Amendment_0005_N0018921R0005.pdf

N0018921R0005

18C0003TSVRONNEWCONTRACT

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

This amendment is to add additional questions and available answ ers to Attachment XIV and revises the Pricing Spreadsheet, Attachment III.

Additionally, this amendment updates the Performance Work Statement and Section L Instrustions to Offerors, w hich are outlined in red. All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 58

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 14-Jan-2021

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 N0018921R0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10-Dec-2020

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

14-Jan-2021

CODE

NAVSUP FLC NORFOLK CONTRACTING

NORFOLK OFFICE ATTN: C WHITESIDE

1968 GILBERT ST, SUTIE 600

NORFOLK VA 23518-3392

N00189 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM 52.212-2 INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS:

The Government intends to award a single Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) with Firm, Fixed-Price (FFP) provisions type contract to the responsible offeror that represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors in the solicitation. The proposal shall be in the form prescribed by, and shall contain a response to, each of the areas identified in Addendum FAR 52.212-1.

The evaluation will consist of two phases: Phase I – Factor 1: Facility Security Clearance and Phase II – Factor II:

Past Performance, Factor III: Technical Approach, Factor IV: Small Business Participation Plan, and Factor V:

Price. Offers receiving a rating of ‘Unacceptable’ for Factor I –Facility Security Clearance are considered un-awardable and will not be further evaluated. Factor III – Technical Approach will consist of two subfactors:

Subfactor I – Staffing and Management Approach, and Subfactor II – Sample Scenario, which are of descending importance. During Phase II, the evaluation of proposals will consider the Non-Price Proposal to be significantly more important than the Price Proposal. Within the Non-Price Proposal, Factor II – Past Performance is more important than Factor III -Technical, each of which are more important than Factor IV – Small Business Participation Plan.

The Government intends to award the contract without discussions. The establishment of a competitive range is not anticipated. Accordingly, each offeror should submit its most favorable terms from a technical, past performance, and price standpoint. The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest priced offeror; award without discussions; or award task order after discussions, whichever is in the best interest of the Government.

QUESTIONS: Offerors may submit questions regarding clarification of solicitation requirements by email to Christopher Whiteside at christopher.d.white1@navy.mil and Samantha Miller at samantha.miller@navy.mil. It is requested that all questions be received by 28 December 2020 by 1300 Eastern Time, as time may not permit responses to questions received after that date to be prepared and issued prior to the receipt of proposals.

FOR SUBMISSIONS OF OFFERORS:

(1) Proposals shall be submitted electronically no later than the due date of the solicitation via email to Christopher Whiteside at Christopher.d.white1@navy.mil and Samantha Miller at samantha.miller@navy.mil. Proposals shall comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposals contained herein; proposals that do not comply may be considered unacceptable and may render the proposal ineligible for award. All electronic files and versions of proposals shall be compatible with the current release of Adobe Acrobat and Microsoft Office Suite version 2016. The offeror shall be responsible for ensuring that their electronic proposals are virus free.

(2) Volumes I, II, III, & IV – Non-Price Proposal

These volumes shall address the Facility Security Clearance, Past Performance, Technical Approach and Small Business Participation Plan and include all information required for proposal evaluation. This volume of the proposal shall exclude any cost/pricing information.

Proposals shall include the following legend on each page:

Source Selection Information See FAR 2.101 and FAR 3.104

(3) Volume V – Price Proposal This volume shall include the completed solicitation documents and a complete and detailed price breakdown with all supporting information. Each page of each copy shall be affixed with the following legend:

Source Selection Information See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

II. REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPOSAL CONTENT:

The proposal should contain the following items in addition to other information required by this solicitation.

