N6660423R00260001.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

Add Delivery Schedule as a Pass/Fail Requirement and extend the response date. Additional details on page 2.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 15

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 18-Nov-2022

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 N6660423R0026

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Nov-2022

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 X is extended, 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

18-Nov-2022

CODE

NAVAL UNDERSEA WARFARE CENTER

CARRIE ROCHELLE, CODE 0232

CONTRACTS DEPARTMENT

1176 HOWELL STREET, BLDG. 1258

NEWPORT RI 02841

N66604 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6660423R0026

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 06-Dec-2022 04:30 PM to 20-Dec-2022 04:30 PM.

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

The following have been modified:

52.211-8 TIME OF DELIVERY (JUN 1997)

(a) The Government requires delivery to be made according to the following schedule:

REQUIRED DELIVERY SCHEDULE

CLIN 0001: First Article HFSA Window and associated test panels are required to be delivered one (1) year after delivery order award.

CLIN 0002-0005: Production HFSA Windows are required to be delivered starting six (6) months after delivery order award at a rate of one (1) HFSA Window every 1.5 months until order completion.

CLIN 0006-0007: Test Panels are required to be delivered six (6) months after delivery order award.

CLIN 0008: CLIN 0008 is active for the duration of the five year contract. The delivery schedule for specific CDRLs will be included in applicable delivery orders.

The Government will evaluate equally, as regards time of delivery, offers that propose delivery of each quantity within the applicable delivery period specified above. Offers that propose delivery that will not clearly fall within the applicable required delivery period specified above are required to submit a justification for the proposed delivery schedule in accordance with Section L Delivery Schedule Pass/Fail criteria. The Government reserves the right to award under either the required delivery schedule or the proposed delivery schedule, when an offeror offers an earlier delivery schedule than required above. If the offeror proposes no other delivery schedule, the required delivery schedule above will apply.

OFFEROR'S PROPOSED DELIVERY SCHEDULE

CLIN 0001:

CLIN 0002-0005:

CLIN 0006-0007:

CLIN 0008: CLIN 0008 is active for the duration of the five year contract. The delivery schedule for specific CDRLs will be included in applicable delivery orders.

(b) Attention is directed to the Contract Award provision of the solicitation that provides that a written award or acceptance of offer mailed, or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror, results in a binding contract. The Government will mail or otherwise furnish to the offeror an award or notice of award not later than the day award is dated. Therefore, the offeror should compute the time available for performance beginning with the actual date of award, rather than the date the written notice of award is received from the Contracting Officer through the ordinary mails. However, the Government will evaluate an offer that proposes delivery based on the Contractor's date of receipt of the contract or notice of award by adding (1) five calendar days for delivery of the award through the ordinary mails, or (2) one working day if the solicitation states that the contract or notice of award will be transmitted electronically. (The term "working day" excludes weekends and U.S. Federal holidays.) If, as so computed, the offered delivery date is later than the required delivery date, the offer will be considered nonresponsive and rejected.

(End of clause)

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

(a) Offerors must respond to all requirements of the solicitation document. The Government will evaluate the Offeror's understanding of the Government's requirements and ability to perform the work on the basis of its proposal. Offerors should provide information and documentation in sufficient detail to clearly identify its overall qualifications.

(b) Offerors are hereby notified that, from time to time, the Government may post additional information to the web site (SAM.gov) relating to this solicitation (e.g., responses to questions, amendments, etc.). It is the Offeror’s responsibility to check the web site for any such information.

(c) For pricing purposes, the anticipated contract award date is 07 July 2023.

(d) The contract minimum guarantee referred to in paragraph (b) of FAR Clause 52.216-22 ‘Indefinite Quantity’ is CLIN 0001 First Article HFSA Window and associated test panels. In the event first article is waived, the minimum guarantee is one (1) production window.

(e) The awarded contract dollar value ceiling will be established using the same calculation as is used to arrive at the total evaluated price. See Section M.

