N62306-17-R-0002_(DRAFT).pdf

SEE ADDENDUM

(No Collect Calls)

N62306-17-R-0002 23-Nov-2016

b. TELEPHONE NUMBER

228-688-4362

8. OFFER DUE DATE/LOCAL TIME

12:00 PM 19 Dec 2016

5. SOLICITATION NUMBER 6. SOLICITATION ISSUE DATE

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE

STANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012)

Prescribed by GSA – FAR (48 CFR) 53.212

(TYPE OR PRINT)

(SIGNATURE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER)

ADDENDA X ARE

26. TOTAL AWARD AMOUNT (For Gov t. Use Only )

23.

CODE 10. THIS ACQUISITION IS

SUCH ADDRESS IN OFFER

17b. CHECK IF REMITTANCE IS DIFFERENT AND PUT

BELOW IS CHECKED

TELEPHONE NO.

N623069. ISSUED BY

18b. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN BLOCK 18a. UNLESS BLOCK

7. FOR SOLICITATION

INFORMATION CALL:

a. NAME

CHANTEL A. SMITH

2. CONTRACT NO. 3. AWARD/EFFECTIVE DATE 4. ORDER NUMBER

(TYPE OR PRINT)

30b. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER 30c. DATE SIGNED 31b. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER

30a. SIGNATURE OF OFFEROR/CONTRACTOR 31a.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

27a. SOLICITATION INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-1. 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-3. 52.212-5 ARE ATTACHED.X

25. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

1. REQUISITION NUMBER

20.

ADDITIONAL SHEETS SUBJECT TO THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS SPECIFIED.

OFFEROR TO COMPLETE BLOCKS 12, 17, 23, 24, AND 30

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

ARE NOT ATTACHED

27b. CONTRACT/PURCHASE ORDER INCORPORATES BY REFERENCE FAR 52.212-4. FAR 52.212-5 IS ATTACHED. ADDENDA ARE ARE NOT ATTACHED

(BLOCK 5), INCLUDING ANY ADDITIONS OR CHANGES WHICH ARE

SET FORTH HEREIN, IS ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS:

. YOUR OFFER ON SOLICITATION

28. CONTRACTOR IS REQUIRED TO SIGN THIS DOCUMENT AND RETURN

% FOR:SET ASIDE:UNRESTRICTED OR X

SMALL BUSINESS

17a.CONTRACTOR/ CODE FACILITY

OFFEROR CODE

NAVAL OCEANOGRAPHIC OFFICE CONTRACTS

ATTN: CHANTEL SMITH

EMAIL: CHANTEL.SMITH@NAVY.MIL

STENNIS SPACE CENTER MS 39522-5001

18a. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY CODE

RATED ORDER UNDER

DPAS (15 CFR 700)

13a. THIS CONTRACT IS A

13b. RATING

CODE15. DELIVER TO CODE 16. ADMINISTERED BY

SEE SCHEDULE

12. DISCOUNT TERMS11. DELIVERY FOR FOB DESTINA-

TION UNLESS BLOCK IS

MARKED

SEE SCHEDULE

14. METHOD OF SOLICITATION

RFQ IFB RFPX

228-688-4121FAX:

TEL: 228-688-4362

SERVICE-DISABLED

VETERAN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS

X 8(A)

HUBZONE SMALL

BUSINESS

SIZE STANDARD:

$15,000,000

NAICS:

541330

X

OFFER DATED

29. AWARD OF CONTRACT: REF.

DELIVER ALL ITEMS SET FORTH OR OTHERWISE IDENTIFIED ABOVE AND ON ANY

COPIES TO ISSUING OFFICE. CONTRACTOR AGREES TO FURNISH AND

EMAIL:

TEL:

31c. DATE SIGNED

SEE SCHEDULE

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/ SERVICESITEM NO. QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

24.22.21.19.

WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS (WOSB)

ELIGIBLE UNDER THE WOMEN-OWNED

SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM

EDWOSB

32g. E-MAIL OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

SOLICITATION/CONTRACT/ORDER FOR COMMERCIAL ITEMS

(CONTINUED)

PAGE 2 OF76

ACCEPTED, AND CONFORMS TO THE CONTRACT, EXCEPT AS NOTED: ______________________________________________________

32a. QUANTITY IN COLUMN 21 HAS BEEN

RECEIVED INSPECTED

32b. SIGNATURE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT

REPRESENTATIVE

32c. DATE 32d. PRINTED NAME AND TITLE OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT

REPRESENTATIVE

32e. MAILING ADDRESS OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE 32f . TELEPHONE NUMBER OF AUTHORIZED GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVE

37. CHECK NUMBER

FINALPARTIALCOMPLETE

36. PAYMENT35. AMOUNT VERIFIED

CORRECT FOR

34. VOUCHER NUMBER

FINAL

33. SHIP NUMBER

PARTIAL

38. S/R ACCOUNT NUMBER 39. S/R VOUCHER NUMBER 40. PAID BY

41a. I CERTIFY THIS ACCOUNT IS CORRECT AND PROPER FOR PAYMENT

41b. SIGNATURE AND TITLE OF CERTIFYING OFFICER 41c. DATE

42a. RECEIVED BY (Print)

42b. RECEIVED AT (Location)

42c. DATE REC'D (YY/MM/DD) 42d. TOTAL CONTAINERS

STANDARD FORM 1449 (REV. 2/2012) BACK

Prescribed by GSA – FAR (48 CFR) 53.212

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

PREVIOUS EDITION IS NOT USABLE

SEE SCHEDULE

20.

