Amendment_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

See Summary of Changes.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 11

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 20-Mar-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 N6134019R0007

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

28-Jan-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 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE

RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

20-Mar-2019

CODE

NAWCTSD 253

CODE 2.5.3.7.2

1211 SCIENCE DRIVE

ORLANDO FL 32826-3324

N61340 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6134019R0007

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been added by full text:

DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT 0005

The purpose of Amendment 0005 is to:

1. Update Section J, List of Attachments, to incorporate a revised Attachment 1, Performance Work

Statement for Advanced Helicopter Training System (AHTS), from version 1.2 to version 1.3.

2. Clarify the Inspection and Acceptance and Delivery requirements of CLIN 0010. This change is incorporated through an update to:

a. Section E, Inspection and Acceptance

b. Section F, Deliveries or Performance

3. Update Section L, Attachment L-5, to clarify data updates through the effective date of the agreement.

4. Revise Section M, Part I, General Information, Subpart A, Evaluation Process (Certifications), to clarify if the FAA IFR certificate is not received or is incomplete, the Offeror’s proposal will be deemed ineligible for award.

Note: Offerors are to sign and date Amendment 0001, Amendment 0002, Amendment 0003, Amendment 0004, and Amendment 0005 and include the signed Amendments with the proposal submittal. The offerors signature and inclusion of the signed Amendments with the proposal submittal provide acceptance of the changes made in the amendment and agreement that those changes will be incorporated into the resulting contract.

SECTION E - INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

The following have been modified:

INSPECTION & ACCEPTANCE TERMS

CLIN 0X01 – Inspection and acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4 and the

Government approved inspection and acceptance procedures delivered in accordance with CDRL A007 deliverable, Government Acceptance Testing.

CLIN 0X02 – CDRL deliverables will be inspected and accepted in accordance with Exhibit A CDRLs.

CLIN 0X03 – Inspection and acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4 and the

Government approved inspection and acceptance procedures delivered in accordance with CDRL A007 deliverable, CLIN 0X04 – Inspection and acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4 and the

Government approved inspection and acceptance procedures delivered in accordance with CDRL A007 deliverable, CLIN 0005 – Inspection and acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4 and the

Government approved inspection and acceptance procedures delivered in accordance with CDRL A007 deliverable, CLIN 0006 – Inspection and acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4 and the

Government approved inspection and acceptance procedures delivered in accordance with CDRL A007 deliverable, CLIN 0007 – Inspection and Acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4 and

Attachment 1, Performance Work Statement paragraph 3.4, Instructor Pilot Training.

CLIN 0008 – Inspection and Acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4 and

Attachment 1, Performance Work Statement paragraph 3.6, Maintenance Personnel Training.

CLIN 0009 – Inspection and Acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4 and

Attachment 1, Performance Work Statement paragraph 3.5, NATOPS Flight Manual.

CLIN 0010 – Inspection and Acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4, H-4, Data

Access, and Attachment 1, Performance Work Statement paragraph 3.11, Non-FAA ICA Data.

CLIN 0011 – Inspection and acceptance shall be performed in accordance with FAR Clause 52.212-4 and the

Government approved inspection and acceptance procedures delivered in accordance with CDRL A007 deliverable, SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

F-1 TH-XX PRODUCTION LOT DELIVERY

The contractor shall deliver IAW the tables below. The below delivery schedule assumes a CLIN 0001 quantity of

32. If the Offeror chooses to propose a quantity in excess of 32, the Offeror shall propose a delivery cadence, starting in month three, not to exceed four aircraft per month. For CLINs 0101, 0201, 0301, and 0401 the Offeror shall propose a delivery cadence not to exceed three aircraft per month. All quantities proposed in Section F shall align with the quantities proposed in Section L.

The TH-XX aircraft to be furnished hereunder shall be delivered F.O.B. Origin at the contractor's facility, ready for flight. Any uninstalled flyaway kits shall be delivered F.O.B. destination in accordance with the delivery address identified under F-3, Delivery Addresses.