(f) The technical documents attached to this solicitation are export controlled; therefore, Joint Certification Program (JCP) certification (DD Form 2345) is required to access these documents. Access to these documents must be requested via SAM.gov (provide the company CAGE code when requesting access). Verification will be made that the company has an active JCP Certification status (non-expired DD Form 2345) before access is granted to these documents. Information on the JCP can be found at https://www.dla.mil/Logistics-Operations/Services/JCP/

(g) All questions concerning this procurement, either technical or contractual, must be submitted via e-mail to both of the following points of contact:

Name: Carrie Rochelle Email: carrie.r.rochelle.civ@us.navy.mil

Name: Dawn Griffin Email: dawn.a.griffin.civ@us.navy.mil

No direct discussion between the technical representative and prospective Offeror shall be conducted. All questions should be constructed in an unclassified manner. All such questions should be received in writing via e-mail no later than 4:30 PM Eastern Daylight Time (EDT) 14 calendar days after solicitation is issued to allow the Government adequate time to prepare and issue responses to all Offerors prior to the date and time set for receipt of proposals.

Only questions transmitted electronically will receive a response. The Government will continue to accept questions up to the closing date and time of the solicitation; however, time may not permit responses to be issued prior to proposal receipt. Questions received after the time set forth above will not result in an extension to the proposal due date. Information provided with each question should include the document name, document date, specific page, paragraph, clause or other definitive citation requiring clarification.

1.2 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION/FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

(a) Offerors shall comply with the detailed instructions for the format and content of the proposals; proposals that do not comply may be considered unacceptable and may render the Offeror ineligible for award.

(b) Offeror shall submit its entire proposal electronically. Proposals shall be submitted no later than the date and time specified on page 1, Block 9, of this solicitation via e-mail to both of the following points of contact:

Name: Carrie Rochelle Email: carrie.r.rochelle.civ@us.navy.mil

Name: Dawn Griffin Email: dawn.a.griffin.civ@us.navy.mil

It is the Offeror’s responsibility to submit its complete and entire proposal no later than the closing date and time identified in the solicitation.

(c) Proposals shall be marked with ‘CUI Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104’ at the top and bottom of each page submitted. The first page or cover page of each document submitted shall contain the below CUI Designation Indicator, with ‘XXXX’ replaced with Offeror’s entity name.

Controlled By: XXXX CUI Category: PROPIN, PROCURE, SSEL Limited Dissemination Control: DL Only, C02 FED, 00L FED, SSEB Team FED, and XXXX.

POC: Name, phone number or email

(d) The narrative material in the proposal shall be prepared in no smaller than 10 point font, single-spaced, with no less than a one inch margin on all sides. In the event photo reduction is used for tables, charts, and drawings, their presentation must be clear and legible. No hyperlinks are allowed. Adobe.pdf or Microsoft Office compatible files are required. Offeror is required to submit its proposal in separate volumes as follows:

Volume Volume Title Maximum Number of Pages

1 Cover Letter No Limit 2 Pass/Fail Requirements:

Plan for Obtaining Personnel Clearances 2 Facility Clearance No Limit OCI Mitigation Plan No Limit Small Business Participation 2 Delivery Schedule 2 3 Technical Capability 20 4 Past Performance 2 per reference

(max 6 per Offeror/prime contractor and max 6 per each major subcontractor)

5 Price* No Limit 6 Completed Solicitation No Limit 7 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if applicable) No Limit

*Price may be a separate Volume 5 or part of Volume 6 ‘Completed Solicitation’

A Cover or Title Page, Table of Contents, and Glossary of abbreviations and acronyms are allowed for each volume and will not count against the page limitation for each respective volume.

Important: Offeror shall not include classified material in the volumes.

(e) Cover Letter. The Offeror shall provide a cover letter with the following information (no pricing information shall be in the cover letter):

(1) The solicitation number;

(2) The name, address, telephone number, CAGE Code, SAM Unique Entity Identifier, and Tax Identification Number (TIN) of the Offeror;

(3) A statement specifying unconditional acceptance of all terms, conditions, and provisions included in the solicitation and agreement to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item;

(4) A statement that the proposal is valid through 240 calendar days from the date specified for receipt of proposals;

(5) Names, titles, telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses of persons authorized to negotiate on the Offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation;

(6) DCAA and DCMA office points of contact, including branch location, contact name, telephone number, and email address;

(7) Name, title, and signature of a person authorized to sign the proposal;

(8) Identify all enclosures being transmitted as part of its proposal.

(c) Solicitation. The Offeror shall provide one electronic copy of the signed solicitation document with fill-in information for all NAVSEA text and FAR and DFARS provisions and clauses that require it.

(d) Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The Offeror’s attention is directed to Section L text L-219-H001 ‘Submission of Small Business Subcontracting Plan.’ As prescribed in FAR 19.7, the Offeror shall submit a subcontracting plan, and an acceptable plan will be incorporated into and made a material part of the contract. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan does not apply to small business concerns.