SCHEDULE OF SUPPLIES/ SERVICES

21.

QUANTITY UNIT

22. 23.

UNIT PRICE

24.

AMOUNT

19.

ITEM NO.

N62306-17-R-0002

Section SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 12 Months Labor (EARS & AUV Support Services)

FFP

Base Period: 20 January 2017 to 19 December 2017. The contractor shall provide all labor requirements in accordance with the attached Performance Work

Statement (PWS) titled Environmental Acoustic Recording Systems (EARS) and

Autonomous Underwater Vehicles (AUV) Support Services.

FOB: Destination

NET AMT

0002 1 Lot Travel

FFP

Base Period: 20 January 2017 to 19 December 2017. Reimbursable travel in accordance with the PWS para 5.1.3. Excludes overhead, G&A, and profit. NTE:

$61,000.00

0003 1 Lot Materials

FFP

Base Period: 20 January 2017 to 19 December 2017. The contractor shall purchase materials/supplies incidental to performing services in accordance with the attached PWS para 5.1.5.

NTE: $400,000.00

0004 1 Lot Overtime

FFP

Base Period: 20 January 2017 to 19 December 2017. Overtime hours as needed in accordance with the attached PWS para 5.1.4.

NTE: $147,000.00

0005 1 Lot Transition (Phase-In)

FFP

The contractor will have up to 15 days to transition into full performance capability. (Reference PWS 5.2)

1001 12 Months OPTION Labor (EARS & AUV Support Services)

FFP

OPTION 1 - The contractor shall provide all labor requirements in accordance with the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS) titled Environmental

Acoustic Recording Systems (EARS) and Autonomous Underwater Vehicles

(AUV) Support Services.

1002 1 Lot OPTION Travel

FFP

OPTION 1 - Reimbursable travel in accordance with the PWS para 5.1.3. Excludes overhead, G&A, and profit.

NTE: $61,000.00

1003 1 Lot OPTION Materials

FFP

OPTION 1 - The contractor shall purchase materials/supplies incidental to performing services in accordance with the attached PWS para 5.1.5.

NTE: $450,000.00

1004 1 Lot OPTION Overtime

FFP

OPTION 1 - Overtime hours as needed in accordance with the attached PWS para

5.1.4.

NTE: $152,000.00

2001 12 Months OPTION Labor (EARS & AUV Support Services)

FFP

OPTION 2 - The contractor shall provide all labor requirements in accordance with the attached Performance Work Statement (PWS) titled Environmental

Acoustic Recording Systems (EARS) and Autonomous Underwater Vehicles

(AUV) Support Services.

2002 1 Lot OPTION Travel

FFP

OPTION 2 - Reimbursable travel in accordance with the PWS para 5.1.3. Excludes overhead, G&A, and profit.

NTE: $61,000.00

2003 1 Lot OPTION Materials

FFP

OPTION 2 - The contractor shall purchase materials/supplies incidental to performing services in accordance with the attached PWS para 5.1.5.

NTE: $500,000.00

2004 1 Lot OPTION Overtime

FFP

OPTION 2 - Overtime hours as needed in accordance with the attached PWS para

5.1.4.

NTE: $155,000.00

ADDENDUM FAR 52.212-1

ADDENDUM

FAR 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS—COMMERCIAL ITEMS (Oct 2015)

PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

Description Due Date/Time

Past Performance Information Sheets 9 Dec 16 / 12:00 p.m. Central Time Volume I Executive Summary 19 Dec 16 / 12:00 p.m. Central Time Volume II Technical Acceptability 19 Dec 16 / 12:00 p.m. Central Time

Volume III Past Performance Information 19 Dec 16 / 12:00 p.m. Central Time

Volume IV Price Proposal/Responsibility

Determination/Contract Forms 19 Dec 16 / 12:00 p.m. Central Time

Mail proposal documents to the address identified in paragraph A.1.

A. SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL: Proposals shall be submitted no later than the date and time listed above. If amendments are issued, they must be acknowledged in writing prior to the due date. Proposals must be sealed and show the time and date specified for receipt, the solicitation number, and the name and address of the Offeror. It is the Offerors’ responsibility to confirm receipt of correspondence.

