts and plating.

b. Holding and securing the ballast plates (1030-2044, 1030-2046, 1030-2048, 1030-5043) to drill and thread 0.250-28 UNF though holes.

c. Describe bending, heat treatment, and inspection process for the connector bracket (1030-5211).

The Offeror shall identify which major items and/or subassemblies will be procured from Subcontractor or vendors.

The Offeror shall describe the test program including in-process testing, inspection procedures, special test equipment including environmental test equipment, and test equipment calibration that will be implemented to verify compliance with the requirements in the performance specification and SOW. Offerors are advised that no special test equipment will be furnished by the Government.

SUB-FACTOR 3: QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA) PLAN (Not included in the page limit)

The Offeror shall provide a copy of their Quality Management Plan (QMP) tailored to the requirements of the SOW for production of the hardware kits and the other products required by the solicitation that meets the requirements of ISO 9001:2008. This document does not count against the page limitation of the technical proposal.

SUB-FACTOR 4: MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE

The Offeror shall provide an organizational chart(s) that identifies management and the lead technical personnel for each functional area (e.g., engineering, manufacturing, QA, procurement) that will support this procurement and their level of involvement. The key personnel qualifications are provided in Section J, Attachment X of the solicitation. The Offeror shall describe key personnel resources available for this contract and provide a list including experience and skill level of all key personnel that will be assigned to this contract. The Offeror shall describe the proposed plan for liaison with the Government, including schedule control processes that maintain visibility of the work progress and reporting of problems and schedule slippages.

The Offeror shall provide a production schedule for qualification and manufacturing of the hardware kits required by the solicitation indicating at a minimum:

a. Facility set up (the arrangement of tooling, machinery, input and control of supplies and materials that efficiently support the manufacturing process) ;

b. Tooling and test equipment designs/procurement;

c. Material acquisition, including long lead items;

d. Fabrication;

e. Inspection and testing;

f. Delivery of hardware in accordance with Government Schedule;

g. Preparation and delivery of Data Items in accordance with Government schedule.

FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE (No Page Limit)

Past performance information shall be provided for the Prime and all subcontractors in order to develop an Offeror's past performance rating.

Past performance information is one indicator of an Offeror’s (to include prime and subcontractors) ability to perform the contract successfully. In the evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance, the Government reserves the right to use relevant performance within the past five years. Relevant and timely past performance information in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), and the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) (http://www.ppirs.gov/) including the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) will be considered during the evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance.

Using the Past Performance Matrix (as listed in Section J), the Offeror and all subcontractors shall provide a separate list of relevant contracts that were performed within the last five years. Contracts that are listed in PPIRS are preferred. The list for the Prime shall contain no more than seven relevant contracts. In addition, each subcontractor shall complete a separate matrix and provide no more than seven relevant contracts. The identified relevant contracts shall focus on performance that is relevant to the current solicitation requirement (i.e., Booster Mk 70 Fin) cited in the Scope of this solicitation. Relevancy includes similarity of item, complexity and dollar value.

With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

If the Offeror has no relevant past performance within the last five years or cannot provide a list of relevant contracts, then the Offeror must provide an explanation.

Past Performance Questionnaires (as listed in Section J) only apply to relevant contracts for which performance information is not available through PPIRS. The Offeror and subcontractors shall submit the Past Performance Questionnaire to all of their references listed on the Past Performance Matrix that have NO PPIRS contracts, and shall request the references to complete the Past Performance Questionnaire and return it directly to:

NSWC IHEODTD –

4081 N. Jackson Road, Bldg 841 Indian Head, MD 20640-5115 Code 022DR

Attn: Devon Renner

Surveys may also be emailed to devon.renner@navy.mil which is the preferred method of delivery. All questionnaires must be received by the closing date and time of the solicitation.

FACTOR 3: PRICE (No Page Limit)

This volume is the only volume that shall contain price information. There is no limitation on the number of pages or print size for the price proposal. All Attachments submitted under Volume III (Factor 3) shall be clearly identified.

The Price Volume shall include the completed RFP document, with Section B, pricing filled in. The Price Volume shall include any available pricing information to facilitate the price analysis that will be performed in evaluating the proposal (i.e., price breakdown, catalog pricing, past pricing history, etc.).

