2.04 N00244-24-R-0003-0003.pdf

1301079702

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: 1) update the PWS, 2) update Attachments 1 and 12, 3) revise sections L and M.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 52

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 23-Feb-2024

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 N0024424R0003

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

30-Jan-2024

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 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

23-Feb-2024

CODE

NAVSUP FLC SAN DIEGO

REGIONAL CONTRACTS (CODE 200)

3985 CUMMINGS ROAD

BUILDING 116 - 3RD FLOOR

SAN DIEGO CA 92136-4200

N00244 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N0024424R0003

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-1

Addendum to 52.212-1

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS--COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (SEP

2023) - (Section L)

1.0 General Instructions: Proposals shall be submitted directly to Ms. Christine Jordan, Contract Specialist via e-mail by the closing date and time specified on the cover page of this solicitation. Offerors must comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposal and should be clear and unambiguous. Failing to comply with the instructions may render the proposal ineligible for award.

The anticipated contract awards under this solicitation will be made using the Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items, with the policies and procedures for solicitation and evaluation.

The resulting contract awards will each be an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract, with Fixed Priced Task Orders. Contracts will be awarded via an unrestricted competition. In accordance with FAR Part 15, Source Selection for this Multiple Award Contracts (MAC) acquisition will be based on Technically Acceptable evaluation criteria with awards to Offerors with technically acceptable proposals, acceptable past-performance, and low price (LPTA). The Government intends to award two or more contracts for a Program ceiling amount of $2,670,026,650 for all contracts for all years. This acquisition consists of a 12-month base period and nine (9) 12-month option periods.

1.1 All offers must fully comply with these instructions and address all solicitation requirements to be eligible for award. As such, offerors that take exception to any minimum requirement, term, or condition of this solicitation, propose any additional term or condition, or omit any required information, without prior resolution with the Contracting Officer may be eliminated from consideration. For purposes of this procurement, multiple offers from one Offeror will not be considered.

1.2 The Government intends to award multiple contracts on the basis of initial offers received, without discussions.

Therefore, each initial offer should contain the Offeror's best terms and pricing. If discussions are not held, proposals not rated as ”Acceptable” for all non-price factors will not be evaluated for past performance or price and will not be considered for award. Notwithstanding this intent, the Government reserves the right to establish a competitive range, conduct discussions with Offerors, and request revised proposals, as necessary.

1.3 Each Offeror’s proposal is presumed to represent the Offeror’s best efforts to comply with the solicitation requirements and provide the best price. The Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price standpoint. Clarity and completeness of the proposal are of the utmost importance. The proposal must be written in a practical, clear, and concise manner. It must use quantitative terms whenever possible and must avoid qualitative adjectives to the maximum extent possible.

1.4 The proposal should be complete as submitted, and not include references to data or information previously submitted. Data previously submitted to the Navy, if any, will not be incorporated “by reference” into the offer and will not be considered in the evaluation of the proposal.

1.5 The proposal must demonstrate the Offeror’s familiarity with the detailed aspects of the requirements, and clearly show that the Offeror understands all of the requirements. Offerors are cautioned against restating the PWS in their proposal, particularly with regards to the Factor I: Technical; and must state how all solicitation and PWS r(Minimum Requirements will be met. Statements such as "the Offeror understands", and "the Offeror shall/can comply", along with responses that paraphrase the solicitation, are inadequate. The use of phrases such as “standard practices” (with a specific Government reference or industry reference) does not reflect the Offeror’s understanding of requirements and will likely result in an “Unacceptable” evaluation rating.

1.6 The Government will not agree in advance to withhold release of unit prices in a Government contract; and, in order to be considered for award any non-conforming data rights restrictive legends shall be removed. Contractors may, however, provide proposal data rights legends that confirm substantially to FAR 52.215-1(e)(1)(2) and mark the data in accordance with that clause.

Information marked and considered to be proprietary and/or trade secret information, does not bind the Government by that assertion. Federal Law, to wit, 5 USC 552, "The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)" applies. The Government will nevertheless not release any FOIA requested contract information unless and until it has provided a meaningful opportunity to object. Further, the Government acknowledges that the pricing data submitted herein is in response to a "Request for Proposals" (RFP) for a contract. See FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(3) and (4).

