N3943019R2126-0005.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

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

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1) Provide response to Offeror's questions.

2) Clarify proposal due date is July 22, 2019 by 5:00 PM PST.

3) Clarify proposal due date for Inquiries to July 15, 2019 by 5:00 PM PST.

4) Add labor category descriptions to Attachment J-1 Schedule of IDIQ Price

5) Edit Header and Footer for Attachment J-7 Safety Data Sheet - Safety Narrative

6) Alter Sections L and M in Solicitation

See page tw o, Summary of Changes, for more details.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 20

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 03-Jul-2019

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 N3943019R2126

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-May-2019

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

03-Jul-2019

CODE

NAVFAC EXWC

CODE ACQ / NAVAL BASE VENTURA COUNTY

1100 23RD AVE BLDG 1100

PORT HUENEME CA 93043-4301

N39430 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N3943019R2126

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 5

a) Provide Government answers to the following Offeror’s questions:

Q1: Page 36 of 40, Section L.2 Inquires by Offerors, Amendment 0001, states that Offeror’s questions should be “submitted before 01 July 2019 at 5:00 pm Pacific”. Section L.6 (per A2 on Page 2 of 40) states that the deadline for proposals is “no later than 8 July 2019 by 1700 PST”. To ensure on-time delivery of proposals, Offerors will need to ship their proposals no later than July 3rd (less than 48 hours after the deadline for questions).

Due to the short turn-around between questions/answers and the due date, will the government consider extending the proposal due date two weeks (to July 22)?

A1: We have extended the solicitation closing date to 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific, Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific.

Q2: Our company is trying to form a 8a JV with another 8a company. We do not see SBA approval as an impediment to responding to the solicitation. We do, however, see an issue with obtaining a CAGE code. The government is backed up on these requests and that CAGE code request is currently taking over a month in some cases. Do we need to have CAGE code at time of submission for the JV if both companies already have a CAGE code individually? We are confident that by time of award we will have a CAGE code for the JV

A2: Per the DFARS the government cannot deny potential offerors the opportunity to provide a proposal on a solicitation because they do not have a CAGE code. Refer to :PGI 204.1870-1 Commercial and Government Entity Code “Not deny a potential offeror a solicitation package because the offeror does not have a CAGE code, DUNS number, or TIN”

Q3: While we appreciate the critical importance of Safety, for an information technology (IT) contract on which the work is generally/overwhelmingly low-risk and sedentary, to equate or value Safety as important a factor as Technical Approach or a Management Plan effectively dilutes the critical importance of an offeror's Technical Approach or Management Plan. This effect will impede the Government's objective of establishing true and valuable "discriminators" amongst offerors in order to evaluate, most highly rate/score/rank, and award to the "offerors submitting the proposals determined to represent the best value—the proposals most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered."

In order for the Government to be able to appropriately/correctly evaluate the offeror's IT experience and capabilities, will the Government consider removing the Safety factor as a significant evaluation criteria given that this is not a construction / design build services contract with anything other than low-risk work?

A3: The Government will not consider removing the Safety Factor for evaluation.

Q4: Pages 72 and 73 of 80, Section L.7: Could use a PPQ for a past performance reference that has less than 12 months of performance against it?

A4: Yes, It is at the discretion of the Offeror to submit a reference that has less than 12 months of performance against it, but the Period of Performance could impact the relevancy score.

Q5: Page 73 of 80: Per the Solicitation in Section L.7(5)(c)(i) Content of Price Proposal Schedule of prices, it states “The rates will be the maximum annual fully priced direct labor hour rates that the offeror may propose on future task orders.” Because of the multiple locations that will be provided service, there is a significant variance in the direct labor rates. Can you identify the location that will most likely serve as the “home base” and, therefore, absorb most of the hours being proposed?

A5: The estimated ratio of performance location is as follows: 15% in Port Hueneme 5 % in East Coast, the contractor is to determine where they would place them per labor rates.

Q6: Page 2 of 6, Amendment 003, L.6: Submit one (1) original and one (1) copy of your price proposal and (1) original and (4) copies of your technical proposal to the cited address below no later than 8 July 2019 at 5:00 PM

PST.

Would the Government consider extending the due date by one day to allow for commercial delivery?

A6: We have extended the solicitation closing date to 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific, Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific. This extension is further reflected in Section L.2 and Section L.6 of this Amendment.

Q7: Please give an extension of at least 2-3 weeks.