1. Offerors should submit proposals to the address listed below:

To Be Opened By Addressee Only:

NAVAL OCEANOGRAPHIC OFFICE

CONTRACTS DEPARTMENT

ATTN: CHANTEL SMITH

1002 BALCH BLVD

STENNIS SPACE CENTER, MS 39522

2. TELEGRAPHIC OR FACSIMILE PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.

B. INQUIRIES BY OFFERORS: The Contracting Officer is the sole point of contact for this acquisition. All questions or concerns regarding this request for proposal (RFP) must be directed IN WRITING via e-mail (preferred method) to chantel.smith@navy.mil AND NAVO_STNS_CONTRACTS@nmci-isf.com. Offerors shall verify receipt of questions or concerns.

mailto:chantel.smith@navy.mil mailto:NAVO_STNS_CONTRACTS@nmci-isf.com

**QUESTIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED (USING ATTACHMENT 3 of the RFP AS A TEMPLATE) NO

LATER THAN 7 DECEMBER 2016 BY 4:00 PM CENTRAL TIME

C. HANDCARRYING PROPOSALS: Offerors are cautioned Stennis Space Center has visitor control procedures requiring individuals not affiliated with the installation to obtain a visitor pass prior to entrance. SOME DELAY

SHOULD BE ANTICIPATED IF HAND CARRYING PROPOSALS. Offerors should allow sufficient time to obtain a visitor pass and arrive at the Naval Oceanographic Office PRIOR to the time specified for receipt.

Difficulties/problems with Internet Service Providers (ISP) and/or network failures will not necessitate justification for late submissions. Late proposals will be processed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(c) “Submission, modification, revision, and withdrawal of proposals.”

D. PERIOD FOR ACCEPTANCE OF OFFERS: The Offeror agrees to hold the prices in its offer firm for 180 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of offers.

E. AWARD WITHOUT DISCUSSIONS:

1. The Government intends to award without discussions with respective Offerors. Offerors shall submit sufficient information and in the format specified in Proposal Preparation Instructions per the FAR Clause 52.212-1

Addendum. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (e.g., the relevance of past performance information) or respond to adverse past performance information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond. Adverse past performance is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comments received from sources without a formal rating system. Exchanges conducted with regard to adverse past performance or to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions, and the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for proposal revision. Therefore, each initial proposal should contain the Offeror’s best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if deemed in its best interest.

If the Government elects to hold discussions, a competitive range will be established based on FAR 15.306(c) procedures and this solicitation. The Government reserves the right to further 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. If the Contracting Officer determines that an offeror’s proposal should no longer be included in the competitive range, the proposal will be eliminated from consideration for award. Written notice of this decision shall be provided to unsuccessful offerors in accordance with FAR 15.503. Offerors excluded or otherwise eliminated from the competitive range may request a debriefing using guidance from FAR 15.505 or 15.506.

F. EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS: To assure timely and equitable evaluation of proposals, Offerors must follow the instructions contained herein. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or sub-factors. Non-conformance with these instructions may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award.

1. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirement but rather shall provide facts and convincing rationale addressing how the Offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror's proposal.

2. Offerors shall prepare their proposal as set forth in Table 1 below. Proposals shall be submitted in the number of hard copies specified and one compact disk with electronic files. The titles and contents are defined in Table 1 of this document, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in the table. The contents of each proposal are described in the table below and the paragraphs that follow it. In the event that this table conflicts with the detailed instructions in the paragraphs that follow, the detailed instructions shall take precedence.

3. The response shall consist of four (4) separate volumes: Volume I – Executive Summary, Volume II – Technical

Proposal, Volume III – Past Performance Information, Volume IV – Price Proposal/Contract Forms.

Table 1—Proposal Organization

Volume Volume Title Hard & Electronic Copies Page Limit

I Executive Summary

Tab 1 – Master Table of Contents

Tab 2 – Narrative & Authorized Offeror

Personnel

Tab 3 – Proof of Financial Responsibility

Tab 4 – 8(a) Joint Venture Certifications

(if any)

Tab 5 – Glossary of Abbreviations and

Acronyms

1 Original, 3 Copies, plus

Electronic Version

10* (applicable to

Tab 2)

II Technical Capability

Tab 1 – Table of Contents

Tab 2 – Phase-In Plan

Tab 3 – Staffing Plan

Tab 4 – Management Plan

1 Original, 3 Copies, plus

Electronic Version

Tab 5 – Glossary of Abbreviations and

Acronyms

III Past Performance

Tab 1 – Table of Contents

Tab 2 – Reference 1

Tab 3 – Reference 2

Tab 4 – Reference 3

Tab 5 - Subcontractor consent (if required)

1 Original, 3 Copies, plus

Electronic Version

3* per reference

IV Price

Tab 1 – Table of Contents

Tab 2 – SF 1449 & All Amendments

Tab 3 – Glossary of Abbreviations and

Acronyms

1 Original, 3 Copies, plus

Electronic Version

No Limit

*Excess pages will not be evaluated.