The price information shall include data regarding the general financial condition of the Offeror and specific plans for financing the proposed contract. The Government has no plans to provide any financial assistance.

The Price Volume shall also include all executed representation certifications.

SECTION M – EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

General:

1. It is the intention of the Navy to award a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract with one base period and four 12-month option periods.

2. Award will be made to that Offeror whose proposal is the most advantageous to the Government under the selection criteria set forth in this Section M. Offerors are required to follow specific instructions in submitting their proposal. Each Offeror’s submission will be screened upon receipt by the Contracting Officer or a designee of the Contracting Officer to ensure compliance with the RFP instructions and requirements. Elimination of an Offeror due to failure to comply with the submission requirements of the RFP is at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

3. As a result of this solicitation, the Government intends to award a single Indefinite-Delivery Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract based on initial offers and without holding discussions, but reserves the right to hold discussions at the Government’s discretion. Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, in accordance with FAR 15.306 -- Exchanges With Offerors After Receipt of Proposals, may occur when award without discussions is contemplated. IAW FAR: “Clarifications are limited exchanges, between the Government and Offerors. If award will be made without conducting discussions, Offerors may be given the opportunity to clarify certain aspects of 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.”

4. The Government will review the Offeror’s proposal to determine whether at least 50% of the cost of the contract performance incurred for personnel will be expended for employees of the Offeror, in accordance with FAR 52.219-

14. Any proposal that does not on its face demonstrate that the Offeror’s personnel will be performing at least 50% of the contract work will be deemed to be technically unacceptable and therefore ineligible for award. The Government will not evaluate any proposal that it deems to be technically unacceptable for failure to comply with

FAR 52.219-14.

5. The following factors will be used to evaluate offers. The factors are listed in descending order of importance.

All non-cost factors, when combined, are more important than cost; however, cost becomes more of a deciding factor of importance when Offerors receive similar ratings for the other factors. Factors 1, 2, and 3 will be used for a tradeoff process. .

Volume I: Factor 1: Technical: Subfactors listed are of equal importance.

Sub-Factor 1: Facilities Sub-Factor 2: Manufacturing Processes Sub-Factor 3: Quality Assurance (QA) Plan Sub-Factor 4: Management and Schedule

Volume II: Factor 2: Past Performance

Volume III: Factor 3: Price

Technical Ratings:

The Government will use the following combined technical/risk rating which includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Outstanding: Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good: Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable: Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal: Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable: Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable.

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

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

FAR 15.001.

“Weakness” is a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

“Significant Weakness” is a flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

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

FACTOR 1 – TECHNICAL (VOLUME I)

The Government has established the page limit for each technical subfactor in Section L of the RFP. Offerors are advised that excess pages will not be evaluated. The Government will assess whether or not the Offeror has simply restated the SOW, which is unacceptable.

SUB-FACTOR 1: FACILITIES

The Government will evaluate the facility(ies) that the Offeror plans to use to accommodate the flow of manufacturing for the prime and any Subcontractors; including the capability for assembly, testing, and storage. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s facilities to support fabrication, assembly, and test.

SUB-FACTOR 2: MANUFACTURING PROCESSES

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overall manufacturing approach including production processes, procedures, material handling and controls for the fabrication of the hardware kits including, but not be limited to, a description of such items as jigs, fixtures, instruments and facilities required during the manufacturing process. The Offeror shall specifically address the processes for the following critical processes expected during manufacture of the hardware kits:

Machining close tolerance metal parts and plating.

Holding and securing the ballast plates (1030-2044, 1030-2046, 1030-2048, 1030-5043) to drill and thread

0.250-28 UNF though holes.

Describe bending, heat treatment, and inspection process for the connector bracket (1030-5211).

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s depiction of which major items and/or subassemblies will be procured from Subcontractor or vendors. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed test program including in-process testing, inspection procedures, special test equipment including environmental test equipment, and test equipment calibration that will be implemented to verify compliance with the requirements in the performance specification and SOW.

SUB-FACTOR 3: QUALITY ASSURANCE (QA) PLAN

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Quality Management Plan (QMP) tailored to the requirements of the SOW for production of the hardware kits and the other products required by the solicitation that meets the requirements of ISO 9001:2008.