A7: We have extended the solicitation closing date to 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific, Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific. This extension is further reflected in Section L.2 and Section

Q8: Can you please provide 2 days extension as the proposals are going to be in transit (as this is a hard copy shipment) for 4 days as July 4th being holiday and shortage of resources during the holiday weekend. Rather we would fine tune the proposals and submit during the middle of the week of 7/8.

A8: We have extended the solicitation closing date to 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific, Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific. This extension is further reflected in Section L.2 and Section

Q9: How many awards will be made for this solicitation? RFP document says “multiple” award but it doesn’t say how many.

A9: Page 70 of 80, Section L.1 Introduction, the Solicitation states: This is a solicitation for a Multiple Award, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract. The Government intends to award up to five contracts resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offerors whose proposals represent the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and their relative importance in the solicitation.

Q10: Due to the holiday weekend ahead of the 7/8 due date and shipping times, would the government consider an extension to the due date to provide time for pricing development once the RFP amendment is received?

A10: We have extended the solicitation closing date to 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific, Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific. This extension is further reflected in Section L.2 and Section

Q11: I respectfully request that an extension be granted for this proposal so that my company and other 8(a)'s can provide you with a satisfactorily response to the alterations that will be required once the questions have been answered.

A11: We have extended the solicitation closing date to 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific, Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific. This extension is further reflected in Section L.2 and Section

Q12: I respectfully request an extension of a couple of weeks be granted after the answers to the questions are posted.

A12: We have extended the solicitation closing date to 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific, Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific. This extension is further reflected in Section L.2 and Section

Q13: I respectfully request a 2-week extension to the proposal deadline after the answers to questions are received.

A13: We have extended the solicitation closing date to 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific, Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific. This extension is further reflected in Section L.2 and Section

Q14: Pages 72 - 73, Section L.7 (4) Factor 4, Past Performance: To ensure that the Government receives offers from qualified 8(a) Offerors, would the Government consider incorporating the following requirements for Offerors with teaming agreements:

(1) A majority of past performance references must come from the Prime (since the Prime is required to perform the majority of the work); and

(2) When averaging/accounting for all three aspects of the past performance evaluation - more weight will be applied to the Prime past performance references than those coming from the Subcontractor.

(3) When averaging/accounting for all three aspects of the past performance evaluation - more weight will be applied to having multiple applicable prime past performance references (with a maximum of three) - e.g. three qualifying past performance will be rated more favorably than one or two qualifying past performances?

A14: Added to Section M.4 (4) b., Paragraph 1: “Offerors may provide a subcontractor/team member’s past performance so long as the offer includes evidence of the subcontractor /team member’s commitment to perform on a contract awarded from this solicitation, but the Offeror’s own past performance will generally have more predictive value than a subcontractor/ team member’s past performance.”

Q15: Amendment 0004, page 6 of 40, Q11: When asked in Q11 about LCATS, the Government responded with, “A11: ) No, Offerors are requested to provide proposal-using LCATS they think are best.”. The revised Pricing Sheet Attachment J-1 does not allow Offerors the capability to provide proposal-using LCATS we think are best.

Please clarify if Offerors are to utilize the Government directed LCATS and qualities established in N3943019R21260004Attachment_J-1_Schedule_of_IDIQ_Price.

A15: Yes, Offerors are to use Government directed LCATS and quantities established in Attachment J-1.

Q16: Amendment 0004, page 8 of 40: The Government’s response to A19 states, “Digital delivery is not requested. Page 4 of 6, Section L.6 Submission of Offers, Paragraph 2, of Amendment 0003 states: “Submit one

(1) original and one (1) copy of your price proposal and (1) original and (4) copies of your technical proposal to the cited address below no later than 8 July 2019 at 5:00 PM PST.”

Could the Government clarify if it requires Offerors to submit by 8 July or 22 July?

A16: We have extended the solicitation closing date to 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific, Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM Pacific. This extension is further reflected in Section L.2 and Section

Q17: Will the government provide an updated RFP that consolidates Amendment 1 changes as identified in section b)? If not, will the government at least provide an updated SF 33 for the Offeror to complete for the final proposal submission?

A17: A consolidated document will be provided in the next Amendment for Offeror’s final proposal submissions

Q18: In regards to Attachment J-1 Schedule of IDIQ Price 5-22-19, would the Government specify the education and experience levels required/expected for each labor category?

A18: In regards to Attachment J-1, Schedule of IDIQ Price, it is up to the Offerors to determine their mix of expertise level within each labor category, the Government isn’t going to specify what level to hire.