Note: The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is separate from the Small Business Participation Pass/Fail. All Offerors, including small businesses, must address the Small Business Participation Pass/Fail.

2.0 PASS/FAIL REQUIREMENTS

The Offeror shall submit the following information with its proposal, which the Government will evaluate as a pass or fail in relation to the solicitation requirements:

2.1 Plan for Obtaining Personnel Clearances

A plan for obtaining personnel clearances within thirty days of contract award at the required level specified in the DD Form 254, Contract Security Classification Specification, attached to this solicitation. The plan shall include confirmation of existing personnel clearances, detail the Offeror’s process for obtaining new clearances to perform the full requirement within thirty days of contract award, and outline the schedule for obtaining any required new clearances during the life of the contract.

2.2 Facility Clearance

Performance under this contract requires that the Offeror hold a facility clearance, as specified in the DD Form 254 attached to this solicitation, at the time of proposal submission. As such, the Offeror shall provide CAGE codes and addresses for all locations where work will be performed that require classified facilities and safeguarding capabilities as defined in the DD Form 254 and associated references.

2.3 Organizational Conflict of Interest Mitigation Plan

In accordance with H-209-H004 and L-209-H009, the Offeror shall identify any and all conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest related to this solicitation and provide a mitigation plan to address the conflicts and/or potential conflicts. If no conflict of interest exists, the Offeror shall provide a written statement certifying as such.

2.4 Small Business Participation

The Offeror shall provide sufficient detail to permit a complete evaluation. This factor applies to every Offeror (U.S. and non-U.S.), regardless of size status or locations of working facilities or headquarters. Small Business Participation shall include the following:

(a) All Offerors shall provide the names and CAGE codes of small business concerns (including the Offeror if a small business concern) that would participate in accomplishing the proposed contract; the small business classification of each U.S. small business concern (i.e. SB, SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSB);

and a short description of the specific supplies or services to be provided by each small business concern. If a small business does not have a CAGE code, insert the word "None." List all SB classifications that apply to each concern.

(b) All Offerors, including Offerors who are themselves U.S. small business concerns based on the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code and size standard applicable to this procurement, are to identify the extent to which U.S. small business concerns will be utilized as first-tier subcontractors in the performance of this proposed contract. U.S. small business concerns are defined (1) in FAR 19.001 and (2) by the criteria and size standards in FAR 19.102 for the applicable NAICS code.

(c) A Small Business Offeror shall indicate the percentage of work performed by itself, as well as by any Small Business subcontractors. Proposals submitted by Large Business Concerns shall indicate the percentage of work performed by Small Business Subcontractors. The Small Business Participation percentage shall be calculated as follows:

Participation % = $ Total Small Business Contract Dollars + $ Total Small Business Subcontract Dollars $ Total Contract Value

(d) The Government's Small Business Participation objective for this contract is 20%. The Offeror is encouraged to propose a Small Business Participation objective percentage as high as is practicable, as long as the percentage is supported by the related Small Business participation approach outlined in paragraph (e) below. The Offeror's proposed Small Business Participation percentage shall be incorporated into the contract upon award.

(e) Provide an approach for how the Offeror intends to meet the proposed Small Business participation percentage.

The Offeror shall provide rationale that demonstrates the tasks assigned to the selected Small Businesses are meaningful to the overall success of this contract. If the Offeror does not propose to meet the stated Small Business participation objective, the Offeror shall include rationale for the deviation. A Small Business Offeror shall include work performed as the prime contractor as well as any work performed by Small Business subcontractors. In addition, the Offeror shall describe its management approach for involving SDB, WOSB, HUBZone SB, VOSB, and SDVOSB in the performance of this effort.

2.5 Delivery Schedule

Offers that propose delivery that will not clearly fall within the required delivery period specified in FAR Clause 52.211-8 TIME OF DELIVERY (JUN 1997), contained in Section F of the solicitation, are required to submit a justification for the alternate delivery schedule proposed. The justification shall identify barriers that will impact the Offeror’s ability to meet the Government’s required delivery schedule and shall provide sufficient detail to allow the Government to make an evaluation of the Offeror’s ability to meet the alternate schedule proposed. If the Offeror proposes no other delivery schedule, the required delivery schedule will apply.