The cover page should indicate the following:

Title of the proposal Volume Number (I, II, III, IV, or V) Proposal Category (Factor/Subfactor) Request for Proposal Number Name and Address of Offeror, CAGE Code, DUNS number, and applicable Tax I.D. Number (TIN) Identification if original or a copy of the proposal Point of Contact name, telephone number, and email address Proposal valid for 180 days

Phase I:

Volume I, Factor I – Facility Security Clearance

Phase II:

Volume II, Factor II - Past Performance Volume III, Factor III – Technical Approach o Subfactor I – Staffing and Management Approach o Subfactor II – Sample Scenario

Volume IV, Factor IV – Small Business Participation Plan (all offerors) and Small Business Subcontracting Plan (other-than-small business offerors only)

Volume V, Factor V - Price

Table of Contents: The table of contents should provide sufficient detail as to allow the important elements to be easily located.

1. Requirements for Style: Each offeror shall submit a proposal that clearly and concisely describes and defines the contractor’s response to the requirements contained in the RFP. Unnecessary elaboration or other presentations beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal are not desired and may be construed as an indication of the offeror’s lack of understanding of cost consciousness. The proposal shall contain all the pertinent information in sufficient detail in the one area of the proposal where it contributes most critically to the discussion of the same information. When necessary, the offeror shall refer to the initial discussion and identify its location within the submitted proposal.

2. Proposal Page Limitations

The following page limitations are established:

Title Proposal Quantities Page Limit* Volume I – Factor I: Facility Security Clearance 1 Electronic Submission No Limit Volume II – Factor II: Past Performance 1 Electronic Submission 15 Pages

Volume III – Factor III, Subfactor I: Staffing and Management Approach**

1 Electronic Submission 20 Pages

Volume III – Factor III, Subfactor II: Sample Scenario 1 Electronic Submission 5 Pages Volume IV – Factor IV: Small Business Participation Plan 1 Electronic Submission 15 Pages Volume V– Factor V: Price 1 Electronic Submission No Limit

* Page limits represent the maximum pages the Government will evaluate and are not construed as de facto standards for the amount of material expected in the proposal.

** Required resumes and commitment letters for key personnel will be considered as separate documents, and subsequently, will not be counted against page limits. Resumes shall be no more than 2 pages each.

All submission and attachments shall be in Microsoft Office Word or Excel. Submissions are page limited to the maximum number of pages as defined above. These page limitations are inclusive of the executive summary and any charts, diagrams, and/or other graphics. Graphics (including tables) in the proposal may use an alternative font with 8-point size type or larger. Each “page” is defined as one sheet, 8 ½“ x 11”, with at least one inch margins on all sides, using a font with a point size of 12 or greater (e.g., "Times New Roman" style with 12-point font). Lines shall, at a minimum, be selected as single-spaced in Microsoft Word with Microsoft Word Normal character spacing. Pages shall be consecutively numbered. Multiple pages, double pages, two-sided pages, or foldouts will count as an equivalent number of 8 ½" x 11" pages. The offeror is permitted to submit no more than one page for each of the following, which will not be included in the page count: a cover sheet, list of tables, list of figures, compliance matrix, table of contents, tabs, and dividers.

Pages submitted in excess of the page limitations described within will not be evaluated.

The Price proposal is not page limited; however, the Price proposal is to be strictly limited to price information and completed solicitation documents as described in the General Section at the beginning of this text.

III. PROPOSAL CONTENT

Phase I:

1. Volume I Factor I – Facility Security Clearance:

The offeror shall provide proof/verification that it possesses a current Secret Facilities clearance at time of proposal submission as identified in section 8.0 of the PWS. The proof/verification shall be in the form of Defense Security Service verification. The submission shall include the following: Cage Code, Facility Name, Physical Location, Facility Clearance Status/level, Status Date/Issue Date, Safeguarding Level, and Authorized Access To, FCL Limitation, Facility Security Office, Facility Security Officer Phone Number, DSS Field Office, and DSS Field Office Phone Number. The verification or letter shall be dated within 30 days of the solicitation close date.

Phase II:

2. Volume II Factor II – Past Performance:

The offeror shall demonstrate relevant past performance or affirmatively state that it possesses no relevant past performance. Relevant past performance is performance under contracts or efforts performed within the past five years that is the same as; or similar to, the scope and magnitude of the work described by this solicitation. In addition, performance data will only be assessed for those references demonstrating at least 1 year of completed performance within the five years prior to the closing date of this solicitation.