1.7 Questions regarding any aspect of this procurement must be submitted in writing via email only, and addressed to both: christine.jordan@navy.mil and juana.m.perez2.civ@us.navy.mil. Other methods of submitting questions are not authorized and will not be acknowledged, i.e. phone calls will not be accepted. The subject line of all email correspondence must state: RFP N00244-24-R-0003 QUESTIONS in the subject line. The Government will make every attempt to answer all questions in a timely manner; however, questions submitted within 7 days of the closing date may not allow for ample time to respond and Offerors cannot be guaranteed a response will be issued. Offerors should anticipate that questions and responses will be posted for viewing by all other potential Offerors. An extension to the Offer Due Date/Time may not be provided on the basis of question(s) regarding any aspect of this procurement.

1.8 It is the Offeror’s responsibility to ensure all electronic media are readable by the Government.

1.9 Period for acceptance of offers. The Offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 280 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

2.0 Proposal Format and Content:

2.1 All offers must be submitted via e-mail to Contract Specialist Ms. Christine Jordan, e-mail address christine.jordan@navy.mil and must show the RFP Number, Offeror’s name, and the word “PROPOSAL” in the Subject Line of the email.

Proposals will include the following:

Volume I – Offer, FAR 52.212-3, and Offeror Representations and Certifications specified herein.

Volume II – Pricing Volume III – Technical Volume IV – Past Performance Volume V – Small Business Subcontracting Plan (required for large businesses)

Volume Name Page Limit Volume I – Offer and FAR 52.212-3 Unlimited Volume II – Pricing Excel – Unlimited, submission may also include a

5 page explanatory word document Volume III –Technical 60 pages, excluding attachments and heat maps Volume IV – Past Performance 5 pages, excluding attachments Volume V – Small Business Subcontracting Plan

15 pages

* Volume III shall not contain any price or cost information ** Page limits do not include cover pages or table of contents. However, these pages shall not include any material information that needs to be evaluated under the evaluation factors.

2.1.1 The Government prefers one-inch margins on all sides and single-spaced, 12 point Times New Roman font with normal spacing, and pages of each volume numbered consecutively.

(a) Each volume must include the following information:

i. Title Page – The Title Page shall include

(A) Title – N00244-24-R-0003 DoD Wireless and Cellular Services and Devices

(B) Volume Name (e.g. Pricing, Technical, Past Performance, etc.)

(C) Volume Number

(D) Name and address of the Offeror, point-of-contact (POC), title, telephone number, fax number, email address

(E) Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN), Unique Entity Identifier (UEI), Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code.

(F) List of persons, with their titles and contact information, who are authorized to legally sign a contract and bind the Offeror.

ii Table of Contents – The TOCs shall provide enough detail to locate all required elements of the proposal.

(b) Data submitted to the Government in support of the Offeror’s price proposal shall follow the above format. All submissions are subject to the posted submission requirements including the posted closing date and time.

3.0 Specific Volume Instructions

3.1 Volume I – Offer

3.1.1 Complete and submit the following documents, constituting Volume I:

(a) Standard Form 1449, “Solicitation, Offer and Award” with blocks 17a, 30a, 30b, and 30c completed with original signatures and completed CLIN pricing

(b) FAR Clause 52.212.3 Alt I – Offerors’ Representations and Certifications-Commercial Items (OCT 2014) Products and Commercial Services (SEP 2023) including additional RFP Certification requirements set forth herein.

(c) Acknowledgement of any/all RFP amendments, by signature and title on each applicable Standard Form

3.1.2 Volume I shall be formatted as follows:

a) Title page

b) Table of Contents

c) Signed Amendments

d) Original 1449 (two pages) and completed CLIN pricing.

e) All Representations and Certifications, or a statement that the certifications are complete within your System of Award Management (SAM) profile.

3.2 Volume II – Pricing

3.2.1 This Volume shall include a completed Attachment 1 –ELINs 1(a) and 1(b) for the 36-month and 48-month tech refresh options. The total of the extended amounts shown on the spreadsheets represents the proposal’s total offer amount for evaluation for both the base period and the option periods.

3.2.2 Each offeror’s price proposal shall include completed Entry Line Item Number (ELINs) schedules as provided in the RFP (Attachment 1). Offerors are to provide a proposal for all CLIN items. Offerors shall ensure all calculations are no more than two decimals. Calculations shall be made to two decimals ONLY. All Wireless Mobility Services are to be priced based upon Legacy Coverage (in accordance with PWS Section 6.6.1), and on the basis that the government and offeror have mutually agreed upon given Frequency Bands and Geographical Areas for the Task Order (in accordance with PWS Sections 6.3 and 6.6.2). All Paging Services are to be priced upon Local Coverage (in accordance with PWS Section 3.2.2), and on the basis that the government and offeror have mutually agreed upon a Metropolitan Area for the Task Order.