Q19: The page 1 footer and pages 2 and 3 headers of Attachment J-7 identify it as Attachment "I." Will the Government release an updated version of Attachment J-7 with the correct attachment number in all headers and footers?

A19: Attachment J-7 was updated and attached to this Amendment with the correct headers and footers.

Q20: Page 73 of 80: Offeror shall submit completed schedule of price (Attachment J-1 of the RFP). The provide attachment J-1 only allows for one rate to be provided per labor category. Based on the place of performances provided in 2.3.1 there is a significant cost of living difference among these locations, for example a rate for Pearl Harbor, HI and Norfolk, VA, there is such a substantial cost of living difference among these locations, about 100%. To ensure we are providing fair and reasonable rates, to confirm we are to price the highest cost of living area or would the government consider the offerors to provide rates per location?

A20: The estimated ratio of performance location is as follows: 15% in Port Hueneme 5 % in East Coast, the

Q21: Q11: Page 2 of 6, Amendment 003, L.6: Would the Government allow electronic delivery of the submission?

Would the Government allow electronic delivery of the submission?

A21: The Government will not allow electronic delivery of the submission. Submission are to be in accordance with Section L.6 Submission of Offers, as stated below:

The proposals shall be submitted to the cited address below. The package(s) shall be marked with the name of the proposer, the solicitation number, and the date and time specified for receipt of proposals. No other markings shall be used on the package(s). Proposals not received at the below address on or before the hour and date set forth for receipt of proposals shall be subject to the provisions of FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to offerors— Competitive Acquisition (OCT 1997).

Submit one (1) original and one (1) copy of your price proposal and (1) original and (4) copies of your technical proposal to the cited address below no later than 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM PST.

NAFVAC EXWC ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT

N39430-19-R-2126 ECITS

EXWC Code ACQ73 Attn: Chris Wolf and Carol Contreras 1100 23RD Avenue, Bldg 1100 Port Hueneme, CA 93043-4301

Q22: Please provide labor category descriptions for the labor categories to be priced within Attachment J-1.

Attachment J-1 rates be representative of Contractor-site or Government-site rates?

A22: Labor category description are included in the Attachment J-1, Schedule of IDIQ Price of this Amendment.

Q23: Amendment 0003, Page 6, Section L.7 (5) c. (i), Paragraph 2: Do we need to have separate levels for each labor category ? (Master/Senior...etc)

Regarding rates, are they for the contractor site or government site separately?

A23: It is up to the Offerors to determine their mix of expertise level within each labor category; the Government is not going to specify what level to hire. The estimated ratio of performance location is as follows: 15% in Port Hueneme 5 % in East Coast, the contractor is to determine where they would place them per labor rates.

Q24: Section L.7 (5) Factor 5, Price, c. Content of Price Proposal (Vol II) (i) Schedule of prices (page 73) states that bidders are required to propose hourly rates for the labor categories in RFP Attachment J-1, and that these rates will be the maximum annual fully priced direct labor hour rates that the offeror may propose on future task orders. Attachment J-1 only lists labor category titles and does not provide functional descriptions or education and years of experience requirements.

Will the Government provide a baseline for the functional descriptions and qualifications to ensure consistency among offers received, or is each bidder required to define their proposed categories?

If each bidder is required to define the descriptions and qualifications, does the Government require that information to be included in the cost volume for bidder comparison and evaluation purposes?

A24: Labor category description are included in the Attachment J-1, Schedule of IDIQ Price of this Amendment.

It is up to the Offerors to determine their mix of expertise level within each labor category; the Government is not going to specify what level to hire.

Q25: Section L.7 (5) Factor 5, Price, c. Content of Price Proposal (Vol II) (i) Schedule of prices (page 73) states that bidders are required to propose hourly rates for the labor categories in RFP Attachment J-1, and that these rates will be the maximum annual fully priced direct labor hour rates that the offeror may propose on future task orders.

Will bidders be allowed to propose new labor categories and rates on future task orders if the PWS requirements for that task order are unique or require special skills or experience outside of the original labor categories proposed?

A25: The bidder will not be allowed to propose new labor categories and/or rates on future task orders.

Q26: Section L.7 (5) Factor 5, Price, c. Content of Price Proposal (Vol II) (i) Schedule of prices (page 73) states that bidders are required to propose hourly rates for the labor categories in RFP Attachment J-1, and that these rates will be the maximum annual fully priced direct labor hour rates that the offeror may propose on future task orders.