1. Base Year

a. CLIN 0001 – 1 Lot, TH-XX Full Rate Production Lot I

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

CY 20 1 2 2

CY 21 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

2. Option Year 1

a. CLIN 0101 – 1 Lot, TH-XX Full Rate Production Lot II

CY 21

CY 22

3. Option Year 2

a. CLIN 0201 – 1 Lot, TH-XX Full Rate Production Lot III

CY 22

CY 23

4. Option Year 3

a. CLIN 0301 – 1 Lot, TH-XX Full Rate Production Lot IV

CY 23

CY 24

5. Option Year 4

a. CLIN 0401 – 1 Lot, TH-XX Full Rate Production Lot V

CY 24

CY 25

F-2 DELIVERY SCHEDULE INFORMATION

The contractor shall deliver in accordance with the below:

CLIN 0X01 – IAW F-1, TH-XX PRODUCTION LOT DELIVERY.

CLIN 0X02 – CDRL deliverables delivered IAW Exhibit A CDRLs.

CLIN 0X03 – For Spares Parts, deliver by;

CLIN 0003 - 1 October 2020

CLIN 0103 – 1 October 2021

CLIN 0203 – 1 October 2022

CLIN 0303 – 1 October 2023

CLIN 0403 – 1 October 2024

CLIN 0X04 – For Peculiar Support Equipment, deliver by 1 October 2020 for CLIN 0004 and 1 October 2021 for

CLIN 0104.

CLIN 0005 – For Hoists, deliver IAW Attachment 1, Performance Work Statement paragraph 3.1.9.1, External

Hoist. An external hoist shall be delivered with each of the first 25 aircraft.

CLIN 0006 – For Mission Planning Systems, deliver 25 by 01 October 2020.

CLIN 0007 – For Instructor Pilot Training, IAW Attachment 1, Performance Work Statement paragraph 3.4, Instructor Pilot Training. TH-XX IP training shall commence 45 days after contract award and complete all 25

Government IP no later than five months after contract award, with as many Government IP being trained simultaneously as possible.

CLIN 0008 – For Maintenance Personnel Training, IAW Attachment 1, Performance Work Statement paragraph

3.6, Maintenance Personnel Training. All maintenance training shall be completed no later than 30 days prior to delivery of first aircraft.

CLIN 0009 – For NATOPS Development, IAW Government acceptance of CDRL A028, NATOPS Flight Manual.

CLIN 0010 – For Data in Excess of FFF/OMIT, the contractor shall deliver, in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Access Agreement, 30 days after option exercise. The terms and conditions of the access agreement shall continue through CY2050 IAW H-4, Data Access.

CLIN 0011 – For Sling Load, deliver IAW Attachment 1, Performance Work Statement paragraph 3.1.9.2, External

Sling Load. An external sling load device shall be delivered with each of the first 25 aircraft.

F-3 DELIVERY ADDRESSES

The contractor shall deliver in accordance with the below:

CLINs 0001, 0009, 0010, 0101, 0201, 0301, and 0401 shall be shipped to the following address (DODAAC / CAGE

- N52813):

COMTRAWING FIVE

RECEIVING OFFICER

7480 USS ENTERPRISE ST.

MILTON FL 32570-6107

FOB: Destination

CLINs 0003, 0004, 0005, 0006, 0011, 0103, 0104, 0203, 0303, and 0403 shall be shipped to the following address

(DODAAC / CAGE - N49155):

CNATRA DET WHITING FIELD

MR. MIKE HARRIS

7480 USS ENTERPRISE STREET

MILTON FL 32570

(850) 623-7548

FOB: Destination

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachments

# Title Effective Date # Pages

1 Performance Work Statement for Advanced Helicopter Training System

(AHTS), Version 1.3

17 Jan 19 26

2 Performance Specification for AHTS, Version 1.83PR 11 Jan 19 37

3 Access Agreement Date of Award 3

4 Configuration Date of Award

5 Small Business Subcontracting Plan Date of Award

6 Warranty Date of Award

Exhibits

# Title Effective Date # Pages

A Contract Data Item Deliverables, Version 1.1 24 Jan 19 31

B Flyaway Kits List Date of Award

C Spare Parts List Date of Award

D Peculiar Support Equipment List Date of Award

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION OF OFFERORS

M

M.1. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

I. GENERAL INFORMATION

The Government expects to select one Offeror on the basis of its proposal providing the best value to the

Government, all factors considered. "Best value" means the expected outcome of an acquisition that, in the

Government's estimation, provides the greatest overall benefit in response to the requirement. Offerors are advised that proposals meeting the solicitation requirements with the lowest proposed price may not be selected for an award if award to a higher-priced Offeror is determined to be more beneficial to the Government. However, the perceived benefits of the higher-priced proposal must merit the additional price.