4. Page Limitations. Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. Compliance with page count limits shall be verified via the hardcopy. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal.

5. Page Structure. A page is defined as each face of a sheet of paper containing information. When both sides of a sheet display printed material, it shall be counted as two pages. Pages shall be 8.5 x 11 inches. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the text size shall be no less than 12 point. Margins on all four edges of each sheet will be at least one inch. Legible tables, charts, graphs and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, plans, etc. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 by 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume. Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics not for pages of text. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 12 point. Pages shall be numbered sequentially.

6. Binding and Labeling. Each volume should be separately bound in a three-ring loose-leaf binder permitting the binder to lie flat when opened. Do not use staples. A cover sheet should show 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. Be sure to apply all appropriate markings including those prescribed in accordance with FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data, and FAR 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information.

7. Electronic Offers: The content and page size of electronic copies must be identical to the hard copies. For electronic copies, indicate on each CD the volume number and title. Use separate files to permit rapid location of all portions, including subfactors, exhibits, annexes, and/or attachments, if any. The Offeror shall submit volumes I through IV in electronic format, using recordable CDs. Each volume shall be in a different directory on a CD. The electronic copies of the proposal shall be submitted in a format readable by Microsoft (MS) Office Word 2010, MS

Office Excel 2010, and MS Office Power Point 2010, as applicable. In the event that there are any discrepancies between the hard copies and the electronic copies of the proposal, the hard copies will be used for evaluation of

Offeror’s proposal.

G. DISCREPANCIES: If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the Contracting Officer in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the Offeror is asking the Contracting Officer to consider as related to the perceived omission or error. The Offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions in accordance with FAR 52.212-1(g).

H. EXCEPTIONS TO TERMS AND CONDITIONS: Exceptions taken to terms and conditions of the RFP, to any of its formal attachments, or to other parts of the solicitation shall be identified to the Contracting Officer as soon as they are identified and prior to the proposal due date. Each exception shall be specifically related to a paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being removed from consideration for award.

I. PRICE COMPETITION: The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition in this acquisition. Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review this determination and if, in the Contracting Officer's opinion, adequate price competition exists, no additional cost information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this evaluation the Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists, Offerors may be required to submit information other than cost or pricing data that is adequate to the extent necessary for the

CO to determine the reasonableness of the price using FAR 15.404-1.

VOLUME I – EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The executive summary volume shall consist of the following sections:

Tab 1. Table of Contents. Include a master table of contents of the entire proposal.

Tab 2: The Offeror’s narrative summary of the entire proposal should be concise, to include addressing the significant risks, and highlighting any key or unique features, excluding price. The salient features should tie in with

FAR 52.212-2 evaluation factors/sub-factors. Also identify authorized Offeror personnel and individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government. Provide the name, title, CAGE, DUNS and telephone number of the company point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to the Offeror‘s proposal and who can obligate the company contractually. Additionally, provide the name, title, and telephone number of the CEO, Division President, and/or

Vice President of the company for notification purposes. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal. The narrative portion of the executive summary has a limit of 10 pages.

Tab 3: The Offeror shall include Proof of Financial Responsibility (letter from the Offeror’s bank on the bank letterhead) as acceptable evidence to the Contracting Officer that the Offeror has sufficient financial resources to cover startup expenses for this acquisition IAW FAR 9.104-3(a).

Tab 4: Joint Venture Agreements are allowable on competitive 8(a) set-asides, however, the joint venture agreement must be received by the Small Business Administration prior to proposal due date and approved before award of any resulting contract. If you are contemplating a joint venture on this project, you must advise your assigned SBA

Business Opportunity Specialist (BOS) as soon as possible. It is also recommended that the agreement be submitted as soon as practicable to ensure compliance with established regulations. Any corrections and/or changes needed can be made only when your BOS has adequate time for a thorough review before proposal due date. NO

CORRECTIONS AND/OR CHANGES ARE ALLOWED AFTER TIME OF SUBMISSION OF PROPOSAL.

Tab 5: Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

VOLUME II – TECHNICAL CAPABILITY – Maximum 20 pages The Technical Capability Volume shall be specific and complete. Clarity and coherence are very important. The offeror’s responses will be evaluated against the technical evaluation criteria in FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation--

Commercial Items. Using the instructions provided below, provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology the Offeror would use for accomplishing/satisfying these sub-factors. All the requirements specified in the solicitation are mandatory. By the Offeror’s proposal submission, the Offeror is representing that the Offeror’s firm will perform all the requirements specified in the solicitation. Do not merely reiterate the objectives or reformulate the requirements specified in the solicitation, but instead discuss how the Offeror plans to accomplish each of the requirements. The Technical Capability Volume shall address the proposed approach to meeting the minimum capability requirements of the following three sub-factors: Phase-In Plan, Staffing Plan, and Management

Plan.