3.0 NON-PRICE FACTORS

The Offeror shall address each factor identified in the solicitation. The Offeror must provide information in sufficient detail to allow the Government to make an evaluation of the offeror’s ability to perform the work described in the solicitation. The proposal shall be detailed and clearly stated to allow an assessment by the Government without the need for additional clarifications. All information and data provided shall be specific to this solicitation except for the area of Past Performance. Proposals that do not contain the information required in the solicitation risk being determined unacceptable by the Government

3.1 FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

The Offeror shall describe its capability to manufacture HFSA Windows in accordance with the Critical Item Performance Specification (CIPS) and Statement of Work (SOW). The Offeror shall substantiate its competency to manufacture HFSA Windows by addressing each of the below topics in a format and in an order that the Offeror believes best conveys its capability. The Offeror shall cite or otherwise specifically reference each of the following topics within its proposal:

3.1.1 The Offeror shall describe how it will implement the details of the mechanical and adhesive joining of precision-machined parts and elastomers, including details on surface preparation prior to bonding. The Offeror shall discuss chemical compatibility of design materials with the operational and non-operational environment.

3.1.2 The Offeror shall describe how it will implement test and quality control operations to ensure a high probability that a properly functioning HFSA Window results. The Offeror shall describe how it will implement the test and quality control operations at key production operations, as identified by the Offeror, to ensure that a properly functioning HFSA Window is produced consistently. The Offeror shall detail the test data it will collect on each unit from inception to window completion.

3.1.3 The Offeror shall describe how the sensitivity of operation for 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 relate to and affect electro-acoustic and environmental performance of the HFSA Windows. The Offeror shall describe HFSA Window performance variations with temperature and pressure. The Offeror shall discuss its bases of performance predictions and provide objective quality evidence thereof (e.g. measured data, modeling/analysis outputs, or both).

3.1.4 The Offeror shall describe its facilities, tooling and equipment with respect to successfully manufacturing, testing and handling the HFSA Windows at the required throughput of 1 HFSA Window per 1.5 months. The Offeror shall identify any anticipated throughput issues and how they will be resolved. The Offeror shall identify the existence of any single point failures in the planned manufacturing process that would result in compromised throughput or a production line shutdown. The Offeror shall detail how it will address such compromises and provide time estimates to fix the identified single point failures to resume production. The Offeror shall address how it will recover from such events and return to the required production throughput of 1 HFSA Window per 1.5 months.

3.1.5 The Offeror shall describe how its manufacturing controls address HFSA Windows assembly and manufacturing sensitivities while maintaining required HFSA Windows performance.

3.1.6 The Offeror shall describe how they intend to implement the overall configuration management system in accordance with the Statement of Work Applicable Document 3.2, including the means by which it promulgates approved engineering changes and revisions through its manufacturing processes.

3.1.7 The Offeror shall discuss the planned schedule and important milestones for both the first article and production phases of the HFSA Windows program and shall identify any risks in achieving the program objectives.

The Offeror shall describe mitigation plans for any identified risks.

3.2 FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

(a) The Offeror shall provide three (3) past performance references, if available, that reflect recent relevant experience performed within the last three (3) years of the closing date of the solicitation that demonstrate the ability to perform the work required by this solicitation.

For each reference, the Offeror shall include the contract number, contract type, program name, total contract dollar value, and names, telephone numbers and e-mail addresses for the Contracting Officer, Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR), and Government Program Manager (PM).

For each reference, the Offeror shall identify its role as either a prime contractor or a subcontractor on the referenced contract.

If the Offeror was a subcontractor on the reference, then the Offeror shall provide an explanation of its role in contract performance as well as the dollar value of its subcontract.

For each reference, the Offeror shall provide a written explanation describing the work that was performed and how the work was or is relevant to the work required by this solicitation. The Offeror may provide information on problems encountered on the identified contracts and the Offeror's corrective actions.

Each past performance reference shall not exceed two (2) pages per reference, for a total of six (6) pages.

(b) Subcontractors proposed to perform more than 25% of the Total Evaluated Price (refer to section M ‘Evaluation Factors’ for details as to how the Government will calculate Total Evaluated Price) shall also submit three (3) past performance references, if available, that reflect recent relevant experience performed within the last three (3) years of the closing date of the solicitation that demonstrate the ability to perform the work required by this solicitation.