3.2.3 The Price Proposal shall include a summary sheet showing the amount for each CLIN and a Total amount in the following format:

SUMMARY SHEET

Solicitation Number OFFEROR’s name

CLIN 0001 $____________

CLIN 1001 $____________

CLIN 2001 $____________

CLIN 3001 $____________

CLIN 4001 $____________

CLIN 5001 $____________

CLIN 6001 $____________

CLIN 7001 $____________

CLIN 8001 $____________

CLIN 9001 $____________

TOTAL $______________________

Date: ________________________________

Signed by: ____________________________

Name:

Official Title:

E-Mail Address Phone Number

**FOR ANY DISCREPANCIES IN TOTALS AMONG THE ELINS, CLINS, AND SUMMARY SHEET-- THE

GOVERNMENT WILL CONSIDER THE UNIT PRICES AS HAVING PRECEDENCE

3.2.4 A proposal that leaves a blank or zeros for any ELIN unit prices, may not be considered for award for that item for the base period, unless the proposal clearly states that that ELIN item is not separately priced (NSP), and may be ordered at $0.00 price. The exception to this would be where the Government has provided Not To Exceed (NTE) amount on the Pricing ELIN Spreadsheet in those instances unit pricing is not required and should be left blank.

The Contracting Officer, at her/his sole discretion, may consider requests to include items not in the original proposal, for the out years. The items will be added at a competitively developed price.

***The Program Ceiling amount of $2,670,026,650 is divided evenly among the 10 CLINS, with $267,002,665 per CLIN. The total unobligated ceiling will be available for each period until the total Program Ceiling amount has been obligated. Offerors are cautioned that the Program Ceiling NTE award amount does NOT obligate the Government to order the NTE amount or any amount over the Minimum Guarantee of $3,000. Offerors are further cautioned that they should provide the best price for the ELIN unit prices as there will be task orders awarded based on calculations of the ELIN unit prices alone (for orders using Simplified Acquisition Procedures < 250K).

3.2.5 By signature on Proposal, offeror agrees that the proffered prices, including consideration of any discount or rebate arrangement, do not exceed prices charged on any other Federal Government or DoD contract for like services with similar terms and conditions.

3.3 Volume III –Technical – THERE SHALL BE NO COST OR PRICING INFORMATION INCLUDED IN

ANY PART OF VOLUME III.

3.3.1 The technical proposal shall be page numbered, contain a table of contents, be organized in the order specified for technical sub-factors, and shall address in detail the information required below. Each factor and sub-factor shall be clearly identified.

Technical has five sub-factors:

Sub-factor (1) Coverage, Sub-factor (2) Devices, Sub-factor (3) Transition Plan, Sub-factor (4) Corporate Management Reporting Capabilities, and Sub-factor (5) Contingency Communication Capability.

3.3.2 Factor I, Technical --Proposals must demonstrate the offeror’s ability to meet the requirements as set forth in the solicitation and PWS.

(1) Coverage: Proposals shall provide a narrative demonstrating the Offeror’s ability to provide coverage in the United States.

The narrative must clearly address those areas where coverage is provided and those areas where they provide little or no coverage. The Offeror shall also address how it plans to improve coverage in those areas, working toward meeting coverage for all areas. Proposals must clearly demonstrate that their coverage meets the requirements of section 6.6 of the PWS.

The narrative must also demonstrate the ability to provide coverage for Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S.

Virgin Islands, and temporary international coverage for Zones 1 and 2 (shown in attachments 7 and 8) and how the offeror plans to expand its temporary international coverage. The narrative must specifically address those areas where they provide little or no coverage, and how the Offeror plans to improve coverage in those areas working toward meeting coverage for all the areas. Offerors shall also identify those countries without an added fee for voice, text, and data outside of the 50 United States and Washington D.C.

Proposals shall provide three (3) separate Heat Maps that depict the range of signal strengths across the 50 United States and Washington D.C., based upon the latest data submission for an in-vehicle mobile environment to the Federal Communication Commission Broadband Data Collection for the National Mobile Broadband Map, to include 4G LTE and 5G (for both 35/3 Mbps or above, and for 7/1 Mbps or above), as applicable.

(2) Devices: Proposals shall demonstrate how the offeror will provide devices that meet the technical requirements of the RFP and shall demonstrate their approach to repair, replacement, or upgrade of equipment and any maintenance terms for the use of the proposed equipment.

