Market Survey 10 September 2015 Final.pdf

10 September, 2015

Market Survey Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection (ATFP Electronic Surveillance Systems (ESS)

Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center, Pacific

REFERENCE NUMBER: N66001-15-R-0031

**LARGE BUSINESSES DO NOT NEED TO RESPOND TO THIS NOTICE**

1. This Market Survey is issued for the purpose of determining Small Business capabilities. Small Business firms having the capabilities to perform the tasking described in this RFI are encouraged to respond. It should be noted that any resultant contract or task order for services (except construction) will require at least 50 percent of the cost* of the contract performance incurred to be expended for employees of the concern proposing as a prime. Please see FAR Clause 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting (Nov 2011) for prescription and complete version of the clause.

2. The contractor will be tasked to accomplish the work as specified in the in the draft Performance Work Statement (PWS) posted on the SPAWAR e-Commerce website under N66001-15-R-0031.

A. The Space and Naval Warfare Systems Center Pacific (SSC-Pacific) is issuing this Market Survey for determining Small Business capabilities and is soliciting information from potential sources to provide life cycle sustainment, installation, integration, testing and procurement/acquisition support for Anti-Terrorism/Force Protection (AT/FP) Electronic Surveillance Systems (ESS).

B. The Government anticipates this effort to be a CPFF type contract for five years period of performance (one-year base period, followed by four, one-year optional periods). This is a follow-on contract to Multiple Award Contracts N66001-14- D-0052 through 0054. The Government may issue a Single Award or Multiple Award contract. The incumbent contractors are CACI, Honeywell and SERCO, respectively. The average cost per task order is $1,500,000.00.

C. The Government’s estimated level of effort for this procurement, based upon Full Time Equivalents (FTE’s) will be approximately 305 per year. Each FTE is estimated to be 2,080 hours per year. The labor categories and annual level of effort is anticipated to be as follows:

Labor Category Straight Hours Overtime Hours

PROGRAM MANAGER 2,080 42

PROJECT MANAGER 10,400 208

CONTRACT / ADMIN SPEC 10,400 208

SENIOR SYSTEMS ENGINEER 12,480 250

SOFTWARE SYSTEMS

ENGINEER 12,480 250

CM SUPPORT SPEC 12,480 250

IA SUPPORT SPEC 12,480 250

ILS SUPPORT SPEC 12,480 250

ILS ENGINEER 12,480 250

ENGINEER TECH 12,480 250

ENGINEER TECH 35,360 707

ENGINEER TECH 43,680 874

SUPPLY SUPPORT SPEC 12,480 250

MATERIAL COORDINATOR 10,400 208

SENIOR TECH WRITER 10,400 208

TRAINING

SPECIALIST/INSTRUCTOR 10,400 208

INSTALLATION DESIGN

ENGR 20,800 416

INSTALLATION MANAGER 20,800 416

SYSTEMS ENGINEER 33,280 666

ENGINEER TECH 37,440 749

ENGINEER TECH 43,680 874

ELECTRONICS TECH, MAINT 43,680 874

ELECTRONICS TECH, MAINT 43,680 874

WORD PROCESSOR II 20,800 416

WAREHOUSE SPECIALIST 20,800 416

DRAFTER III 33,290 666

NETWORK ENGINEER 12,480 250

SYSTEM ADMINISTRATOR 12,480 250

TELEPHONY ENGINEER 12,480 250

WORD PROCESSOR III 10,400 208

PROGRAMMER III 12,480 250

FOLKLIFT OPERATOR 10,400 208

Sub-Totals 621,930 12446

TOTAL ANNUAL EFFORT 634,376

D. The Government’s estimated dollar range for this effort is: $220M - $249M.

E. The applicable NAICS code is 541330 with a size standard of $38.5M.

F. In addition to the specific systems indicated on the PWS, interested companies should be advised successful performance requires numerous, commercially available, Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) certifications. These OEM certifications include:

- IATI Certified (Win 7 or above)

- IATII Certified (Server 2008 or above) CSWF Certified

- Delta certified

- Nasatka certified

- Autogate certified

- Lenel Certified

- Tower/Climbing Certified

- Centralert Certified Techs

- Cooper Tech Training Waves 7

- Cooper Advanced Training Waves 7

- FedSig Certified

- Monaco Certified

- Whelen Certified

- AMX Certified

- Fork Lift Certified

- American Signal Certified

- ATI Certified

- CSWF 1AT2 Windows Server/Workstation

- CSWF 1AM1 Security+, CISSP

- Systems Engineer (NERMS/GIS) (3 years of experience)

G. Travel Requirements

Requirements are likely to include simultaneous support for seven regions that cover all U.S. NAVY shore installations located throughout both CONUS and OCONUS locations simultaneously. These locations may include the following:

CFA Yokosuka (Japan)

CFA Sasebo (Japan) NAF Atsugi (Japan)

NSF Diego Garcia (British Indian Ocean Territory) CFA Chinhae (South Korea)

NRC Singapore (Republic of Singapore) CNR Marianas (Guam)

JB Pearl Harbor-Hickam (Hawaii, USA) PMRF Barking Sands (Hawaii, USA)

NCTAMS PAC (Hawaii, USA) NAVSTA GITMO Bay (Cuba)

USN Expeditionary Base (Djibouti) NSA Naples (Italy)

NAS Sigonella (Sicily, Italy) NAVSTA Rota (Spain)

NAS Bahrain (Kingdom of Bahrain)

NAS Souda Bay (Crete, Greece) Navy District Washington DC (USA)

Kwajalein Atoll (Marshall Islands) USAG, Hawaii (USA)

USAG Kaiserslutem/Landstuhl Hospital (Germany) USAG Graferwoehr/Vilseck (Germany)

USAG Yongsan (South Korea) Camps Red Cloud/ Casey (South Korea)

USAG Daegu (South Korea) USAG Stuttgart/Patch Barracks (Germany)

USAG Humphreys, (South Korea) USAG Tori Station (Japan)

USAG Benelux (Netherlands) Camp Zama (Japan)

Fort Buchanan (Puerto Rico)

3. Responses shall be prepared so that when printed, they meet the following requirements: 8.5 x11 inch paper, single-spaced typed lines, 1 inch margins, 12 point Times New Roman font. Tables may use 10-point font. Graphics or pictures are not allowed. Illustrations such as tables, flowcharts, organizational charts, process charts or other similar type informational charts may be used, and they will be counted against the page count limitations. Text entered into Attachment (1) shall be single spaced Times New Roman 10 point font. Respondents are responsible for ensuring the legibility of all table, charts, etc., and should assume that when their response is printed or copied, it will be done in black and white. When submitted, the format of Table 1 shall not be changed from how it appears in this document.

4. Responses shall include a Corporate Description section and a Corporate Experience section as described below.

Section 1: Corporate Description. Capability Responses must include all of the following information (2 page limit):

(1) Name of firm

(2) State the respondent’s size status and whether the respondent is registered in applicable NAICS code listed in paragraph 2E above.

(3) Ownership, including whether: Small, Small Disadvantaged, 8(a), Women-Owned, HUBZone, Veteran Owned and/or Service Disabled Veteran-Owned Business;

(4) Two points of contact, including: Name, title, phone, and e-mail address

(5) CAGE Code and DUNS Number

(6) Affiliate information, including parent corporation, joint venture partners, potential teaming partners, prime contractor (if potential sub) or subcontractors (if potential prime).