Subcontractor past performance references shall contain the same information as that of the prime contractor as listed in paragraph (a), above. Each past performance reference shall not exceed two (2) pages per reference, for a total of six (6) pages per major subcontractor.

4.0 FACTOR 3: PRICE

CLIN 0001: Offeror shall fill in proposed Unit Price and Amount in section B (Note: these two prices will be the same).

CLINs 0002-0007: Offeror shall fill in proposed prices in the pricing tables in section B.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

(a) The Government intends to make a single award as a result of this solicitation. Award will be made to the responsible Offeror passing the Pass/Fail requirements of the solicitation and whose proposal contains the combination of those factors offering the best overall value to the Government. The best overall value to the Government will be determined by comparing the difference in value of non-price features of proposals (technical capability and past performance) with the difference in price to the Government.

(b) The Government intends to award a contract on the basis of initial proposals without conducting discussions (except for clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)), as permitted by FAR 15.306(a)(3) and FAR 52.215-1.

However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined to be necessary by the Contracting Officer/Source Selection Authority.

2.0 PASS/FAIL REQUIREMENTS

Offerors will be evaluated based on a Pass/Fail rating for each of the Pass/Fail requirements. Offerors must receive a Pass rating under each of the Pass/Fail requirements to be eligible for award. A fail will result in no further consideration for award. The Pass/Fail rating evaluation criteria are as follows:

2.1 Plan for Obtaining Personnel Clearances

The Government will evaluate the plan for obtaining personnel clearances for compliance with the DD Form 254 and the ability of the Offeror to perform the full requirement within thirty days of contract award.

2.2 Facility Clearance

The Government will verify whether the Offeror’s facility clearance and safeguarding meet the level specified in the DD 254 using Government sources of information for all CAGE codes and addresses provided.

2.3 Organizational Conflict of Interest Mitigation Plan

The Government will verify that the offeror indicated whether or not any conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest exist, and specified what the conflicts of interest are, if any. The Government will verify whether or not any conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest exist. If conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest exist, the Government will evaluate whether the Offeror’s mitigation plan sufficiently addresses any conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest identified. If no conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest exist, the Government will verify that a written statement was provided certifying as such.

Note: Award will only be made to an offeror that has no organizational conflict of interest as defined in FAR 9.5 or that the Government determines has provided a satisfactory mitigation plan. Offerors are advised that technical proposals may be evaluated without consideration of any proposed subcontractor that is deemed to have an organizational conflict of interest.

2.4 Small Business Participation

The Government will evaluate the Offeror's proposed small business participation percentage in accordance with the small business objective or its rationale for its proposed deviation as set forth in Section L.

2.5 Delivery Schedule

If an alternate delivery schedule is proposed by the Offeror, the Government will evaluate the Offeror's justification for the alternate delivery schedule proposed and the Offeror’s ability to meet the alternate delivery schedule proposed. If the Offeror proposes no other delivery schedule, the required delivery schedule will apply.

3.0 NON-PRICE FACTORS

3.1 FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY

a. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposal for technical capability, identifying significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies, resulting in the assignment of a combined technical/risk rating. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s technical solution for meeting the Government’s requirement, taking into consideration the significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies identified in the proposal and the risk associated with the technical approach to meeting the Government’s requirements.

The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of its capability to manufacture HFSA Windows in accordance with the Critical Item Performance Specification (CIPS) and Statement of Work (SOW). The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s substantiation of competency to manufacture HFSA Windows using each of the following topics:

3.1.1 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of how it will implement the details of the mechanical and adhesive joining of precision-machined parts and elastomers, including details on surface preparation prior to bonding. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s discussion of chemical compatibility of design materials with the operational and non-operational environment.

3.1.2 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of how it will implement test and quality control operations to ensure a high probability that a properly functioning HFSA Windows results. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of how it will implement the test and quality control operations at key production operations, as identified by the Offeror, to ensure that a properly functioning HFSA Windows is produced consistently. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s detail of the test data it will collect on each unit from inception to window completion.

3.1.3 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of how the sensitivity of operation for 3.1.1 and 3.1.2 relate to and affect electro-acoustic and environmental performance of the HFSA Windows. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of HFSA Windows performance variations with temperature and pressure. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s discussion of its bases of performance predictions and the objective quality evidence the Offeror provides to support its predictions (e.g. measured data, modeling/analysis outputs, or both).