Does the Government intend for bidders to select the highest cost of living work sites, likely Pearl Harbor, HI or Washington, DC, and use those salary rates for the basis of their proposed ceiling rates, and then apply discounts when bidding on individual task orders performed at lower cost of living work sites?

Does the Government require the basis of the labor rate salaries to be included in the cost volume for bidder comparison and evaluation purposes?

A26: Labor category description are included in the Attachment J-1, Schedule of IDIQ Price of this Amendment.

It is up to the Offeror to determine their mix of expertise level within each labor category; the Government is not going to specify what level to hire. The estimated ratio of performance location is as follows: 15% in Port Hueneme 5 % in East Coast, the contractor is to determine where they would place them per labor rates.

Q27: Page 72 of 80, Section L.7 (4) Factor 4, Past Performance: Past performance, volume is just the CPARS report submission or do we need to narrate the performance summary for the projects?

A27: A narrative is not necessary.

Q28: The labor categories are not split out by experience levels. Please advise as to what experience levels we should use.

A28: It is up to the Offeror to determine their mix of expertise level within each labor category; the Government is not going to specify what level to hire.

Q29: Could the Government provide a conformed RFP reflecting all changes to date so that Offerors can utilize the most relevant and current requirements/updates to respond?

A29: A conformed/consolidated document will be provided in the next Amendment.

Q30: Since the Government has confirmed the place of performance can also be at Contractor site, is it the Government’s intent to revise Attachment J-1 Schedule of IDIQ Price to request distinct Contractor site rates in additional to Government site rates? If not, what is the Government’s guidance on submission and evaluation on a single rate unless the Government removes the requirement for Contractor site performance?

A30: The estimated ratio of performance location is as follows: 15% in Port Hueneme 5 % in East Coast, the

Q31: Page 38 of 40, Amendment 0001, Section L.7(3) subparagraph c states, “the technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to two pages.” We interpret this as the narrative response to Block #9 of Attachment J- 7, Safety Data Sheet/Safety Narrative, shall be no more than two pages and that the two-page limit does not pertain to the entire completed form. Please confirm.

A31: That pertains to the entire completed form. The Solicitation has been updated in Section L.7 (3) Factor 3, Safety, Paragraph “c.” to allow for a three-page limit.

Q32: Page 12 of 40, Amendment 0004: Question 36 asked if the government would provide labor category descriptions for the labor categories listed in Attachment J-1. The answer said “Yes/ see attached,” however the attachments provided with Amendment 4 did not include Labor Category descriptions, nor were they included within the amended Attachment J-1. Please provide this attachment ASAP.

A32: Labor category description are included in the Attachment J-1, Schedule of IDIQ Price of this Amendment.

Q33: Amendment 4, questions 16 and 36 referenced an attachment containing descriptions/quals for the labor categories in Attachment J-1 Price, but I couldn't find the attachment containing those descriptions. Could you please provide the attachment?

A33: Labor category description are included in the Attachment J-1, Schedule of IDIQ Price of this Amendment.

Q34: Page 5 of 6, Amendment 0003, Section L.7 (3): The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to two pages.

Factor 3: Safety is listed as being included in the page limit for Volume I: Technical Proposal, but in the instructions for Factor 3, the safety narrative is given a page limit of 2 pages. Will the Government consider Attachment J-7 Safety Data Sheet, including the safety narrative, outside of the 55-page limit such that the information provided in the Safety Data Sheet is not page restricted and the safety narrative is limited to 2 pages in addition to 55 pages allocated to Factors 1 and 2?

A34: The Solicitation has been updated in Section L.7 (3) Factor 3, Safety, Paragraph “c.” to allow for a three-page limit for the safety narrative.

Q35: Can the Government release the attachment providing labor category descriptions as stated, since it was not in fact provided with Amendment 0004?

A35: Labor category description are included in the Attachment J-1, Schedule of IDIQ Price of this Amendment.

Q36: Page 72 of 80, Section L.7 (3) c.: Attachment J-7 Safety Data Sheet contains 3 pages. Please confirm that in Attachment J-7 section 9 “Technical Approach for Safety” is limited to two pages only and that sections 1 to 8 on Attachment J-7 do not count toward the safety narrative page limit. If the entire Attachment J-7 Safety Data Sheet is limited to two pages, request that the Government allow the offeror 4 pages for this response, as the template is 3 pages.

A36: The Solicitation has been updated in Section L.7 (3) Factor 3, Safety, Paragraph “c.” to allow for a three-page limit.