Tab 1: Table of Contents

Tab 2: Sub-factor1 – Phase-In Plan in accordance with Addendum to FAR 52.212-2

Tab 3: Sub-factor 2 - Staffing Plan in accordance with Addendum to FAR 52.212-2

Tab 4: Sub-factor 3 – Management Plan in accordance with Addendum to FAR 52.212-2

Tab 5: Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

VOLUME III – PAST PERFORMANCE

a. The Government will conduct an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements.

Offerors shall select a minimum of one (1) but no more than three (3) past and current contracts for past performance information (PPI) consideration. These contracts may include Federal, State, and local government and private efforts similar to the requirements of this solicitation performed within the last 3 years. The Government will use this information to assess performance.

b. The evaluation (see Addendum to FAR 52.212-2 for relevancy and recency criteria) of PPI will take into account

PPI regarding predecessor companies, key personnel who have relevant experience, or subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement when such information is relevant to the instant acquisition.

Furnish the following information for each contract referenced:

(i) Company/Division name

(ii) Description of Services Provided

(iii) Contracting Agency/Customer

(iv) Contract Number

(v) Contract Dollar Value

(vi) Period of Performance

(vii) Verified, up-to-date name, address, e-mail, and telephone number of the contracting officer

(viii) Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

(ix) Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions.

c. Early Proposal Information: The Government requests Offerors ensure that their past performance information sheets are received by the Contracting Officer no later than 9 December 2016.

d. Subcontractor Consent (Tab 4 - If required): PPI pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime

Offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. With the proposal, provide a letter from all subcontractors that will perform 20% or more of the requirement, consenting to the release of their PPI to the prime contractor.

The Past Performance Volume shall consist of the following sections:

Tabs 2-4: Past Performance Information References (3 page limit per reference)

Tab 5: Subcontractor Consent (if required)

VOLUME IV - PRICE PROPOSAL – Unlimited

a. This section is to assist the Offeror in providing the pricing information that is required to evaluate the reasonableness and balance of proposed prices. Compliance with these requirements is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of the proposal. The price proposal shall be based on Offerors’ own technical approach submitted in the Technical Proposal (Volume II) and the PWS requirements. Note that unreasonably high proposed prices, initially or subsequently, may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition on the basis that the Offeror may not understand the requirement. Additionally, unbalanced pricing poses an unacceptable risk to the Government and may render a proposal unawardable. Unreasonably low prices may be grounds for eliminating a proposal from competition on the basis that the Offeror may not understand the requirement. The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the Offeror.

b. Information beyond that required by this instruction shall not be submitted, unless the Offeror considers it essential to document or support a price position. The information listed below must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Price Volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.

c. SF 1449 and amendments (if applicable): Complete blocks 12, 17a, and 30a, b, and c of the SF 1449. Fill in unit prices, amounts and totals (using no more than two decimal places) for each Labor CLIN. In doing so, the Offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in the SOLICITATION, with attachments. The

SOLICITATION constitutes the model contract.

d. The proposal prices must be submitted for all CLINs for the base year and all four (4) option periods within the

SF1449. FAR 52.217-8, Option to Extend Services, is included in the RFP and will be incorporated into the resultant contract; IF exercised, the clause will extend the terms and conditions of the contract period being extended at the rates specified in the contract, the evaluation of which will be considered and included in the initial evaluation of the proposal (to include the base period plus all option periods) as demonstrated herein.

The Price Volume shall consist of the following sections.

Tab 2: SF 1449 & All Amendments

Tab 3: Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

(End of Addendum)

ADDENDUM FAR 52.212-2

ADDENDUM TO 52.212-2—EVALUATION—COMMERCIAL ITEMS (Oct 2014)

BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

A. Pursuant to FAR Parts 12 and 15, this is a competitive best value source selection in which all evaluation factors other than cost or price, when combined , will be evaluated on a basis significantly more important than cost or price. By submission of its offer, the offeror accedes to all solicitation requirements, including terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors and subfactors.

One firm fixed price contract will be awarded to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the FAR and whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representations, certifications, and all other information required by addendum FAR 52.212-1 of this solicitation) and is judged, based on the evaluation factors and sub factors to represent the best value to the Government. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors, and the Contracting Officer reasonably determines that the technical and/or overall business approach and/or past performance of the higher price offeror outweighs the price difference. The Contracting Officer will base the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of proposals against all source selection criteria in the solicitation (described below). While the Government source selection evaluation team will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; and therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

B. The evaluation process shall proceed as follows:

Volume II – Technical Acceptability

1. Initially, the government technical evaluation team shall evaluate each technical proposal, assigning a color and corresponding adjectival rating. Proposals that are determined to be technically unacceptable shall be excluded from further evaluation and shall not be further considered for award.

a. The following technical and risk rating definitions will be used in the assessment of technical capability:

(Note: A combined technical/risk rating will be used)

Technical Evaluation Ratings

Color Rating Adjectival

Rating

Description

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

Purple

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

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

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

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

Technical Risk Descriptions

Adjectival 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 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. The offeror’s proposal shall, at a minimum, address each of the subfactors, as they apply to the PWS.