3.1.4 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of its facilities, tooling and equipment with respect to successfully manufacturing, testing and handling the HFSA Windows at the required throughput of 1 HFSA Window per 1.5 months. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s identification of any anticipated throughput issues and how they will be resolved. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s identification of the existence of any single point failures in the planned manufacturing process that would result in compromised throughput or a production line shutdown. The Government will evaluate how the Offeror proposes to address such compromises and will evaluate the time estimates provided to fix the identified single point failures to resume production. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s discussion on how it will recover from such events and return to the required production throughput of 1 HFSA Window per 1.5 months.

3.1.5 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of how its manufacturing controls address HFSA Windows and manufacturing sensitivities while maintaining required HFSA Windows performance.

3.1.6 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of how it intends to implement the overall configuration management system in accordance with the Statement of Work Applicable Document 3.2, including the means by which it promulgates approved engineering changes and revisions through its manufacturing processes.

3.1.7 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of the planned schedule and important milestones for both the first article and production phases of the HFSA Windows program and the Offeror’s identification of risks in achieving the program objectives. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s description of mitigation plans for any identified risks.

b. Technical Capability Factor Ratings: Combined Technical/Risk Ratings

The Offeror’s proposal for Technical Capability will be assigned one of the below combined technical/risk ratings.

The combined technical/risk ratings include consideration of risk in conjunction with the significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies.

Adjectival Rating Description Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

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

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

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

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

Definitions:

Significant Strength is an aspect of an Offeror’s proposal with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Strength is an aspect of an Offeror's proposal that has merit, or exceeds specified performance, or capability requirements, in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Weakness means as a flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See FAR 15.001.

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

FAR 15.001.

Risk is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an Offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

3.2 FACTOR 2: PAST PERFORMANCE

The past performance evaluation assesses the degree of confidence the Government has in an Offeror’s ability to supply products and services that meet users’ needs, based on a demonstrated record of performance.

Sources of Past Performance Information for evaluation are as follows:

Past performance information provided by the offeror, as solicited;

Past performance information obtained from questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of the acquisition;

and

Past performance information obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; the Defense Contract Management Agency, Contracting Officers, Contracting Officer’s Representatives, and Program Managers.

The Government reserves the right to limit or expand the number of references it decides to contact and to contact references other than those provided by the Offeror. The Government may also contact all or some of each Offeror’s customers to obtain past performance information.

The past performance evaluation results in an assessment of the Offeror's ability to meet the solicitation requirements. The past performance evaluation considers each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements. 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 shall be combined to establish a performance confidence assessment rating for each offeror.

There are three (3) aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy (including context of data), and quality (including general trends in contractor performance and source of information). All three aspects will be considered for each of the past performance references evaluated.

1. Recency. The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the Offeror’s past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant, and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information. For this solicitation, a past performance reference will be evaluated as recent if any part of the period of performance is within the last three (3) years of the closing date of this solicitation.

2. Relevance. The second aspect is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the Offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration is given to those aspects of an Offeror’s history of contract (or subcontract) performance that would provide the most context and give the greatest ability to measure whether the Offeror will successfully satisfy the current requirement. Common aspects of relevancy include, but are not limited to: similarity of product/service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services), and extent of subcontracting/teaming.

There are four (4) levels of relevancy as shown below. With respect to relevancy, more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the past performance confidence assessment than past performance of lesser relevance.

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 of Performance (Products or Services). The third aspect of the past performance evaluation is to establish the overall quality of the Offeror’s past performance (see FAR 15.304(c)(2)). The past performance evaluation conducted in support of a current source selection does not establish, create, or change the existing record and history of the Offeror’s past performance on past contracts; rather, the past performance evaluation process gathers information on how well the Offeror performed those past contracts. The Government 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.

Performance Confidence Assessment. The past performance confidence assessment rating is based on the Offeror’s overall record of recency, relevancy, and quality of performance. Each Offeror will be assigned one of the Performance Confidence Assessment ratings shown below.

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 successfully perform the required effort.

4.0 FACTOR 3: PRICE

(a) The Government will evaluate proposed prices by performing a price analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404- 1(b) procedures. In evaluating offers, the Government will review the prices of the Offeror's proposal to determine that they are fair and reasonable, per FAR 15.404 procedures.