Q37: Page 73 of 80, Section L.7 (5) c.(i): Bidders are required to propose hourly rates for the labor categories in RFP Attachment J-1, and that these rates will be the maximum annual fully priced direct labor hour rates that the offeror may propose on future task orders. Attachment J-1 only lists labor category titles and does not provide functional descriptions or education and years of experience requirements.

Will the Government provide a baseline for the functional descriptions and qualifications to ensure consistency among offers received, or is each bidder required to define their proposed categories?

If each bidder is required to define the descriptions and qualifications, does the Government require that information to be included in the cost volume for bidder comparison and evaluation purposes?

A37: Labor category description are included in the Attachment J-1, Schedule of IDIQ Price of this Amendment.

It is up to the Offeror to determine their mix of expertise level within each labor category; the Government is not going to specify what level to hire.

Q38: Page 4 of 40, Amendment 0004, Attachment J-7: let us know which sections of Attachment J-7 Safety Data Sheet – Safety Narrative (3 pages) the Government would like us to cut to ensure that the Safety requirements are “two pages max.”

A38: The Government would not like anything cut, the Solicitation has been updated in Section L.7 (3) Factor 3, Safety, Paragraph “c.” to allow for a three-page limit.

Q39: Page 8 of 40, Amendment 0004, Question 16: Can the Government please confirm that they will be releasing the labor category descriptions? Can the Government please identify which document or attachment has the labor category descriptions?

A39: Labor category description are included in the Attachment J-1, Schedule of IDIQ Price of this Amendment.

Q40: Page 11 of 40, Amendment 0004, Question 31: “15% in Port Hueneme 5% in East Coast, contractor to determine where they would place them per labor rates.” Can the Government please expand on their answer to this question? What does the 15% and 5% represent? 15% onsite in Port Hueneme? 5% on-site in East Coast?

Please explain how the contractor should place the labor categories.

A40: These are estimated ratios of where the work will be performed; 15% onsite in Port Hueneme, 5% onsite on the East Coast, and 80% at Contractor’s facility. It is up to the Offeror to determine how they would like to place their labor rates.

b) Portions of this Solicitation were altered as follows:

1. Section L.2, Sentence 3, now states: “All inquiries shall include the page number and paragraph number or identifier, which pertains to the Offeror’s question. Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM

PST.”

2. Section L.6, Paragraph 2, now states: Submit one (1) original and one (1) copy of your price proposal and

(1) original and (4) copies of your technical proposal to the cited address below no later than 22 July 2019 at

5:00 PM PST.

3. The Solicitation has been updated in Section L.7 (3) Factor 3, Safety, Paragraph “c.” to allow for a three-page limit.

4. The max number of pages for Factors 1, 2, and 3 has been changed from a 44-page limit to a 55-page limit.

Section L.5, Content of Proposal, has been update to reflect the change.

5. Language has been added to Section M.4 (4) Factor 4 Past Performance, Paragraph “b.”, it now states: “In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration will be given to those aspects of an offeror’s contract history that would give the greatest ability to measure whether the offeror will satisfy the current procurement. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to, the following: similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services) and extent of subcontract/teaming. The Government will consider the Offeror’s demonstrated record of contract compliance, including technical, schedule, and cost in supplying products and services. The purpose of assessing relevancy is to take into account the predictive value of past effort toward success on this contract. Offerors may provide a subcontractor/team member’s past performance so long as the offer includes evidence of the subcontractor /team member’s commitment to perform on a contract awarded from this solicitation, but the Offeror’s own past performance will generally have more predictive value than a subcontractor/ team member’s past performance.”

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The solicitation issue date has changed from 07-Jun-2019 to 22-May-2019.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION L

L.1 INTRODUCTION

This solicitation is for a Multiple Award, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) Contract set aside for 8(a) participants. The Government intends to award up to five contracts resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offerors whose proposals represent the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and their relative importance in the solicitation.

L.2 INQUIRES BY OFFERORS

Offerors may submit inquiries, concerns, or request clarification of any aspect of this solicitation via electronic mail to the Contract Specialist, Chris Wolf at christopher.wolf2@navy.mil. The Offeror must include N39430-19-R- 2126 ECITS Questions and Company Name in the email subject line. All inquiries shall include the page number and paragraph number or identifier, which pertains to the Offeror’s question. Inquiries should be submitted before 15 July 2019 at 5:00 PM PST.

All questions will be answered via written amendment to the solicitation.