To demonstrate its past performance, the offeror shall identify up to three (3) of its most relevant contracts or efforts performed within the past five (5) years, as determined by the closing date of this solicitation. Offerors should provide a detailed explanation demonstrating the relevance of the contracts or efforts to the requirements of the solicitation.

For purposes of this solicitation, a contract is defined as a single contract or a single task order placed under an ID/IQ contract, a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA), or a Federal Supply Schedule. Offerors may submit a combination of no more than three (3) delivery orders (DOs), task orders (TOs), technical direction letters (TDLs), and/or technical area tasks (TATs) placed under an ID/IQ or BPA as one of the three examples of past performance. Such a combination must also meet the requirements stated above: each individual example in the combination must have been performed within five (5) years of the solicitation closing date and demonstrate at least one (1) year of completed performance during that five-year period. No more than one combination of DOs, TOs, TDLs and or TATs is permitted in the past performance submittal.

a. If proposed subcontractor past performance is provided as part of the three (3) of its most relevant contracts or efforts, the percentage and type of work to be done by the subcontractor on the solicitation requirement must be stated. The offeror’s submittal shall detail clearly the aspects of the work in the solicitation that the subcontractor is proposed to perform. A Past Performance example which does not detail clearly the aspects of the work in the solicitation that the subcontractor is proposed to perform will not be evaluated.

b. If the prime offeror or intended subcontractor/partner submits a past performance example in which it served as a subcontractor, the prime/sub/partner shall detail clearly the work that it performed and the magnitude (dollar value) of that subcontracted work only. A Past Performance example that does not differentiate between the overall contract effort and the subcontractor effort will not be evaluated.

c. If a combination of DOs, TOs, TDLs and or TATs are used as a past performance example, the offeror shall state the specific experience claimed, period of performance, and dollar value of each. Performance data will only be assessed for those individual references demonstrating at least 1 year of completed performance prior to the closing date of the solicitation. A Past Performance example that does not provide the level of detail required will not be evaluated.

Subcontractor performance (either the offeror's own subcontractor experience or proposed subcontractors experience) of major or critical aspects of this requirement will be considered as highly as prime contractor past performance information for the offeror. Failure of offerors to provide the required information and level of specificity will result in the contract reference not being evaluated.

The offeror should complete a Past Performance Information Form for each reference submitted. The form is an attachment to this solicitation. The forms will count toward the Volume II page limit described above. For additional information regarding a particular reference beyond that which will fit on the form, the offeror may continue onto another sheet of paper. Such continuation sheet(s) for submitted references will count toward the Factor IV page limit.

In addition to the information requested above, offerors shall contact their past performance references and request that each reference complete the Past Performance Report Form, an attachment to this solicitation, and e-mail the completed survey form directly to Chris Whiteside at christopher.d.white1@navy.mil and Samantha Miller at samantha.miller@navy.mil by the DUE DATE OF THIS SOLICITATION. The Government reserves the right to consider past performance report forms received after the due date of the solicitation and to contact references for verification or additional information.

3. Volume III Factor III – Technical Approach: Factor III will consist of two subfactors: Subfactor I, Staffing and Management Approach, Subfactor II, Sample Scenario.

Factor III, Subfactor I – Staffing and Management Approach The offeror shall provide a staffing and management approach for utilization of the offeror’s personnel resources that demonstrates a thorough understanding of the skillsets required to successfully accomplish the tasks in PWS Sections 2-9. The offeror shall provide in detail a management approach that will successfully accomplish the requirements of the solicitation and the tasks/requirements specified within Sections 2-9 of the PWS. The offeror shall also provide their methodology to replace personnel with equally qualified personnel should a replacement be required. Furthermore, the offeror shall provide a plan to monitor personnel performance, skill maintenance and skill improvement. The offeror shall also provide their plan to sustain retention of employees and shall also provide information regarding its personnel retention and attrition history. Additionally, the approach should address the following:

a) Approach for maintaining the currency of the capabilities of personnel to include mariner certifications.