(3) Transition Plan: Change of Contract and Service Provider – Proposals shall provide a narrative of how the offeror will be able to comply with the requirements under section 3.3 of the PWS. The offeror should discuss the methodology for moving from the existing contract to a new contract and for moving from one carrier to another carrier without a break in service.

(4) Corporate Management Reporting Capabilities: Proposals shall provide a narrative of how the offeror will be able to comply with all of the reporting requirements under section 5.0 of the PWS.

(5) Contingency Communication Capability (CCC): The proposal shall demonstrate how the offeror is capable of meeting the requirements of section 6.1.1 of the PWS. Should address a methodology for assisting DoD users covered under these contracts.

3.4 Volume IV –Past Performance Factor II

3.4.1 Offerors should provide relevant past performance information for similar or related work during the last three years. Offerors may submit performance data regarding current contract performance as long as a minimum of one year of performance has been completed as of the closing date of this solicitation.

3.4.2 For each Past Performance Reference, the Offeror shall provide Contract number, POC and Contact information, Contract amount and contract value (amount ordered against the contract), date of award and any options exercised, description of challenges and how the challenges were overcome.

3.4.3 For each Past Performance Reference, the Offeror shall describe how the past contract/task order relates to this solicitation’s requirement and exactly how it is relevant. The contract/task order identified should be relevant in that they are of similar scope and complexity to the effort in this solicitation and provide the most context and ability to measure whether the Offeror will successfully satisfy the current requirement. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, similarity of product/service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services), and extent of subcontracting/teaming.

3.4.4 Each Offeror has the opportunity to provide in its proposal any information regarding its past performance that it would like the Government to consider. Identify awards received for performance, customer service, innovation etc.; Past Performance information should address the following: customer service; contingency communication capability; transition planning; coverage; devices. Past Performance experience information should also include timely delivery of equipment; timely activations and porting; timely technology refresh; timely repair and replacement; continuous upgrade of equipment (infrastructure and devices) and Customer Satisfaction with service and pricing. 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.

3.4.5 Additionally, offerors shall contact their past performance references and request that each reference complete a “Past Performance Questionnaire” (PPQ) in the format shown in Attachment 5.

(a) Offerors shall submit a minimum of 3 and a maximum of 5 completed survey(s) via email directly from the company providing the survey. Surveys submitted from the offeror’s customers should be sent directly from the customer to the Government via email. Surveys sent via email shall be addressed to christine.jordan@navy.mil and show the RFP Number, Offeror’s name, and the word “SURVEY’ in the Subject Line of the email. Within the body and at the top of the email message, the customer should include the name and address of the company for which the survey was done, or paste the content of the Attachment Survey into the body of the email. Offerors may include past performance references with the proposal submission, however, it is the responsibility of the Offeror to ensure their proposal includes sufficient past performance information. Past Performance reference submissions received after the proposal due date and time may not be considered.

(b) Offerors shall include information with regard to meeting small subcontracting plan goals for each Past Performance Reference. Include specific goals, actual progress toward meeting the goals and steps taken when goals were not met. Offeror’s shall include past performance information explaining how they complied with the requirements of clause FAR 52.219-8. Large Business Offerors shall include past performance information with regard to subcontracting plan goals for Small Business (SB) concerns on previous contracts, explaining how they complied with the requirements of clauses FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns and FAR 52.219- 9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

3.4.6 Volume IV Past Performance shall be formatted as follows:

(a) Title page

(b) Table of Contents

(c) List of Past Performance References

(d) Completed PPQs

(e) Small Business Utilization Narrative

3.5 Volume V- Small Business Subcontracting Plan

3.5.1 Offerors who are other than Small Businesses are required to submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan conforming to the requirements of FAR 19.7 and DFARS 219.7. If the offeror is a participant in the DoD Comprehensive Subcontracting Test Program specified in DFARS 219.7, the offeror shall describe how Small Business participation on this contract will contribute to its overall Comprehensive Subcontracting goals. Offerors shall describe specific efforts to ensure the resulting contract meets or exceeds proposed goals. Proposals shall include all the information, goals, and assurances required by FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7003.

3.5.2 The table below provides the small business subcontracting goals:

Small Business 7% Small Disadvantage 1.5% Women-Owned Small Business 1% HUBZone Small Business 1% Service-Disabled Veteran Owned 1%

3.5.3 Any Offeror proposing a subcontracting plan that does not meet the above goals in any category must clearly explain why the goal is not being met and what actions the contractor is undertaking to maximize small business subcontracting. The offeror shall provide targets expressed in percentages for small businesses, HUBzone small business, service-disabled veteran owned small business, women-owned small business, and small disadvantage business concerns (do not include any cost information).