L.3 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

Offer are required to submit a written proposal of their qualifications by responding to the following evaluation factors:

Factor 1 Technical Approach Factor 2 Management Plan Factor 3 Safety Factor 4 Past Performance Factor 5 Price

L.4 ORGANIZATION OF OFFER

a. Volume I – Technical Proposal

b. Volume II – Price Proposal

L.5 CONTENT OF PROPOSAL

The technical proposal must address the evaluation factors in Section M and include all of the required documentation. The documentation should be provided in volumes that are formatted as described below:

Volume/Tab Title Max No. of Pages 1/1 Factor 1: Technical Approach

55 Total

1/2 Factor 2: Management Plan 1/3 Factor 3: Safety 1/4 Factor 4: Past Performance -- 2 Price Proposal --

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

The same identifying data should be placed on the spine of each binder.

b. Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.

c. Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, with an explanation for each.

Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

d. Submission of the proposal shall be typewritten, and shall be presented on Standard 8.5x11 inch paper, one-inch margins, single-spaced using 12-point font size and times New Roman font print. Each section shall start on a new page and pages shall be sequentially numbered and identified with the name of the Proposer and the RFP number. Technical proposals (Factor 1,2, and 3) shall be limited to 55 pages. Pages submitted beyond these limits will not be considered in the evaluation. The Cover Letter, blank pages, tables of contents, and indexes are not considered a "page" for purposes of the above page limit.

e. Volume I - Technical Proposal (Original and 4 copies separately bound and organized by evaluation factor).

f. Volume II – Price Proposal (Original and 1 copy separately bound and organized).

L.6 Submission of Offers

The proposals shall be submitted to the cited address below. The package(s) shall be marked with the name of the proposer, the solicitation number, and the date and time specified for receipt of proposals. No other markings shall be used on the package(s). Proposals not received at the below address on or before the hour and date set forth for receipt of proposals shall be subject to the provisions of FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to offerors—Competitive Acquisition (OCT 1997).

Submit one (1) original and one (1) copy of your price proposal and (1) original and (4) copies of your technical proposal to the cited address below no later than 22 July 2019 at 5:00 PM PST.

NAFVAC EXWC ACQUISITION DEPARTMENT

N39430-19-R-2126 ECITS

EXWC Code ACQ73 Attn: Chris Wolf and Carol Contreras 1100 23RD Avenue, Bldg 1100 Port Hueneme, CA 93043-4301

L.7 SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS FOR EACH FACTOR

(1) Factor 1, Technical Approach:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Provide a detailed narrative demonstrating your understanding and technical ability to perform each of the following functional areas: Systems Development Lifecycle Support, Cyber Security Support, Business Systems Operations and Support, IT Operations Management and Enterprise Analysis and Management Services as outlined in the performance work statement (PWS).

Offerors shall also describe relevant Capability Maturity Model Integration (CMMI) or equivalent model-based process maturity certification. As a part of this description, offerors shall identify the granting organization, applicable model, level achieved and provide a copy of the appraisal and/or certificate.

(2) Factor 2, Management Plan:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Offerors shall submit a management plan to describe how they intend to manage and coordinate efforts under this contract. The proposed plan must include a quality management plan which describes your approach in accordance with ANSI/ISO/ASQC-9000 (for hardware) and IEEE/EIA 730 (for software) standards explaining how it will be used to reduce program risks (performance, price, and schedule). If the offeror deviates from the guidance, an explanation and proposed alternate methodology description is required.

Offerors shall also address technical staffing, specifying how it will address security clearance and technical certification requirements while ensuring contract requirements are met. Included in the plan must be the company’s ongoing, long-term methodology for recruiting, training (including the ability to comply with the Cyber Security Workforce (CSWF) requirement, and retaining, on an uninterrupted basis, high quality personnel who will meet the PWS requirements for the life of the contract.

If subcontracting is contemplated, offerors shall provide a full description of:

• the proposed subcontractors. Offeror shall explain its approach toward subcontracting and its relationship toward achieving the overall objectives of the resultant contract;

• the approach for managing how design information from one subcontractor’s design influences another subcontractor’s design and include this in the matrix designating subcontractor assignments.

(3) Factor 3, Safety:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements: Submit Attachment J-7 (Safety Data Sheet / Safety Narrative). Individual blocks on this form may be expanded.

The Offeror shall submit the following information: (For a partnership or joint venture, the following submittal requirements are required for each contractor who is part of the partnership or joint venture; however, only one safety narrative is required. EMR, DART and TRC Rates shall not be submitted for subcontractors.)

a. Experience Modification Rate (EMR): Include three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data.