b) Approach for management of personnel, addressing day-to-day operations, oversight and control.

c) Approach for surge ability/capability under a complexed, combined training schedule.

d) Include a transition-in and transition-out plans to maintain full performance.

e) Provide a risk assessment and risk mitigation plan.

f) The offeror shall provide the required number of resumes for each labor category indicated in the table below. The offeror shall provide sufficient information within the resumes to detail the education, certifications, experience and required security clearance set forth in Section 3.1 of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Letters of intent shall accompany the resume submitted for an individual who is not currently employed by the prime offeror or an intended subcontractor or joint venture partner. Letters of intent will not count against the page count total. The required number of resumes for each labor category is shown below.

Position Required Number of Resumes Program Manager 1 Ship’s Communications Officer 1 Electronics Material Officer 1 Warehouse Clerk 1

* Required resumes and commitment letters for key personnel will be considered as separate documents, and subsequently, will not be counted against page limits. Resumes shall be no more than 2 pages each.

Factor III, Subfactor II – Sample Scenario Offeror shall provide a detailed approach to successfully accomplish the sample scenario corresponding to functional areas defined in the PWS. The Contractor, at a minimum, shall describe their approach to accomplish the task. The offeror shall provide a well written response to the below scenario:

a) Scenario: 96 hours prior to an underway mission a contractor Chief Engineer falls ill. Medical screening finds that employee will not be found fit for duty in time to make the underway time. What actions will you take to locate an employee, confirm they meet the qualifications espoused in the PWS, and get them to the ship in time to make the underway?

4. Volume IV Factor IV – Small Business Participation Plan (all offerors) All offerors, both large and small businesses, are required to provide a Small Business Participation Plan responding to the elements below:

o The extent to which small business concerns are specifically identified;

o The extent of commitment to use small business concerns (for example, enforceable commitments will be weighted more heavily than non-enforceable ones);

o The complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform;

o Past performance of the offeror in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan;

When subcontracting possibilities existed on the contracts submitted by the offeror in the Past

Performance volume, address whether or not the offeror awarded subcontracts to small business concerns, veteran-owned small business concerns, service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns, HUBZone small business concerns, small disadvantaged business concerns, and women-owned small business concerns to the fullest extent consistent with efficient contract performance.

If utilizing small businesses in current or prior contracts was not practicable, the offeror shall explain why.

Provide any information substantiating the offeror’s track record of utilizing small business on past contracts in detail. Include, at a minimum, two most recent Summary Subcontract Reports (SSR) from eSRS.

o The extent of participation of small business concerns in terms of the value of the total acquisition.

Volume IV – Small Business Subcontracting Plan (for other-than-small businesses only). Each offeror that is not a small business shall provide a Small Business Subcontracting Plan that contains all elements required by FAR clause 52.219-9 Alt II (Deviation), and as supplemented by DFARS clause 252.219-7003, by the closing date and time of this solicitation. The small business subcontracting plan is not an evaluation factor and will not be evaluated as part of the formal source selection process. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan must be determined to be acceptable by the contracting officer in order for the offeror to be eligible for contract award in accordance with FAR 19.702(a)(1). If the apparently successful offeror fails to negotiate a subcontracting plan acceptable to the contracting officer within the time limit prescribed by the contracting officer, the offeror will be ineligible for award. If the contracting officer accepts the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, it will become part of the contract. Offerors are permitted to submit a master subcontracting plan as long as it is created in accordance with FAR 19.701 and FAR 19.704(b). Small Business Subcontracting Plans are not required from offerors that qualify as small business concerns under NAICS code 488390 with a size standard of 41.5 (millions of dollars).

It is the goal of this solicitation that prime contractors subcontract with small businesses to the maximum extent practicable. For other-than-small prime contractors, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan goals shall be expressed in terms of whole dollars and percentages based on total planned subcontracting dollars. Of the total planned subcontracting dollars, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall include goals for small businesses, small disadvantaged businesses, woman-owned small businesses, HUBZone small businesses, veteran-owned small businesses, and service-disabled veteran-owned small businesses. The Government will consider prior achievement of small business subcontracting plan goals as well as the proposed dollar values and percentages related to this solicitation.