(7) A completed Table 1. Table 1is a listing the percentage of work a respondent can perform with respect to the stated requirements based on the respondent’s capabilities. This is an assessment/ analysis of a respondent’s independent abilities as to what they can or cannot perform – exclusive of any potential subcontractor/team member information. Do not include any documentation or percentages for any company other than your own. For respondents planning to propose a teaming arrangement that complies with the requirements set forth in FAR clause 52.219-27 (Notice of Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Set-Aside (Nov 2011), Table 1 must be completed for each of the teaming partners. In this case, additional Table 1 listings may be submitted on additional pages, but those additional pages shall only contain those additional tables – no additional narrative is permitted on these extra pages beyond a one line caption for each table. Respondents shall fill in Columns B and C of Table 1.

a. The percentages listed in Column A represent the government’s estimated percentage of effort in each technical area that will be required relative to the overall effort of the contract.

b. Entries in Column B reflect the percentage work in each technical area that a respondent can accomplish as described above. The values in each of the rows of this column will be between 0 and 100%.

c. Values in Column C represent the percentages of the overall contract that the respondent can accomplish in each task area. For each task area, this is determined by multiplying the percentage listed in Column A with the percentage entered in Column B. The sum of the values in Column C represents the percentage of the overall contract that the respondent can accomplish. This value cannot exceed 100%. Additionally, for evaluation purposes, this value, as entered by the respondent will be utilized by the Government as the respondent's maximum level of effort capability possible when determining whether or not the respondent's level of effort capability is at least 50 percent of the cost* of the contract performance incurred to be expended for employees of the concern proposing as a prime.

*Contractors should note that “cost” refers to the total burdened labor costs expected to be expended under the effort.

TABLE 1 – Respondent’s Level of Effort Capability

Functional Area

Tasking Description (with PWS Paragraph Reference)

Column A Percentage of

Functional Area Effort in the Overall Task

(Gov Est)

Column B Respondent’s

Projected Level of Effort in each

Functional Area

Column C Respondent’s

Projected Level of Overall Task Effort

(Col A) x (Col B)

A ATFP Engineering 31%

Support (Paragraph 3.6, 3.7, 3.1, 3.2)

B ATFP Sustainment (Paragraph 3.3, 3.1, 3.2)

39%

C

ATFP Site Operations (Paragraphs 3.4, 3.1, 3.2)

15%

D

ATFP Security Systems (paragraphs 3.5, 3.1, 3.2

15%

Totals * 100%

* The Sum of the values in Column C represents the percentage of the task that the respondent can perform as the prime.

(8) A list of customers for current and relevant work performed. The purpose is to demonstrate the prime’s management infrastructure, capacity to procure and manage a level of effort which may include, but is not limited to, teaming arrangements, joint ventures, etc. that correspond to the technical tasking, relevant experience, and past performance. Respondents shall submit at least 1, and no more than 3, citations of current and relevant work performed this information is not part of the description of the corporate capabilities for technical requirements listed in the Draft PWS.

a. Current work is defined as work performed within the 5 years before the posting date of this market survey.

b. Common aspects of relevancy include similarity of services/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type and degree of subcontract/teaming.

c. Information for each customer shall be provided by completing the Relevant Contract Experience Matrix provided as Attachment (1) to this template.

(9) A statement that the contractor either has or does not have an approved accounting system, as required in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.301-3(a)(3) for cost-reimbursement contracts.

(10) A statement that the respondent either agrees or does not agree that their company or partnership’s name can be published as one of the respondents to this RFI.

Companies that agree the Government may publish their company or partnership name will be posted on the eCommerce website.

(11) Additional Information.