This rate compares company’s annual losses in insurance claims against its policy premiums. The offeror may submit an insurance company-provided equivalent rate if no EMR exists. If the offeror has no EMR or premium, for any year, affirmatively state so and explain why. Any extenuating circumstances that affect the EMR and negative trends should be addressed as part of the factor submission.

b. OSHA Days Away from Work, Restricted Duty, or Job Transfer (DART) Rate and Total Recordable Case

(TRC) Rate: Submit three previous complete calendar years’ worth of data. If an offeror cannot submit an OSHA DART and TRC rates, for any year, affirmatively state so and an explanation must be provided.

Any extenuating circumstances that affected the OSHA, DART, and TRC rate data negatively must be addressed as part of this factor submission.

c. Technical Approach for Safety: Describe the plan for safety that will be implemented to evaluate safety performance of potential subcontractors as part of the selection process for all levels of subcontractors. The offeror shall submit a narrative that fully describes the safety management system that they will use to oversee the safety compliance and performance of self-performed and subcontractor performed work. The offeror will describe any innovative methods that will be employed to ensure and monitor safe work practices at self-performed and/or all subcontractor levels. Additionally, the contactor will describe their methodology to execute an effective program that facilitates sound mishap prevention techniques and processes, employee reporting of unsafe conditions, unsafe activities, and near-miss mishaps. The technical approach to safety narrative shall be limited to three pages

(4) Factor 4, Past Performance:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements: IF A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION IS AVAILABLE, IT SHALL BE SUBMITTED WITH THE PROPOSAL. IF THERE IS NOT A COMPLETED CPARS EVALUATION, the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) included in the solicitation (Attachment J-2) is provided for the offeror or its team members to submit to the client for each project/contract the offeror includes in its proposal. AN OFFEROR

SHALL NOT SUBMIT A PPQ WHEN A COMPLETED CPARS IS AVAILABLE.

IF A CPARS EVALUATION IS NOT AVAILABLE, ensure correct phone numbers and email addresses are provided for the client point of contact. Completed PPQs should be submitted with your proposal. If the offeror is unable to obtain a completed PPQ from a client for a project(s) before proposal closing date, the offeror should complete and submit with the proposal the first page of the PPQ, which will provide contract and client information for the respective project(s). Offerors should follow-up with clients/references to ensure timely submittal of questionnaires. If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government's point of contact, Christopher Wolf, via email at christopher.wolf2@navy.mil prior to proposal closing date. Offerors shall not incorporate by reference into their proposal PPQs or CPARS previously submitted for other RFPs. However, this does not preclude the Government from utilizing previously submitted PPQ information in the past performance evaluation.

Offerors are required to submit past performance information for no more than three projects (see Attachment J-2 in the RFP).

The Government will only consider recent past performance. Recent is defined as projects/contracts completed no more than five years from the posting date of this RFP. Projects/contracts which were completed more than five years before the posting of this RFP will not be evaluated.

(5) Factor 5, Price:

Solicitation Submittal Requirements:

a. The Contracting Officer has determined that certified pricing data is not required to be submitted by the Offeror for the solicitation for the indefinite delivery indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract due to the exception at FAR 15.403-1 for adequate price competition.

b. Content of the Price Proposal shall be submitted in a separate volume from technical proposal. No technical information shall be submitted as part of the price proposal.

(i) Standard Form 33, Solicitiation, Offer, and Award and all its Amendments in Standard Form 30: A copy of the Standard Form 33 with blocks 12 through 18 completed, signed by an authorized representative of your company by the closing date and time indicated on the face page of the RFP, shall be included.

(ii) Confirmation of VETS-4212 report(s) filing: A copy of the email confirmation of VETS-4212 reports(s) filing at www.dol/vets/vets4212.htm, as required by regulation (41 CFR Part 61-300), shall be included. Upon the succsesful submission of a VETS-4212 report(s), federal contractors will receive an email confirmation of receipt notification for their records. These confirmation notifications will be used as verification of submission by the Contracting Officer. A copy of a submitted report is NOT required to suffice for a confirmation /validation of submission.

(iii) Requirements of Section K: Offerors shall include an additional section in their proposal that addresses all the requirements in Section K of this solicitiation, and shall include a statement of its representations and certifications in the System for Award Management (SAM). Offerors shall provide identification of any Organizational Conflict of Interest.

c. Content of Price Proposal (Volume II)

(i) Schedule of prices:

Offeror shall submit completed schedule of price (Attachment J-1 of the RFP). This attachment requires the offeror to propose hourly rates for the labor category indicated. The rates will be the maximum annual fully priced direct labor hour rates that the offeror may propose on future task orders. Rates shall be fully priced direct labor hourly rates which include: base pay rate, fringe benefits, operations overhead, general and administrative (G&A) expense, profit, and any other applicable rates and factors.