5. Volume V:

Factor V – Price:

Price shall include the completed solicitation documents and a complete and detailed price breakdown with all supporting documentation. The price information shall be completed in accordance with the following:

For the purpose of preparing a price proposal, the offeror shall assume that the period of performance consists of a 5-year ordering period, plus FAR clause 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, established in the Schedule. Total price will be evaluated taking into the account the total FFP for the ordering period and option period. Price analysis will be used to evaluate price reasonableness. The offeror shall complete the attachment, TSVRON Pricing Spreadsheet, for price proposal purposes.

Option FAR clause 52.217-8 will be evaluated pursuant to solicitation provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options.

A complete and signed Standard Form 1449, “Solicitation/Contract/Order for Commercial Items” and executed copy of amendments, if applicable.

Unless completed in the System for Award Management (SAM), the offeror shall complete the representations and certifications contained in the solicitation (FAR provision 52.212-3 Alternate I). If the offeror has completed all of the representations and certifications required by this solicitation in SAM, then the offeror need not submit the hardcopy representations and certifications.

Any subcontracts shall be identified and priced in the price factor.

The estimated travel amount is provided in the solicitation as Not to Exceed (NTE), cost-reimbursable

CLIN. The ODC’s which are, laundry, consumables, galley services, food service, and food survey, will be provided in the solicitation as a Not to Exceed (NTE), Firm-Fixed Price CLIN. Additionally, insurance will be provided in the solicitation as a Firm-Fixed Price CLIN. The Government’s estimated travel, ODC, and insurance amounts (plus applicable burdens) shall be used for the purpose of evaluating the price proposal.

Application of overhead and/or G&A rates, as appropriate, will be allowed only if the offeror maintains separate accounts for such costs; the offeror must apply burdens (as appropriate and allowable) to the common evaluation amounts. No profit or fee may be applied to the travel, ODC, and insurance costs. Any offeror having an accounting system that allows for the application of overhead and G&A to travel, ODC, and insurance shall specifically state this. The offeror’s failure to identify that additional indirect cost elements will be included shall result in those costs being deemed as mutually agreed upon as unallowable during the performance of the contract. Offerors shall use the following Government-estimated amounts in preparing their price proposal:

Performance Period Travel ODCs Insurance Ordering Period $200,000.00 $1,700,000.00 $1,100,000.00

FAR clause 52.217-8 $20,000.00 $200,000.00 $120,000.00

NOTE: The North American Industry Classification (NAICS) code applicable to the requirements contained within this solicitation is 488390.

FAR PROVISION 52.212-2 ADDENDUM

The Government intends to award a Firm Fixed Priced (FFP) Indefinite-Delivery- Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to the responsible offeror whose proposal represents the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors in this solicitation. An offeror’s proposal shall be in the form prescribed by solicitation provision FAR 52.212-1 entitled “Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items” and it’s Addendum and shall contain a response to each of the areas identified within.

The Non-Price Proposal is significantly more important than the Price Proposal. The Non-Cost/Price Proposal consists of Facility Security Clearance, Past Performance, Technical Approach, and Small Business Participation Plan. The evaluation will consist of two phases: Phase I – Factor 1: Facility Security Clearance and Phase II – Factor II: Past Performance, Factor III: Technical Approach, Factor IV: Small Business Participation Plan, and Factor V:

Price. Offers receiving a rating of ‘Unacceptable’ for Factor I –Facility Security Clearance are considered un-awardable and will not be further evaluated. Factor III – Technical Approach will consist of two subfactors:

Subfactor I – Staffing and Management Approach, and Subfactor II – Sample Scenario, which are of descending importance. During Phase II, the evaluation of proposals will consider the Non-Price Proposal to be significantly more important than the Price Proposal. Within the Non-Price Proposal, Factor II – Past Performance is more important than Factor III -Technical, each of which are more important than Factor IV – Small Business Participation Plan.