During evaluations of each proposal, the Government will assign each subfactor a rating as shown above. Separate ratings will be assessed for each subfactor. A rating of Unacceptable in one or more technical subfactors will constitute an overall rating of Unacceptable for the technical evaluation.

2. The proposals shall be evaluated against the following Technical subfactors:

a. Subfactor 1: Phase-In Plan – The proposed plan is acceptable when the offeror adequately addresses a detailed phase-in approach to ensure contract performance begins the first day of full performance. The plan is acceptable when the proposal includes:

1) A detailed description for recruiting, training/validation, certification, and qualification of contract personnel during the phase-in period.

2) A viable time-line schedule which addresses start and completion of each event (e.g., interviewing, hiring, human resource actions, training, and start work dates).

b. Subfactor 2: Manpower (Workforce) Plan – This subfactor evaluates the adequacy of the organizational structure the offeror will utilize in performing the requirements outlined in the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

The plan must adequately address lines of authority, the use of cross utilization of personnel (if applicable), details of on-site personnel by skill mix, function, numbers and job descriptions. The proposal shall address organizational roles, responsibilities, and relationships for each project element, to include EARS and AUVs in accordance with the

PWS requirements.

The offeror provides an acceptable plan when:

1) The proposal adequately addresses an organizational structure, including organization charts and rationale for the proposed organization, to include roles, responsibilities, and relationships for EARS and AUVs support in accordance with the PWS requirements.

2) The proposal includes a completed Manpower Matrix sufficient to staff the PWS requirements for the base period and all option periods. The matrix shall address the number of full time equivalents, number of part-time or temporary staff-year equivalent hires, and manpower programmed for each contract period (base and options).

3) The proposal adequately addresses the technical approach that includes logical methodology used to determine manpower; logical methodology used to determine workforce by project (EARS and AUVs) and skill (job classification); logical methodology for how the offeror will employ staffing to meet changing, scheduled, urgent, and overtime requirements; and an explanation of any manpower adjustments beyond contract start date (workforce staffing adjustments (decrease or increase) beyond the base contract period shall be supported with rationale and computations for each project element).

NOTE 1: Marginal levels of overall manpower, workforce certification, and skill mix could indicate a lack of understanding concerning mission requirements and may result in the proposal receiving an unacceptable rating.

c. Subfactor 3: Management Plan – This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s overall approach to perform engineering, technical, and configuration management tasks in support of EARS and AUVs.

The offeror provides an acceptable plan when:

1) The proposal adequately addresses how the PWS requirements for all functional program areas will be accomplished.

2) The proposal adequately describes the offeror’s approach to designing, prototyping, fabricating/manufacturing, assembling, integrating, testing/qualification and sustaining NAVOCEANO OPD EARS equipment.

3) The proposal adequately describes the offeror’s approach to provide engineering support for

NAVOCEANO OPD AUV equipment and mission systems. Engineering services shall include: a) troubleshooting, maintenance, repair and operations of Remote Environmental Measuring Units (REMUS) class AUV systems b) identification, implementation, review and evaluation of documentation and procedures and c) identification and development of new AUV technology.

4) The proposal adequately describes the offeror’s approach to perform inventory control which includes annotating and entering data utilizing automated data processing equipment; maintaining stock records and inventory databases, annotating records as status changes or as items are received; conducting follow-up; verifying information through administrative manuals and regulations; and performing parts research.

5) The proposal adequately describes the offeror’s approach to purchase materials/supplies used for manufacturing, repair, maintenance of, assembly of, and deployment of EARS buoys.

6) The proposal adequately describes the offeror’s procedures for training, qualifying, and certifying the workforce prior to assuming a position throughout the life of the contract.

Volume III – Past Performance Factor

A. The past performance evaluation is an assessment of the offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertains to the services outlined in the solicitation requirements. Past performance should be initially evaluated to determine whether the offeror’s past performance is recent, and relevant or not relevant to the effort to be acquired. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. These are combined to establish one performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

B. The proposal shall include as a minimum:

Past Performance References - The evaluation for the past performance section will ensure the offeror provided a record of relevant and recent past performance on no more than three (3) previous/current contracts.

NOTE: In the case of an offeror without a record of 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, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance. Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance.

There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

C. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information).