A. EVALUATION PROCESS (Certifications)

Certification requirements are identified in Section L, Part B Specific Instructions, 1.0 Volume 1 – Certifications. A proposal that does not provide the completed certifications at the time designated by the PCO will be deemed ineligible for award.

B. EVALUATION PROCESS

The Government intends to evaluate each proposal and award a contract after discussions to the responsible Offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, provides the best value to the Government, all factors considered. The fact that an Offeror may be initially included in the competitive range does not preclude the Government from excluding the Offeror’s proposal in a subsequent competitive range if the proposal is found to no longer have a reasonable chance of receiving award. Therefore, Offerors are cautioned that their offer should contain the

Offeror’s best terms from a technical and cost/price standpoint. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s written proposal in conjunction with the System Performance demonstration (SPD). Discussions will continue until the

Government declares discussions to be completed.

Non-compliance with the terms, conditions, or “shall” requirements set forth in the solicitation may be considered a deficiency. The Government may consider any exception or deviation to any term or condition of the RFP to be a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001. A proposal assessed with a deficiency is ineligible for award.

C. EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible Offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The

Government will evaluate proposals using the factors listed below, where Technical is significantly more important than Price.

(A) Technical

(B) Price

The proposal must demonstrate to the Government’s satisfaction that the Offeror will provide a solution that will ensure the successful accomplishment of the solicitation requirements and overall program objectives. Proposal information provided for one factor may be used to assess other factors if the Government deems it appropriate.

II. SPECIFIC INFORMATION

A. TECHNICAL FACTOR

The Government will evaluate the proposal to determine the Offeror's understanding of, approach to, and ability to meet the solicitation requirements. The Government will assess the Offeror’s Technical Proposal for the following sub-factors with respect to compliance with the solicitation requirements and the risk associated with the Offeror’s approach.

For the Technical factor, a Technical Rating and a Technical Risk Rating will be assigned based on the Rating and

Risk Rating assigned to each of the two Technical Sub-factors. The Technical Sub-factor Rating is an assessment of compliance with the solicitation requirements that also considers the benefits and detriments related to program performance and operations. The degree of benefit to the Government associated with a strength(s) will be considered in determining the Technical Rating. The Technical Sub-factor Risk Rating considers the risk associated with the technical approach in meeting the requirement. Assessment of technical risk considers potential for disruption of schedule, increase in costs, degradation of performance, the need to increase Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Failure to address part or parts of the Technical sub-factors caused by a lack of information may be assessed as a weakness, significant weakness, or multiple weaknesses or significant weaknesses. A combination of significant weaknesses that increase the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level will be considered a deficiency.

Offerors are advised that during the evaluation process, a Technical Sub-factor assessed to have a “Marginal” or

“Unacceptable” Technical Rating or “High” or “Unacceptable” Technical Risk Rating may have a disproportionate impact on the overall Technical Rating or Technical Risk Rating even if it is the least important sub-factor. Any sub-factor resulting in a Technical Rating of “Unacceptable” or “Marginal”, or a Technical Risk Rating of “High” or

“Unacceptable” may be considered unawardable and may result in the entire proposal being found unacceptable and eliminated from the competition.

The following two sub-factors are in descending order of importance:

1. AIRCRAFT SYSTEM

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Aircraft System proposal with respect to its compliance with the solicitation requirements and the risk associated with the Offeror’s approach in the following elements:

Overall Compliance, Instrument Training, Navigation Training, Warfighting Skills Training, and Safety.

Emphasis will be placed on the Overall Compliance and Instrument Training elements.

Strengths will not be assessed for the Overall Compliance element (2.1.1), but any deficiencies will be addressed in the Technical Rating. Weaknesses/significant weaknesses and risk reducers for the requirements specified in Table T-1 for element 2.1.1 will be addressed in the Technical Risk Rating.

The Government may assess one or more strengths, risk reducers, or weaknesses/significant weaknesses for each element (Section L paragraphs 2.1.2 through 2.1.5) based on the degree to which the Offeror’s proposed attribute solutions, as a whole, provides the highest quality solution and will be addressed in the

Technical Rating and Technical Risk Rating. The Offeror is advised that providing an individual Section L specified attribute does not, in and of itself, result in an assessed strength or risk reducer. For the purposes of assigning strengths or risk reducers under Section L paragraphs 2.1.2 through 2.1.5, only those attributes specified in Section L, paragraphs 2.1.2 through 2.1.5 will be considered in the evaluation of the proposed attribute solutions (i.e., no other AV-XXX “should” statements will be credited with a strength or risk reducer for the Aircraft System Sub-factor).