3.5.4 The successful Offeror’s approved Subcontracting Plan will be incorporated into the resultant contract.

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2

Addendum to 52.212-2

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS AND COMMERCIAL SERVICES (NOV 2021) –

(Section M)

1.0 Basis for Award

1.1 The Government intends to award multiple Indefinite Delivery-Indefinite Quantity (MAC IDIQ) contracts. The award will be made using the lowest price technically acceptable (LPTA) source selection process. Contracts will be awarded to Offerors who are deemed responsible in accordance with FAR Part 9.1, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation’s requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by the Addendum to 52.212-1 and whose proposal is judged to be the lowest priced technically acceptable proposal(s).

The number of IDIQ contracts to be awarded will be within the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer with evaluated price being the deciding factor when comparing technically acceptable offerors. For example, if there are four technically acceptable offers and the Government decides to make three awards, the technically acceptable offeror with the fourth highest price would not receive an award. While the Government will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature is subjective and therefore, professional judgement is implicated through the entire process. The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposals, as received without discussions.

1.1.2 The Government’s technical evaluation team will evaluate the technical proposals on an “Acceptable”/”Unacceptable” basis. Any factor or sub-factor evaluated as “Unacceptable” will render the entire proposal as “Unacceptable” and therefore, not eligible for award. Only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable, either initially or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award.

1.1.3 To be eligible for award, all offers must fully comply with the instructions included in to FAR 52.212-1 and ADDENDUM to FAR 52.212-1 specified herein, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices for Submission of Offers, and addresses all solicitation requirements. As such, offers that take exception to any term or condition of this RFP, propose any additional term or condition, or omit any required information, without prior resolution with the Contracting Officer may be eliminated from consideration. The Offeror’s initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price standpoint.

The following factors shall be used to evaluate proposals:

2.0 Factor I, Technical

2.1 The Government will evaluate Factor I and its sub-factors on an acceptable/unacceptable basis, assigning one of the ratings described in table C-1 below. The five sub-factors under Factor I will be rated individually, and these ratings will be used to determine an overall rating for Factor I Technical. Any sub-factor rated as unacceptable will render the entire Factor I unacceptable and, as a result, will render the entire proposal ineligible for award. The sub-factors are: (1) Coverage, (2) Devices, (3) Transition Plan, (4) Corporate Management Reporting Capabilities, and

(5) Contingency Communication Capability.

Sub-Factor (1) - Coverage

(a) The Government will evaluate if the offeror is able to: (1) provide coverage in the United States, (2) provide international coverage for Zones 1 and 2 (shown in attachments 7 and 8), and (3) provide heat maps that depict the range of signal strengths across the 50 United States and Washington D.C.

The Government will also evaluate how the proposal addresses those areas where coverage is provided, areas where they provide little or no coverage, and plans to improve coverage, as well as the offeror’ s plans to expand international coverage.

Sub-Factor (2) - Devices

(a) The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal to determine whether the proposed equipment meets the technical requirements of the RFP. The Government will also evaluate the offeror’s ability to adequately repair, replace, or upgrade equipment and meet any maintenance terms for the use of the proposed equipment.

Sub-Factor (3) – Transition Plan

(a) The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal to determine whether the offeror will be able to comply with the requirements under section 3.3 of the PWS and have the ability to move from the existing contract to a new contract, and for moving from one carrier to another carrier without a break in service.

Sub-Factor (4) - Corporate Management Reporting Capabilities

(a) The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal to determine whether the offeror will be able to comply with all of the reporting requirements under section 5.0 of the PWS.

Sub-Factor (5) - Contingency Communication Capability

(a) The Government will evaluate the offeror’s proposal to determine whether the offeror clearly demonstrates that the offeror is capable of meeting the requirements of section 6.1.1 of the PWS and their methodology for assisting DoD users covered under these contracts.

2.2 EVALUATION Factor I (Technical) -- The following ratings will be used to evaluate Factor I and its subfactors.

Offerors failing to receive an ACCEPTABLE rating for this factor and its subfactors will not be evaluated for past performance or price.

Table C-1. Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation.

3.0 Factor II, Past Performance

3.1 The Government will evaluate the offeror’s past performance to assess the Government’s confidence in the Offeror’s probability of successfully performing the requirements as outlined in this RFP. Past performance will be evaluated on a subjective, integrated assessment of recency, relevancy, and quality of past performance. All proposals will be rated for past performance on an “Acceptable or “Unacceptable” basis.