1. Recency

An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, a current effort or completed effort must have been performed during the past three (3) years with at least six (6) months of that effort in the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. The past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

2. Relevancy

Relevancy includes performance of efforts involving requirements that are similar or greater in scope, magnitude, and complexity than the effort described in the solicitation. The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent performance information obtained to determine how closely the services performed under those contracts most closely resemble the scope, magnitude, and complexity of this solicitation. Scope considers the range of service categories provided. Complexity considers the contract type. Magnitude considers the overall dollar value of the effort.

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

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

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

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

3. Quality

The Contracting Officer will review all past performance information collected and determine the quality of the offeror’s performance, general trends, and usefulness of the information and incorporate these into the performance confidence assessment.

D. Sources of Past Performance Information for evaluation are as follows:

1. Past performance information may be provided by the offeror, as solicited.

2. Past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee

Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), or other databases; the Defense Contract

Management Agency; and interviews with Program Managers and Contracting Officers.

E. Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings

Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

Volume IV – Price Factor

1. Price will contribute substantially to the source selection decision, and the source selection will be conducted with the expectation of adequate price competition per FAR 15.403-1(c)(1). Therefore, cost or pricing data are not required, and the Government will evaluate proposed prices and related information submitted in the offeror’s proposal for price reasonableness IAW FAR 15.305(a)(1) and FAR 15.404-1. However, the offeror may be required to submit information to the extent necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine price reasonableness.

2. PRICE REASONABLENESS. Price reasonableness will be determined using one or more of the price analysis techniques defined in FAR 15.404-1(b)(2) which include, but are not limited to, a comparison of proposed prices submitted by the competition in response to the solicitation, comparison of proposed prices to the Independent

Government Estimate, historical pricing information, and/or current market conditions. However, if necessary, the

Contracting Officer may use other proposal analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404-1 to the extent necessary to determine price reasonableness. A contract will not be awarded to an offeror whose proposed price is not determined to be reasonable. If the Government elects to hold discussions, any unexplained price reductions submitted by the offeror either during discussions or in response to the request for final proposal revisions may be considered unreasonable. The price proposed for phase-in should correspond to efforts described in the technical proposal for the phase-in approach; a very low price or a price of zero for phase-in may be considered unreasonable.

3. TOTAL EVALUATED PRICE. The total evaluated price (TEP) will be determined by multiplying the quantities identified in the SF 1449 by the contractor proposed unit price for each item to confirm the extended amount for each. The Government will determine the offeror’s TEP by adding the Labor FFP CLINs (Basic and

Option years) together to calculate the TEP. Travel, Equipment, and Overtime CLINS are pre-established amounts with applicable Not-to-Exceed amounts stated in CLIN descriptions. These will be excluded from TEP evaluation;

however, the amounts will be added for the purposes of calculating total contract value.

The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes as follows:

a. All proposed prices will be evaluated for reasonableness in accordance with the criteria stated herein. The Government may require submission of information other than cost or pricing data to the extent necessary to evaluate price reasonableness. A contract will not be awarded to an offeror whose proposed price is not determined reasonable. Each offeror’s Total Evaluated Price (TEP), however, will be calculated as the sum of all firm-fixed-price Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) for the base period and all option years (CLINs 0001, 1001, and 2001). This calculation will not include the Not-to-Exceed Cost Reimbursable CLINs X002, X003, and X004.

Evaluation of option years will not obligate the Government to exercise options.

b. Proposed contract line item prices will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing (FAR 15.404-1(g)).

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more contract line items appears to be significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of price analysis techniques. An offeror’s proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

[END OF ADDENDUM]

ADDENDUM FAR 52.212-4

FAR 52.212-4, CONTRACT TERMS AND CONDITIONS – MAY 2015 COMMERCIAL ITEMS

(ADDENDUM)

Reference FAR 52.212-4, Paragraph (c) is hereby tailored as follows:

(c) Changes. Changes in the terms and conditions of this contract may be made only by written agreement of the parties with the exception of administrative changes such as paying office, appropriation data, etc., which may be changed unilaterally by the Government.

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 Past Performance Information Sheet

Attachment 2 DD Form 254

Attachment 3 Questions & Answers Template

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE TERMS

Supplies/services will be inspected/accepted at:

CLIN INSPECT AT INSPECT BY ACCEPT AT ACCEPT BY

0001 Destination Government Destination Government

0002 Destination Government Destination Government

0003 Destination Government Destination Government

0004 Destination Government Destination Government

0005 Destination Government N/A Government

1001 Destination Government Destination Government

1002 Destination Government Destination Government

1003 Destination Government Destination Government

1004 Destination Government Destination Government

2001 Destination Government Destination Government

2002 Destination Government Destination Government

2003 Destination Government Destination Government

2004 Destination Government Destination Government

DELIVERY INFORMATION

CLIN DELIVERY DATE QUANTITY SHIP TO ADDRESS DODAAC

0001 POP 20-JAN-2017 TO

19-DEC-2017

N/A N93

JOHN R. BRUSSTAR

BUILDING 9322

STENNIS SPACE CENTER MS 39522-5001

228-689-8016

N62306

0002 POP 20-JAN-2017 TO

N/A N93 OCEAN PROJECTS

JOHN BRUSSTAR

NAVOCEANO'BUILDING 9322

STENNIS SPACE CENTER MS 39655

228-689-8016

0003 POP 20-JAN-2017 TO

N/A (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0004 POP 20-JAN-2017 TO