Although the price proposal is not the most important evaluation factor, it has the potential to become more significant during the evaluation process. The degree of importance of cost will increase with the degree of equality of the proposals in relation to the other factors on which selection is to be based. The importance of cost will also increase when an offeror’s cost is so significantly high as to diminish the value to the Government that might be gained under the other aspects of the offer. If, at any stage of the evaluation, all offerors are determined to have submitted equal, or virtually equal, proposals, cost could become the factor in determining which offeror shall receive the award.

All proposals will be reviewed for timeliness. Timely proposals will also be reviewed for compliance to the solicitation. If the proposal is not compliant with the material terms of the solicitation, it may not be evaluated and the offeror will be notified that the proposal is non-responsive.

1. Non-Price Proposal Evaluation Criteria The Non-Price proposal is comprised of the following Factors: Facility Security Clearance, Past Performance, Technical Approach, and Small Business Participation Plan. The Proposal will be evaluated in two phases.

Phase I Phase I will evaluate Factor I, Facility Security Clearance on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis per the submission of the proof/verification of a TOP SECRET Facilities Security Clearance.

This will be evaluated on an acceptable/unacceptable basis in accordance with the Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Table provided below labeled Table 1. In order for a proposal to move on to Phase II of the evaluation the offer must receive a rating of “Acceptable” for this factor evaluated in Phase I. Offers which receive a rating of “Unacceptable” for this factor will no longer be considered for award and no further evaluation will be conducted. To receive a grade of “Acceptable” for Factor I, the offer must provide proof/verification of a current, DSS-approved TOP SECRET Facility Clearance.

Phase II

Factor II: Past Performance The past performance evaluation factor assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an offeror’s ability to meet the contract’s requirements based on the quality of a demonstrated record of recent and relevant performance.

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality. These are combined to establish a single performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

Past Performance Recency: Recency is the first aspect of the past performance evaluation and is the time period during which past performance references are considered relevant. Recency is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. For purposes of this solicitation, recent past performance is performance that has taken place within five (5) years as of the closing date of this solicitation. Performance outside of this stated period will not be considered for evaluation purposes.

Past Performance Relevancy: Regarding relevancy, each past performance reference under each offeror’s Past Performance submission will be evaluated to determine its scope and magnitude relative to the instant requirement.

The following definitions will apply to this evaluation:

Scope: Experience in the areas defined in the PWS.

Magnitude: The measure of the similarity of the dollar value of actually performed work that exists between the PWS and the offeror’s referenced contracts during the stated five-year period established by the solicitation. In addition, performance data will only be assessed for those references demonstrating at least one (1) year of completed performance prior to the closing date of this solicitation.

The relevancy rating assigned to each past performance reference will be considered in determining the weight to be given to that reference in the overall Past Performance Confidence Assessment. In determining the rating for the past performance factor, past performance of greater relevancy will have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

Past Performance Quality: The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. The Government will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror’s performance, including general trends and usefulness of the information, and will incorporate this into the performance confidence assessment.

Past Performance Confidence Assessment: The overall assigned rating for past performance will be the Past Performance Confidence Assessment rating, defined in the table below. The assignment of this rating will be based on the overall quality of the recent and relevant past performance and will also consider the source of the information, the context of the data, and general trends in the offeror’s performance. The quality of performance under a past performance reference that that has no relevance to the instant requirement will not be considered in the overall assessment of past performance confidence. Evaluation will focus only on work already performed. Work yet-to-be performed and work prior the last five (5) years as of the closing date of this solicitation will not be considered. In addition, performance data will only be assessed for those references demonstrating at least one (1) year of completed performance prior to the closing date of this solicitation.

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 on the past performance factor. In this case, the offeror’s past performance is unknown and assigned a performance confidence rating of “Neutral Confidence.” Although an offeror that lacks recent, relevant past performance may not be rated favorably or unfavorably with regard to past performance, the Government may determine that a “Substantial Confidence” or “Satisfactory Confidence” past performance rating provides better value to the Government than a “Neutral Confidence” past performance rating.