Section 2: Corporate Capabilities. Respondents shall summarize the work their company, employees or partnership has performed relevant to this planned requirement by demonstrating their experience/capabilities as described in the attached draft Performance Work Statement (PWS) with respect to the following PWS paragraphs (one page limit per paragraph):

3.1 PROJECT EXECUTION SUPPORT

3.2 PROGRAM SUPPORT

3.3 INTEGRATED LOGISTIC SUPPORT (ILS) AND CONFIGURATION DATA

MANAGEMENT SUPPORT

3.4 ATFP INFORMATION MANAGEMENT (AIM) PORTAL SUPPORT

3.5 INFORMATION SYSTEMS SECURITY SUPPORT

3.6 SYSTEM ENGINEERING SUPPORT

3.7 SOFTWARE ENGINEERING

Additionally, interested businesses shall describe their experience and certifications relevant to the following AT/FP systems (one page per system):

- ALARMS : ( Lenel, Kingfisher, Bosch, Vindicator, DMP, RS2, Cisco, Silent Knight, Black Box)

- ECP: (Delta Scientific, AutoGate, Ameristar Perimeter Security (Boon Edam), Nasatka, Morpho Detection (Itemizer), RSSI Barriers, RSSC, Hysecurity, Stanley)

- ELMR: (Motorola, GE, Puregas, Marvair (HVAC)

- ENCLAVE: (Pelco, Bosch, Southwest Microwave, 3eTI, Toshiba, Honeywell, AiPhone, Flir)

- EOC/RDC/ROC/CAD: (King Fisher, Amx, Extron, SIS, Motorola, Alva

Software, Amag, HIRSCH, Vision21, Monaco, Northrop Gruman, Adtran, Tandberg, Nice, Silent Knight, Stancil)

- MNS: (Federal Signal, Cooper Notification, Whelen, ATI, CentrAlert, Monaco, Alertus, TOA Corp, American Signal)

The definitions of current and relevant as listed in paragraph (8) above apply to the experience/capabilities cited in the response to this section. For respondents planning to propose a teaming arrangement that complies with the requirements set forth in FAR clause 52.219-27 (Notice of Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Set-Aside (Nov 2011), this section should address the combined experience/capabilities of the companies that are part of that teaming arrangement.

5. This notice is for planning purposes only and is not to be construed as a commitment by the Government. This is not a solicitation announcement. No reimbursement will be made for any costs associated with providing information in response to this announcement, or any follow-up information requests. Respondents will be notified of the results of this evaluation. The Government reserves the right to consider a set-aside for small businesses or one of the small business preference groups. (e.g., 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB, WOSB etc.). Any questions shall be submitted to the Contract

Specialist via the email address listed below by the specified date. Any questions submitted after the specified date may not receive responses.

6. Responses to this RFI shall be submitted to SSC Pacific code 22410 via e-mail to Jeremy Shull, jeremy.shull@navy.mil. Please use reference No. N66001-15-R- 0031.when responding to this Market Survey.

a. The closing date for this RFI is: 29 September 2015

b. The closing time for this RFI is: 8:00 AM, PST

c. The deadline for submission of questions is 21 September 2015

7. Within a reasonable time after evaluation of responses, SSC Pacific will post the acquisition strategy decision on the e-Commerce central.

8. Support Contractors

Contractor support will not be utilized in support in review and evaluation of RFI responses.

Attachement 1: Relevant Contract Experience Matrix

1. Customer Point of Contact (Name;

Government agency, commercial firm, or other organization)

Name:

Agency:

2. Customer POC Phone Number / Email (This information is required to verify offeror’s performance)

Phone:

Email:

3. Contract Number or other control number

Xx

4. Period of Performance

From: To:

5. Contract Type (CPFF, FFP etc.)

6. Prime or Sub

8. Contract Value

$XX

9. Provide brief summary of the work performed.

10. Describe how the work demonstrates capability to perform percentages stated in Table 1.

1. Customer Point of Contact (Name;

Government agency, commercial firm, or other organization)

Name:

Agency:

2. Customer POC Phone Number / Email (This information is required to verify offeror’s performance)

Phone:

Email:

3. Contract Number or other control number

4. Period of Performance

From: To:

5. Contract Type (CPFF, FFP etc.)

6. Prime or Sub

8. Contract Value

$XX

9. Provide brief summary of the work performed.

10. Describe how the work demonstrates capability to perform percentages stated in Table 1.