SUB-FACTOR 4: MANAGEMENT AND SCHEDULE

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s organizational chart(s) that identifies management and the lead technical personnel for each functional area (e.g., engineering, manufacturing, QA, procurement) that will support this procurement and their level of involvement. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s key personnel resources available for this contract for compliance with education, certifications, and experience. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposed plan for liaison with the Government, including schedule control processes that maintain visibility of the work progress and reporting of problems and schedule slippages.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s production schedule for qualification and manufacturing of the hardware kit required by the solicitation indicating at a minimum:

a. Facility set up (the arrangement of tooling, machinery, input and control of supplies and materials that efficiently support the manufacturing process);

b. Tooling and test equipment designs/procurement;

c. Material acquisition, including long lead items;

d. Fabrication;

e. Inspection and testing;

f. Delivery of hardware in accordance with Government Schedule;

g. Preparation and delivery of Data Items in accordance with Government schedule.

FACTOR 2 – PAST PERFORMANCE (VOLUME II)

The Government will evaluate the Prime’s and Subcontractors’ past performance to develop the Offeror’s past performance rating. Past Performance will be evaluated by the Contract Specialist.

Past performance information is one indicator of an Offeror’s and subcontractors’ ability to perform the contract successfully. The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the Offeror’s and subcontractors’ probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s and subcontractors’ demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products that meet the contract’s requirements. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s and subcontractors’ past performance to determine how relevant a recent effort is to the current solicitation requirement (i.e., Booster Mk 70 Fin cited in the scope of this solicitation) and to determine how well the contractor performed on those previous contracts.

Relevancy includes similarity of service/support, complexity and dollar value. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance. One performance confidence assessment rating is assigned for each Offeror after evaluating the Offeror’s recent past performance and its relevancy.

The reference information must be current to facilitate the evaluation process. If the Offeror and/or subcontractors has no relevant past performance within the last five years or cannot provide a list of relevant contracts, then the Offeror must provide an explanation.

In the evaluation of an Offeror’s and subcontractors’ past performance, the Government reserves the right to use relevant performance only within the past five years. The Government will not evaluate past performance information outside of the five year timeframe which begins at the date of solicitation issuance. Relevant and timely past performance information including, but not limited to, information in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), and Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) (http://www.ppirs.gov/) including the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) will be considered during the evaluation of an Offeror’s past performance. Other sources of information available to the Government may also be used in the evaluation of Past Performance.

The following adjectival ratings/definitions shall be used to assign a rating for each effort for the Relevancy of the Past Performance obtained by the Government:

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.

The following adjectival ratings/definitions shall be used to assign one rating for the Performance Confidence Assessment to each Prime Offeror. This rating shall be based on the Prime’s and its subcontractors’ Past Performance Information.

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.

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.

Unknown Confidence (Neutral): 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.

FACTOR 3– PRICE (VOLUME III)

Although Price is the least important factor, the degree of its importance will increase with the degree of equality of the offers in relation to the other factors on which selection is to be made. Price will be evaluated by the Contracts personnel to determine fairness, completeness and reasonableness through the most appropriate method available in accordance with FAR Part 15.4.

METHODOLOGY

Proposals will be evaluated for the degree of understanding demonstrated, the technical excellence or lack thereof within the factors, and the level of competence proposed within each factor, as appropriate. Risk assessments will be performed as to the risk of unsuccessful performance within each factor. Each factor will be reviewed based on the merits of the information contained in the Offeror’s submission. Evaluators will not allow any prior knowledge of the Offeror to affect the evaluation of Factor 1, but relevant and timely past performance information will be considered during the evaluation of Factor 2.

At the conclusion of the Technical evaluations, the Government will reach a consensus rating for the Technical factor for each Offeror. If an Offeror receives a Technical rating of “Unacceptable” the Government will not evaluate the Offeror’s Past Performance as that Offeror will not be considered for award. Only Offerors receiving a Technical rating of “Marginal” or better and a Past Performance rating other than “No Confidence” will be eligible for award. The Government will not assign a rating to the Price factor, but will determine the evaluated price for each Offeror based on information provided, for the Offerors that represent the most likely candidates for award.

These Offerors will then be compared using tradeoffs between the Technical factor, the Past Performance factor and Price. Offerors are advised that the Government seeks proposals that demonstrate the greatest technical ability at a reasonable and realistic price. Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government.