3.2 The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance that meet the solicitation requirements. In conducting the Past Performance evaluation, the Government reserves the right to use both the information provided in the Offeror’s Past Performance proposal and the information gathered from other sources available to the Government. These include, but not limited to, Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), or other databases;

interviews with Program managers/Contracting Officers, etc.

3.3 Past performance will be evaluated to determine whether the work performed by the Offeror is relevant to this requirement. Relevant past performance is performance under contracts accomplished within the past three (3) years that is of the same or similar scope, complexity, and magnitude to that which is described in this solicitation.

3.4 The Government will evaluate offerors past performance in complying with the requirements of clause FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, and For Large Business Offerors’ their compliance with FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7003, Small Business Subcontracting Plan as well.

3.5 The Government will assign one relevancy rating for each past performance effort submitted using the two levels of relevancy as shown in the table below:

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar 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

Each past performance reference under each offeror’s Past Performance submission that is found to be relevant will be evaluated to determine the quality of the offeror’s performance under that reference. The Government will focus its inquiry of the offeror’s record of past performance as it relates to timeliness, quality, cost control, customer satisfaction, and Small Business Utilization.

3.6 Quality of the relevant past performance will form the basis for the overall Past Performance rating.

All proposals will be rated for past performance using the following ratings:

Table C-2. Past Performance Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Acceptable Based on the Offeror’s past performance record, the Government has reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance is unknown.

Unacceptable Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have reasonable expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

*NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of recent and relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned Offeror must state that there is no past performance available. This offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable”.

A proposal that omits Factor II will be given a rating of unacceptable.

4.0 Factor III, Price

Proposals that are rated “Unacceptable” either under Factor I, Technical, or Factor II, Past Performance, are ineligible for award and will not be evaluated under Factor III, Price. Proposals rated “Acceptable” for non-price factors will be ranked by price using the total proposed price for all CLINs, inclusive of option periods.

4.1 Price will be evaluated by totaling the prices for all line items, including options, for which the Government has requested the offeror provide a price. Price Analysis will be performed to determine whether the proposed prices are fair and reasonable using one or more of the techniques listed in FAR 15.404-1.

4.2 It is the intent of the contract to effectively manage the DoN Wireless Contract program to fully capitalize on economies of scale and benefits from volume pricing discounts. The Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Multiple Award Contracts will allow the flexibility to negotiate pricing. Offerors should provide for this type of flexibility in their proposal as Task Orders may be issued based on unit prices submitted in response to this RFP alone. Quantities provided in Attachment 1 are for evaluation purposes only and do not commit the Government to order those quantities. The Government does not anticipate the total for this program including all contracts and all options, if exercised, to exceed $2,670,026,650.

4.3 The pricing proposals will be evaluated for balance and reasonableness. The Government will evaluate all priced ELINS and the market basket, inclusive of option periods. Price will also be evaluated for completeness. In order for a contractor to be eligible for award, contractor shall propose on all ELINs. A price proposal that leaves a blank for any ELIN unit prices will not be considered for award unless the proposal clearly states that ELIN item is Not Separately Priced (NSP) and may be ordered at $0.00. The exception to this would be where the Government has provided Not To Exceed (NTE) amount on the Pricing ELIN Spreadsheet in those instances unit pricing is not required and should be left blank.

4.3.1 The Government will take into consideration ELINs AA01 through AC24 from attachment 1, inclusive of option periods. The successful pricing proposal shall meets the requirements of the PWS and provide the lowest price overall considering unlimited plans, one metered (flat rate), unlimited voice text, unlimited voice, text and data, unlimited data only, PAYGO plan with 1GB add-on, paging services and paging devices, FCC charges and taxes.

4.3.2 The proposed ELIN unit prices only (Attachment 1) will become part of the contract at time of award. The Government will use CLIN unit prices set forth in awardee contracts to establish each awardee’s ceiling price for the specific products or tasks to be performed. The Government may award a task order based solely on the lowest price as determined by this method of price competition, without further communication with contractors.

At a task order level, Offerors are encouraged to provide additional discounts to the ceiling prices established in the base IDIQ contract.

4.3.3 Each offeror shall include a completed Market Basket (Attachment 6). The Government may order these items or other "equal" items. The Offeror must submit the proposal utilizing the items and quantities provided in (Attachment 6). The quantities are provided for evaluation purposes only and do not necessarily reflect the actual needs of the Government.