N/A (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

0005 POP 05-JAN-2017 TO

19-JAN-2017

N/A (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

1001 POP 20-DEC-2017 TO

19-DEC-2018

N/A N93

JOHN R. BRUSSTAR

BUILDING 9322

STENNIS SPACE CENTER MS 39522-5001

228-689-8016

1002 POP 20-DEC-2017 TO

N/A N93 OCEAN PROJECTS

JOHN BRUSSTAR

NAVOCEANO'BUILDING 9322

STENNIS SPACE CENTER MS 39655

228-689-8016

1003 POP 20-DEC-2017 TO

N/A (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

1004 POP 20-DEC-2017 TO

N/A (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

2001 POP 20-DEC-2018 TO

19-DEC-2019

N/A N93

JOHN R. BRUSSTAR

BUILDING 9322

STENNIS SPACE CENTER MS 39522-5001

228-689-8016

2002 POP 20-DEC-2018 TO

N/A N93 OCEAN PROJECTS

JOHN BRUSSTAR

NAVOCEANO'BUILDING 9322

STENNIS SPACE CENTER MS 39655

228-689-8016

2003 POP 20-DEC-2018 TO

N/A (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

2004 POP 20-DEC-2018 TO

N/A (SAME AS PREVIOUS LOCATION)

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

52.202-1 Definitions NOV 2013

52.203-2 Certificate Of Independent Price Determination APR 1985

52.203-3 Gratuities APR 1984

52.203-11 Certification And Disclosure Regarding Payments To

Influence Certain Federal Transactions

SEP 2007

52.203-12 Limitation On Payments To Influence Certain Federal

Transactions

OCT 2010

52.203-16 Preventing Personal Conflicts of Interest DEC 2011

52.203-17 Contractor Employee Whistleblower Rights and Requirement

To Inform Employees of Whistleblower Rights

APR 2014

52.204-2 Security Requirements AUG 1996

52.204-4 Printed or Copied Double-Sided on Postconsumer Fiber

Content Paper

MAY 2011

52.204-7 System for Award Management JUL 2013

52.204-9 Personal Identity Verification of Contractor Personnel JAN 2011

52.204-13 System for Award Management Maintenance JUL 2013

52.204-16 Commercial and Government Entity Code Reporting JUL 2016

52.204-17 Ownership or Control of Offeror JUL 2016

52.204-18 Commercial and Government Entity Code Maintenance JUL 2016

52.204-20 Predecessor of Offeror JUL 2016

52.209-2 Prohibition on Contracting with Inverted Domestic

Corporations--Representation

NOV 2015

52.209-5 Certification Regarding Responsibility Matters OCT 2015

52.209-7 Information Regarding Responsibility Matters JUL 2013

52.209-9 Updates of Publicly Available Information Regarding

Responsibility Matters

JUL 2013

52.209-11 Representation by Corporations Regarding Delinquent Tax

Liability or a Felony Conviction under and Federal Law

FEB 2016

52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors--Commercial Items OCT 2015

52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions--Commercial Items MAY 2015

52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition JAN 2004

52.215-1 Alt I Instructions to Offerors--Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2004) -

Alternate I

OCT 1997

52.217-5 Evaluation Of Options JUL 1990

52.219-1 Small Business Program Representations OCT 2014

52.219-1 Alt I Small Business Program Representations (Sept 2015)

Alternate I

SEP 2015

52.219-17 Section 8(A) Award DEC 1996

52.219-18 Notification Of Competition Limited To Eligible 8 (A)

Concerns

JUN 2003

52.222-25 Affirmative Action Compliance APR 1984

52.222-46 Evaluation Of Compensation For Professional Employees FEB 1993

52.223-6 Drug-Free Workplace MAY 2001

52.223-10 Waste Reduction Program MAY 2011

52.227-14 Rights in Data--General MAY 2014

52.229-3 Federal, State And Local Taxes FEB 2013

52.232-1 Payments APR 1984

52.232-17 Interest MAY 2014

52.232-33 Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer--System for Award

Management

JUL 2013

52.232-39 Unenforceability of Unauthorized Obligations JUN 2013

52.233-1 Disputes MAY 2014

52.237-2 Protection Of Government Buildings, Equipment, And

Vegetation

APR 1984

52.237-10 Identification of Uncompensated Overtime MAR 2015

52.237-11 Accepting and Dispensing of $1 Coin SEP 2008

52.239-1…