Annual Labor Hours by Labor Category - The Offeror shall use the Government estimated annual labor hours delineated in Attachment J-1, to develop its proposal and prepare the schedule of price. The schedules contain a worksheet for each 12-month interval that comprise the Base 60-month ordering period and a schedule for the 6-month option period. Base contract annual labor rates will become the ceiling rates that may be proposed on task orders. Offerors are free to propose lower rates on task orders in order to be competitive.

(ii) Company Financial Statement Report

Offeror shall submit with their price proposal a company financial statement (F/S) for the most recent completed 12-month financial accounting year. Include the balance sheet, income statement, and related notes or management discussion and analysis, if any. Include the cash flow statement if prepared. The submission requirement in descending order of preference is:

• F/S compiled, reviewed, or audited by an independent external auditor

• Company prepared F/S

• Accounting system generated F/S

(iii) Financial Institution/Bank Information of Prospective Contractor

This information will be utilized to verify Financial Responsibility as required by FAR Part 9.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M

M.1 BASIS OF AWARD

1. The Government reserves the right to negotiate with offerors in the competitive range and to award the contracts to the offerors submitting the proposals determined to represent the best value—the proposals most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

2. As stated in the solicitation, the Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with offerors. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer determines them to be necessary. In addition, if the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

3. The tradeoff process is selected as appropriate for this acquisition. The Government considers it to be in its best interest to allow consideration of award to other than the lowest priced Offeror or other than the highest technically rated Offeror.

4. All technical factors when combined are of equal importance to the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating; and all technical factors and the performance confidence assessment (past performance) rating, when combined are approximately equal to price.

5. Any proposal found to have a deficiency in meeting the stated solicitation requirements or performance objectives will be considered ineligible for award, unless the deficiency is corrected through discussions. Proposals may be found to have either a significant weakness or multiple weaknesses that impact either the individual factor rating or the overall rating for the proposal. The evaluation report must document the evaluation board’s assessment of the identified weakness(s) and the associated risk to successful contract performance resulting from the weakness(s). This assessment must provide the rationale for proceeding to award without discussions.

M.2 RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF EVALUATION FACTORS

The relative importance of the following factors is as follows:

The relative order of importance of the non-price evaluation factors is the technical factors (Factors 1, 2, and 3) are of equal importance to each other and, when combined, are equal in importance to the past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment factor. When the proposal is evaluated as a whole, the technical factors and past performance/performance confidence assessment factor combined (i.e., the non-price evaluation factors) are approximately equal to price.

The importance of price will increase if the Offeror’s non-price proposals are considered essentially equal in terms of overall quality, or if price is so high as to significantly diminish the value of a non-price proposal’s superiority to the Government. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror(s) whose offer conforms to the solicitation and represents the best value to the Government, price and non-price factors considered.

M. 3 ADJECTIVAL RATINGS, DESCRIPTIONS, DEFINITIONS FOR TECHNICAL

FACTORS 1 & 2

1. The technical rating reflects the degree to which the proposed approach meets or does not meet the performance or capability requirements through an assessment of the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, deficiencies, and risks of a proposal.

A combined technical/risk evaluation considering risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings shall be used. The technical risk evaluation shall utilize the combined technical/risk ratings listed in the following table.

Adjectival ratings and rating descriptions will be used to assign an overall rating to each technical proposal and to assign a rating for each technical factor. Use upper case letter ratings for major technical factors as well as the overall rating. The addition of plus (+) or minus (-) to an adjective rating is not allowed.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Adjectival Rating Description

Outstanding (O)

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

Good (G)

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 (A)

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

Marginal (M)

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

Unacceptable (U)

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

2. Definitions: The following definitions are provided to assist evaluators in the evaluation of each nonprice factor.

Strength

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

Weakness

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

Significant Weakness

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

Deficiency

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

M.4 BASIS OF EVALUATION FOR EACH FACTOR:

(1) Factor 1 Technical Approach:

Basis of Evaluation: The Government will evaluate the offeror’s demonstrated depth of technical acumen performing Systems Development Lifecycle Support, Cyber Security Support, Business Systems Operations and Support, IT Operations Management and Enterprise Analysis…