In order to determine the quality of performance, the Government may utilize existing data sources, including the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), the Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; communication with points of contact in the offeror’s customer’s organization, which could include private sector requirements and contracts personnel, Administrative Contracting Officers, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) personnel, Procuring Contracting Officers, Contracting Officer’s Representatives, and other Government activity requirements personnel. The Government may verify past performance information. The Government may contact some or all of the references provided, as appropriate, and may collect information through questionnaires, telephone interviews, and existing data sources. The Government reserves the right to obtain information for use in the evaluation of past performance from any and all sources, including sources outside of the Government. This information will be used for the evaluation of past performance.

The past performance factor evaluation and past performance confidence assessment rating is separate and distinct from the contracting officer’s responsibility determination. The assessment of the offeror’s past performance will be used as a means of evaluating the relative capability of the offeror and other competitors to successfully meet the requirements of the solicitation.

NOTE: A rating of “Limited Confidence” for the past performance factor means that the offeror’s proposal is not awardable without a change or changes to the offeror’s proposal. A proposal that includes a “Limited Confidence” rating is considered to be susceptible to correction if the contracting officer determines that an exchange (pursuant to FAR 15.306) is appropriate and said exchange is conducted. A rating of “No Confidence” for the past performance factor means that the offeror’s proposal is not awardable, is not susceptible to correction, and will not be further evaluated.

Factor III: Technical Approach: Factor III is comprised of the below subfactors:

Subfactor I – Staffing and Management Approach: The offeror’s overall staffing and management approach will be evaluated on its feasibility, comprehensiveness, and the degree to which the offeror demonstrates an understanding of, and capability to successfully accomplish, the tasks found in PWS Sections 2-9. Offerors will be evaluated on their demonstrated capability to replace personnel with equally qualified personnel should a replacement be required. Offerors will be further evaluated on their plan to monitor personnel performance, skill maintenance, and skill improvement. Offerors will be evaluated on their capability to sustain retention of employees and proven capability to maintain low attrition rates. Additional, the offeror’s approach will be evaluated on their proposed techniques and actions for the following:

a) Approach for maintaining the currency of the capabilities of personnel to include mariner certifications.

b) Approach for management of personnel, addressing day-to-day operations, oversight and control.

c) Approach for surge ability/capability under a complexed, combined training schedule.

d) Approach to include a transition-in and transition-out plans to maintain full performance.

e) Approach to provide a risk assessment and risk mitigation plan.

g) The offeror will be evaluated on providing sufficient resumes and sufficient information within the resumes to detail the education, certifications, experience and required security clearance set forth in Section 3.1 of the Performance Work Statement (PWS). Letters of intent shall accompany the resume submitted for an individual who is not currently employed by the prime offeror or an intended subcontractor or joint venture partner. Letters of intent will not count against the page count total. The required number of resumes for each labor category

Position Required Number of Resumes Program Manager 1 Ship’s Communications Officer 1 Electronics Material Officer 1 Warehouse Clerk 1

Subfactor II – Sample Scenario: The offeror’s overall sample scenario will be evaluated on its ability to demonstrate its feasibility, comprehensiveness, and the degree to which the offeror can demonstrate the understanding of the sample scenario and how the tasks identified will be successfully accomplished. The offeror will be evaluated on their ability to provide a detailed approach to execute the sample scenario in line with the corresponding functional areas defined in the PWS.

The purpose of the technical factor is to assess the offeror’s proposed approach to satisfy to Government’s requirement. Factor III will be evaluated utilizing the Combined Technical/Risk Rating in Table 4, which includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical rating.

NOTE: A rating of “Marginal” for Factor III or any subfactor means that the offeror’s proposal is not awardable without a change or changes to the offeror’s proposal. An offer which includes a “Marginal” rating is not eligible for award if award is made on initial offers. Offerors that receive a “Marginal” rating are considered to be susceptible to correction if the Source Selection Authority determines that an exchange (pursuant to FAR 15.306) is appropriate and said exchange is conducted. A rating of “Unacceptable” for Factor III means that the offeror’s proposal is not awardable and will not be further evaluated. Offerors simply providing general statements or paraphrasing/parroting the PWS in whole or in any part may result in a rating of “Unacceptable”.