4.3.4 While the Government will not evaluate and/or determine a “realistic cost”, the Government will review the pricing structure and ELIN prices to determine if the offeror has submitted a materially unbalanced price proposal.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. Any inconsistency, within the price proposal or between the technical or price proposals, should be fully explained, or it may be considered a discrepancy within the offer and a risk in the Offeror’s ability to perform. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), a proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

4.3.5 Option prices will be evaluated at time of award. Evaluation of the options WILL NOT obligate the Government to exercise the options.

4.3.6 Failure to adequately address any of the required proposal elements will result in a determination of “Unresponsiveness” and preclude further consideration for award.

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

Wireless Performance Work Statement

1.0 Overview

The Department of the Navy (DON) is seeking a multi-agency solution to satisfy the repetitive needs for the enterprise-wide commercial wireless mobility requirements of the DON, Department of Defense (DoD), and other federal agencies. This solution will provide Wireless Mobility Telecommunication services and devices to Military Members and Federal Civilian Agencies within the 50 United States. This procurement anticipates a multiple award contractual ordering solution to provide end users a best value solution for their current and future dynamic wireless mobility requirements. The awarded Multiple Award, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contract(s) will be for a base year plus nine (9) twelve-month option periods. This procurement is needed to ensure mission critical support to Military Members and Federal Civilians is sustained without interruption for wireless mobility services, including devices. Services under this procurement cover usage in the 50 United States, US territories, and while traveling internationally for Military Members and Federal Civilians stationed within the 50 States and US territories. Task Orders issued under this contract shall be tailored to the specific needs of each command or organization. This new procurement, Spiral 4, will replace the existing suite of IDIQ contracts; the DON Multiple Award Contracts, Spiral 3.

As a major user of Wireless Mobility Telecommunication services (to include related software, hardware, firmware and equipment), it is estimated that the Department of Defense

(DoD) alone represents nearly 550,000 lines of service; using cell/feature phones, smartphones, tablets, data devices and other wireless devices and equipment. The overall objective of this procurement is to provide a contractual framework that allows Government-wide agencies, with numerous geographically dispersed end users, to operate as a single customer thereby achieving economies of scale for pricing, services and devices.

1.1 Background

For over fifteen years, the Department of the Navy (DON) has been effectively acquiring and managing wireless mobility services. The previous and current DON Wireless Services Contracts, Spirals 1, 2, and 3, have met sourcing strategy objectives that-- (1) offer only those wireless plans aligned with actual usage; (2) deliver competitively priced wireless service packages (inclusive of devices), (3) standardize rate plans among all wireless providers to maximize competition and obtain even lower pricing; (4) capitalize on changes in the marketplace; (5) incorporate improved industry standards and technological advances (technology leveling); (6) offer “free to use” Expense Management tools to monitor and manage wireless usage and provide near real-time visibility of Enterprise-wide and customer- specific usage; (7) provide visibility of wireless mobile device inventory; and (8) provide wireless data for analyses of trends to identify ordering improvements for efficiencies, performance plan optimization, and cost-savings opportunities. The DON Wireless Services Contracts have been the “gold standard” for supporting DON and DoD wireless mobility needs. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) determined the DON Wireless Services contracts were “best in breed” at providing a cost-effective, best-value solution for sustained mission critical wireless services for the military and enhanced communication capabilities for the Warfighter. OSD directed and mandated all of DoD to use the DON Wireless Spiral 3 contracts for wireless mobility services and devices. The DoD mandate will remain in effect for the follow-on solution, the DoD Wireless Services Contracts Spiral 4. Spiral 4 will capitalize on changes in the marketplace realized since award of the previous contract, by incorporating improvements in industry standards, advances in technology and more competitive pricing plans.

1.2 General Scope

The scope of this contract covers the Government’s DON, DoD and Government-Wide Agencies requirement for commercial wireless mobility and cellular telecommunications services [hereinafter, wireless telecommunications includes all wireless mobility technologies and related operations]. Contractor shall be responsible for providing services that conform with acceptable industry standards and the mission-essential functions outlined by the Government in individual Task Orders. In this performance based statement of work, the Contractor will be responsible for utilizing only up-to-date technology in delivering the services required, to include providing the most current repeaters, towers, Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) services and equipment.

In providing services throughout the life of the contract (a ten-year ordering period) in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) services and equipment, the resulting contracts and contractors will keep current with ever-changing technology and services over the life of the contract. The Spiral 4 Wireless Contracts are not a “supply” contract and will not provide wireless, mobile, cellular, and other devices and equipment to customers without the procurement of associated wireless services under the contracts. This contract shall provide a flexible means of meeting and sustaining the Government’s need for fast, safe, secure, dependable, and stable telecommunications services to include the most up-to-date secure devices to communicate data, voice, text, graphics and pictures. At no additional cost, contractor will deliver the services via the most efficient, up-to-date infrastructure that can be adapted to military missions.