(b) Total Evaluated Price. The following demonstrates how the Government will calculate the Total Evaluated Price

(TEP):

For CLIN 0001:

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 First Article HFSA Window 1 Each $10,000.00 $10,000.00

TEP for CLIN 0001 = $10,000.00

For CLINs 0002-0005 (Multiple Quantity Ranges):

Step 1: Calculate Extended Price: the Unit Price is multiplied by the Maximum Quantity in each range, and then these are added to derive an Extended Price.

Step 2: Calculate Maximum Extended Quantity: the Maximum Quantity in each range is added.

Step 3: Calculate Average Unit Price: the Extended Price is divided by the Maximum Extended Quantity to derive an Average Unit Price.

Step 4: Calculate Maximum Production Quantity: the Maximum Production Quantity for each CLIN (0002-0005) is 5 per year and 25 total.

Step 5: Calculate Total Evaluated Price: the Average Unit Price is multiplied by the Maximum Production Quantity to derive the TEP. The Total Evaluated Price for Years 1 through 5 are added together.

Example for CLIN 0002:

CLIN 0002 HFSA Window MX-12062/B Los Angeles/688i Class

Quantity 1 Each 2 Each 3-5 Each

Max Qty

Max Qty

Max Qty

Step 1 Extended

Price

Step 2 Max

Extended Qty

Step 3 Avg. Unit

Price

Step 4 Max

Production Qty

Step 5 Total

Evaluated Price

Year 1 $1,000.00 $800.00 $500.00 $5,100.00 8 $637.50 5 $3,187.50 Year 2 $1,100.00 $900.00 $600.00 $5,900.00 8 $737.50 5 $3,687.50 Year 3 $1,200.00 $1,000.00 $700.00 $6,700.00 8 $837.50 5 $4,197.50 Year 4 $1,300.00 $1,100.00 $800.00 $7,500.00 8 $937.50 5 $4,687.50 Year 5 $1,400.00 $1,200.00 $900.00 $8,300.00 8 $1,037.50 5 $5,187.50 $6,000.00 $10,000.00 $17,500.00 $33,500.00 40 $837.50 25 $20,937.50

Sample Calculation for Year 1:

Step 1: Extended Price = ($1,000 x 1) + ($800.00 x 2) + ($500.00 x 5) = $5,100.00 Step 2: Maximum Extended Quantity = 1 + 2 + 5 = 8 Step 3: Average Unit Price = $5,100.00 / 8 = $637.50 Step 4: Maximum Production Quantity = 5 Step 5: TEP for Year 1 = $637.50 x 5 = $3,187.50

TEP for CLIN 0002 = $20,937.50

The Government will repeat these steps to derive a TEP for CLINs 0003-0005.

For CLINs 0006-0007 (Single Quantity Ranges):

Example for CLIN 0006:

CLIN 0006 Acoustic Test Panel Quantity 1 Each

Year 1 $1,000.00 Year 2 $1,100,00 Year 3 $1,200.00 Year 4 $1,300.00 Year 5 $1,400.00 $6,000.00

TEP for CLIN 0006 = $6,000.00

The Government will add up the TEPs for CLINs 0001-0007 to derive a Total Evaluated Price for the Offeror.

The above prices are examples only and do not obligate the Government to purchase these quantities at these prices.

(c) First Article. In accordance with provision M-209-H003(d), ‘Offers will be evaluated so as to take into account the cost to the Government of testing the first article. The cost to the Government of such testing will be added to the price of all offers which include first article requirements. For the purpose of making this evaluation, it is estimated that $500,000.00 will be the cost to the Government for first article testing.’

As such, for evaluation purposes only, $500,000.00 will be added to the Total Evaluated Price calculated in (b) above for all offers which include first article requirements.

(d) Unbalanced Pricing. All offers will be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced (FAR 15.404-1(g)).

Unbalanced pricing exists where the prices of one or more line items are significantly overstated or understated, despite an acceptable total evaluated price. Offers may be rejected if the Government determines the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

5.0 RELATIVE IMPORTANCE

The following table indicates all factors that will be considered in awarding this requirement.

FACTORS

Technical Capability – Factor 1 Past Performance – Factor 2 Price – Factor 3

The relative importance of the factors is as follows: Technical Capability and Past Performance are of equal importance. All evaluation factors other than Price (Technical Capability and Past Performance), when combined, are significantly more important than Price. Price will increase in importance as competing proposals approach Technical Capability/Past Performance equality, except when Price is so significantly high so to diminish the value of technical superiority to the Government.

(End of Summary of Changes)