Factor IV – Small Business Participation Plan (all offerors) The contracting officer will evaluate each offeror’s Small Business Participation Plan as follows:

o The extent to which small business concerns are specifically identified o The extent of commitment to use small business concerns (for example, enforceable commitments will be weighted more heavily than non-enforceable ones) o The complexity and variety of the work small firms are to perform o Past performance of the offeror in complying with requirements of the clauses at FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan o The extent of participation of small business concerns in terms of the value of the total acquisition

The offeror’s small business participation plan factor will be evaluated utilizing the Small Business Rating Method in Table 5.

Small Business Subcontracting Plan (for other-than-small businesses only). This is NOT an evaluation factor.

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan requirement is mandatory for award to a large business. Each large business offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan will be reviewed in accordance with FAR clause 52.219-9 Alt II (Deviation), Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The plan will be reviewed for acceptability. The apparently successful offeror shall negotiate an acceptable subcontracting plan with the contracting officer prior to award.

Failure to negotiate an acceptable subcontracting plan will make the offeror ineligible for award. Negotiation of the small business subcontracting plan is not considered discussions and will only occur with the apparent successful offeror. The plan will be incorporated into any resultant contract.

2. Price Proposal Evaluation Criteria

Volume IV:

Factor IV – Price:

Price proposals will be evaluated based price reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.404-1, Price Analysis. The Government may evaluate any and all information submitted by the offeror to support the reasonableness of the prices proposed. The method of evaluation used by the contracting officer is solely within the discretion of the contracting officer.

If the offeror’s proposal is determined to be marginal/unacceptable in any of the non-price evaluation factors, the price proposal will not be evaluated by the contracting officer. The Government reserves the right to award the contract to other than the lowest priced offeror.

Although price is not the most important evaluation factor, it has the potential to become more significant during the evaluation process. The degree of importance of price will increase with the degree of equality of the offers in relation to the other factors on which selection is to be based. The importance of price will also increase when a offer’s price is so significantly high as to diminish the value to the Government that might be gained under the other aspects of the offer. If, at any stage of the evaluation, all offerors are determined to have submitted equal, or virtually equal, non-price offers, price could become the factor in determining which offeror will receive the award.

Evaluation of Options Options, to include FAR clause 52.217-8, will be evaluated pursuant to solicitation provision FAR 52.217-5, Evaluation of Options. The Government will evaluate proposals for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

Evaluation of Travel

The dollar values provided in ADDENDUM FAR 52.212-1, under Section 3. Volume V, Price in regards to Travel have been predetermined by the requiring command, and shall be utilized for evaluation purposes in determining the total price for the contract.

3. Written Notice A written notice of award or acceptance of a proposal emailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the proposal, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the proposal’s specified expiration time, the Government may accept a proposal (or part of a proposal), whether or not there are exchanges after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

4. Rating Tables Table 1 – Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

Technical Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

Table 2 – Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Table

Rating Description Very

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

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant

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

Not Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort this solicitation requires.

Table 3 – Past Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings Table

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.

Table 4 – Combined Technical/Risk Ratings Table

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 un-awardable.

Table 5 – Small Business Rating Method

Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objective.

Definitions:

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

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

Significant Weakness in the proposal is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk 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.

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

ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENTS:

ATT I – Past Performance Information Form ATT II – Past Performance Report Form ATT III – Labor Hour Pricing Spreadsheet updated Amendment N0018921R00050005 ATT IV – Consolidated Government Furnished Property Form ATT V – Master Cabin Stores List ATT VI – NAVSUP NOTE 7330 June 2017 ATT VII – Indemnity ATT VIII – Contract Administration Plan ATT IX – Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan and Matrix ATT X – Contract Discrepancy Form

ATT XI – DRAFT DD-254

ATT XII – Wage Determination ATT XIII – Mission…