While the Government will not assign an overall evaluation rating for the SPD, the SPD will be used to facilitate the Government’s evaluation of the Aircraft System sub-factor. As such, the SPD evaluation may affect the Aircraft System risk rating.

2. MANAGEMENT AND SUPPORT

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s Management and Support proposal with respect to its compliance with the solicitation requirements and the risk associated with the Offeror’s approach in the following elements: Data Submission, Initial Sparing Approach, Support Infrastructure, Sustainment

Approach, and Small Business Utilization Strategy. Emphasis will be placed on the Data Submission element.

The Offeror is advised that providing a Section L specified attribute does not, in and of itself, result in an assessed strength or risk reducer. An Offeror that proposes a data access agreement in accordance with

Attachment L-5 may be assessed a strength. With respect to Section L, paragraph 2.2.4 only those attributes specified will be considered in the evaluation of the proposed attribute solutions and will be assigned strengths or risk reducers (i.e., no other AV-XXX “should” statements will be credited with a strength or risk reducer for the Management Support Sub-factor). The Technical Risk Rating for the

Management and Support sub-factor will also take into consideration the spare parts proposed in Annex F

(Spare Parts List). Note: Annexes E (Flyaway Kits List) and G (PSE List) will not be considered as part of the evaluation.

The Offeror's strategy for utilizing Small Business, Veteran-Owned Small Business, Service-Disabled

Veteran-Owned Small Business, HUBZone Small Business, Small Disadvantaged Business and Women-

Owned Small Business will be evaluated.

B. PRICE FACTOR

For the Price Factor, the Government will evaluate each Offeror’s Total Evaluated Price, which is the sum of:

1. FFP CLINs 0001-0011, 0101, 0103, 0104, 0201, 0203, 0301, 0303, 0401 and 0403. The Government will evaluate all CLINs for unbalanced pricing and to ensure that the proposed price is within the Government’s stated budgetary constraints on a per CLIN and cumulative basis. Offerors are advised that proposing a price in excess of the above stated budget either on a per CLIN or cumulative basis may render that Offeror unawardable.

2. C&dD 10 Year Projected Operation & Support Cost

The Government will use the Conklin & de Decker (C&dD) Life Cycle Cost (LCC) Product to generate a 10 Year “Operations & Support Contractor Contribution” cost for the proposed Aircraft for input into the calculated Total Evaluated Price. The output from the C&dD LCC Product will be multiplied by 130 to reflect the total fleet size.

Consistent with FAR 15.404-1(b)(2)(i) and FAR 15.403-1(c)(1), the Government intends to rely on adequate price competition to establish price reasonableness. However, in the event additional analysis is needed, the Government in its sole discretion may use other price analysis techniques per FAR 15.404-1(b)(2). The evaluation will not bind the Government to purchase any of the options.

III. DEFINITIONS

A. EVALUATION RATINGS AND RISK ASSESSMENT DEFINITIONS –

EVALUATION RATINGS DEFINITIONS

The Technical Rating reflects the Government's assessment of the Offeror’s technical solution for meeting the

Government’s requirement.

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

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

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

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

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

RISK ASSESSMENT DEFINITIONS

The Technical Risk Rating reflects the Government’s assessment of potential for disruption of schedule, increased costs, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Rating Description

Low

Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses, which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses, which is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close

Government monitoring.

Unacceptable

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

B. OTHER EVALUATION DEFINITIONS

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.

Risk Reducer An aspect of an Offeror’s proposal that reduces risk in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Weakness (FAR 15.001) “Weakness” means a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness

(FAR 15.001)

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

Deficiency (FAR 15.001)

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

Reasonableness (from

FAR 31.201-3)

A cost is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of competitive business. What is reasonable depends upon a variety of considerations and circumstances, including:

(1) Whether it is the type of cost generally recognized as ordinary and necessary for the work to be performed;

(2) The contractor's responsibilities to the Government.

Completeness The adequacy of the cost proposal, in relation to the SOW, considering whether all costs are included or accounted for. All SOW requirements must be included.

(End of Summary of Changes)