This contract cannot be used for civilians to purchase other than “official use” wireless services. To repeat, hardware devices and equipment can only be acquired in conjunction with services.

Funding for wireless mobility services will be obligated at the Task Order level, as the contracts themselves are not funded. Services shall not be provided under these Contracts unless an Ordering Officer or Authorized User have placed a Task Order.

2.0 Wireless Mobility Services Scope and Prices

The Request for Proposal is to be solicited using the procedures as identified in FAR 15 Contracting by Negotiation and FAR 16.505 Ordering. Each contract will consist of services organized by Exhibit Line Item Numbers (ELINs) to include service plans that are--

(1) Standard Wireless Mobility Services Only; (2) Standard Wireless Mobility Services with Devices, (3) Other Enhanced Wireless Mobility Services & Devices; (4) Paging Services and Devices.

Each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) will represent the base year and each option year of the contract.

CLIN 0001 – Base Year CLIN 1001 – Option Year 1 CLIN 2001 – Option Year 2 CLIN 3001 – Option Year 3 CLIN 4001 – Option Year 4 CLIN 5001 – Option Year 5 CLIN 6001 – Option Year 6 CLIN 7001 – Option Year 7 CLIN 8001 – Option Year 8 CLIN 9001 – Option Year 9

2.1 Geographic Scope and Quantity

2.1.1 Geographic Scope

The primary scope of the DoD Wireless Services Contracts supports commercially available wireless mobility services for both domestic use and temporary international travel. The geographic scope is throughout the contiguous United States (CONUS); outside CONUS (OCONUS) to include Alaska, Hawaii, and U.S. Territories; and for the purposes of temporary international travel.

2.1.2 Current Number of Devices

The DON, DoD, and other federal agencies account for over 606,000 total lines of service; comprised of approximately 435,230 smartphones, 61,293 feature phones, 30,650 tablets, and 85,820 combined hotspots, air cards and other devices, needing wireless mobility services.

During the performance period, the required number of lines may fluctuate on any orders placed against the contracts.

2.1.3 Current Number of Pagers

The DoD has approximately 12,000 pagers needing regional and nationwide paging services. During the performance period of any orders placed against the Contracts the required number of pagers may fluctuate.

2.2 Scope of Services

The scope of services is within North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 517112-- Wireless Telecommunications Carriers (except Satellite), as detailed in the following sections 2.2.1 through 2.2.7. Oher enhanced wireless mobility services and devices, in Sections 2.2.2 through 2.2.9, will be available under the contract Exhibit Line Item Numbers (ELINS) tiled Other Services & Equipment.

2.2.1 Wireless Carrier Services

Including, but not limited to, Wireless Telecommunications Carriers and Telecommunication Resellers of Wireless Services which support mobile communications.

Voice Service plans and Features that enable mobile voice communications such as Voicemail, Three-way calling, etc.

Data Service plans and Features that provide connectivity and communications for data- capable mobile devices.

Service Enabling Devices (SEDs) mobile devices bundled with voice and data service plans which are included at no additional cost.

Wireless infrastructure components (which do not include a service plan or features) offered under a monthly lease arrangement or recurring charge to ordering entities.

2.2.2 Other Mobility End-Point Infrastructure

Mobility Infrastructure, only for the purchase and installation of Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) equipment that compliments or facilitates Wireless/Mobile Service and any installation of the same. This is an incidental fixed cost and the entire cost of installation (inclusive of material and labor) cannot exceed $2,500.

Includes mobile infrastructure equipment for implementing mobile solutions or enhancing wireless communications. Also includes user interfaces and miscellaneous hardware included with a mobile solution(s) or service.

2.2.3 Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM)

Includes a collective set of tools, software, and service capabilities required for the provision, management, security, wipe and control of mobile device functionality, its applications, features and content that are delivered to Government (or Contractor) owned or employee owned mobile devices. The three main EMM areas include mobile device management (MDM), mobile application management (MAM), and mobility content management

(MCM).

2.2.4 Mobile Backend-as-a-Service

Represents mobile application delivery solutions that provide mobile application developers with a platform, tools, and libraries to develop, integrate, test and publish their applications to back- end cloud storage and processing resources while also providing common features such as user management, push notifications, social networking integration, and other features demanded by mobile users.

2.2.5 Telecom Expense Management Services (TEMS)

Enterpris…