Amendment_0002__Crash_Crane.doc

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 0002

1. The following are questions received by this Agency and our answers:

Question 1. The subject RFP does not include an expected award date yet all of the CLIN schedules are triggered “x” months After Contract Award (ACA). Could a rough time frame of contract award be offered as it would aide our planning for production resource/capacity and out year pricing and/ or could NAVAIR provide an expected contract award date?

Answer 1. For proposal preparation purposes of CLIN schedules, a contract award date of March 2019 can be used.

Question 2. Will performance based payments be an acceptable billing processes for this program?

Answer 2. The following answer was provided to a similar question via Amendment 001; Once the Government makes its source selection decision, the Government will engage the apparent successful Offeror in discussions with respect to progress payments or performance based payments being the appropriate method of contract financing. For additional information we suggest you contact your DCMA Administration Office for further details on how they implement progress payment financing.

Question 3. RFP N68335-14-R-0276 SOW, page 33, paragraph 4.5.2 sites MIL-HDBK-29612B. No such handbook can be located. Should this paragraph site MIL-PRF-29612B? Or series MIL-HDBK-29612-1A-5?

Answer 3. The SOW was revised to change this reference to MIL-PRF-29612B.

Question 4. Regarding SETR’s, can we assume the last scheduled SETR is SVR/PRR?

Answer 4. Yes.

Question 5. Regarding Training Kick Off Meeting (KOM), will this meeting be held in conjunction with the Post Award Guidance Conference (PAGC) or Logistic Guidance Conference (LGC)? Or at some other time?

Answer 5. The timeframe for the Training KOM will be discussed at the LGC and held approximately 4 months after the LGC.

Question 6. CDRL L010, block 16 Remarks referencing “Blocks 12 & 13” discusses a DT-C2. A “C2” event is not noted anywhere else in the RFP. Please clarify if this is a “C1” or is “C2” another testing event?

Answer 6. The CDRL has been revised to change this reference to DT-C1.

Question 7. Section 3.2.1 of the Performance Specification directs contractors to assume the aircraft vertical CG is 110" from the deck. Part B, 1.0 Volume 1, System Performance, directs contractors to assume the lifted aircraft CG is 96" off the deck and is secured to the crane via straps. Please clarify if both CG's are required?

Answer 7. The statement in Part B, 1.0 Volume 1, System Performance, is changed to reflect 110” requirement identified in the Performance Specification and is shown below in Section L “L – [ 1 ] Content of Proposals.” This is the only change made to “L – [ 1 ] Content of Proposals.”

The Performance Specification is revised as follows:

FROM:

3.2.1 NOTE: Wind forces and horizontal acceleration forces are to be applied simultaneously in the same direction. Vertical accelerations (minimum and maximum) are to be applied simultaneously with horizontal accelerations and wind forces. Assume a wind load of 1750 lbs for aircraft. Shape factor for projected area of the crane shall be rationally determined but in no case shall the aggregate shape factor be less than 1.4. Assume the aircraft vertical center of gravity is 110” from the deck.

TO:

3.2.1 NOTE: Wind forces and horizontal acceleration forces are to be applied simultaneously in the same direction. Vertical accelerations (minimum and maximum) are to be applied simultaneously with horizontal accelerations and wind forces. Assume a wind load of 1750 lbs for aircraft. Shape factor for projected area of the crane shall be rationally determined but in no case shall the aggregate shape factor be less than 1.4. Assume the aircraft vertical center of gravity is 110” from the deck and the aircraft is secured to the crane via straps.

Question 8. SOW, Page 19 requirements 3.2.7, s (1) dictates the cab heater shall be capable of raising the internal cab temperature from -20F to at least 65F within 20 minutes after the heater is turned on. The requirement makes no mention of test procedure or state of engine temperature. Can the assumption be made that the heater performance is mutually exclusive of engine temperature and the test can be performed with a warm engine?

Answer 8. The test shall be conducted in a low temperature chamber, starting with a cold engine and reaching 65F in 60 minutes. The Performance Specification is revised as follows:

FROM:

3.2.7.s (1) The cab heater shall be capable of raising the internal cab temperature from -20 F to at least 65 F within 20 minutes after heater is turned on (doors and windows closed).

TO:

3.2.7.s (1) The cab heater shall be capable of raising the internal cab temperature from -20 F to at least 65 F within 60 minutes after heater is turned on (doors and windows closed).

FROM:

4.2.19 Cab Heater Testtc "4.2.19 Cab Heater Test" \f \l3

The cab heater shall meet the requirement of paragraph 3.2.7.s. The temperature shall be measured 24 inches above the seat and 10 inches above the cab floor at each operator/passenger location. The heating requirements shall be met within 20 minutes after the heater is turned on.

TO:

4.2.19 Cab Heater Testtc "4.2.19 Cab Heater Test" \f \l3

The cab heater shall be tested in a low temperature chamber at -20 deg F to meet the requirement of paragraph 3.2.7.s. The engine and heater shall be started after a minimum soak time of two hours at -20 deg F. The temperature shall be measured 24 inches above the seat and 10 inches above the cab floor at each operator/passenger location. The heating requirements shall be met within 60 minutes after the engine is started. This test may be performed during the Low Temperature Operation Test in paragraph 4.2.24.

Question 9. Specialty Coating System MIL-PRF-32440 does not appear to be available on the qualified products list according to: http//apidocs.dla.mil/search/default.aspx. At the time of construction, will Specialty Coating Systems MIL-PRF-32440 be available?

Answer 9. The Performance Specification is revised as follows:

FROM:

3.2.7.c. Top Surface

(1) The top area of the unit shall be capable of supporting a 250 lb. person walking on it without damaging, bending or deforming it in any way.

(2) The horizontal top surfaces expected to be walked on shall be covered with black non-skid safety walk, conforming to MIL-PRF-32440, Coating System 4.

TO:

3.2.7.c. Top Surface

(1) The top area of the unit shall be capable of supporting a 250 lb. person walking on it without damaging, bending or deforming it in any way.

(2) The horizontal top surfaces expected to be walked on shall be covered with black non-skid coating A-A-59166.

Question 10. Requirement 3.2.1.3 Steering control states, the turning radius shall be 35ft maximum (30ft as a goal), curb to curb when both axle and counterweight (if applicable) are retracted. In contrast, Requirement 4.2.15 Turn Radius Test method is consistent with a wall to wall test as curb to curb test is typically measured at the tire bulge. Please verify if measurement method is wall to wall or curb to curb.

Answer 10. The measurement shall be wall-to-wall. The Performance Specification is revised as follows:

FROM:

3.2.1.3 Steering Controltc "3.2.1.3 Steering Control" \f \l3

The crane shall change directions under the control of the operator.

a. Steering Ratio Maximum turning limits shall be achieved with not more than 3.5 turns of the steering wheel stop to stop.

b. Turning Radius The turning radius shall be 35 ft maximum (30 ft as a goal), curb-to-curb when both extendable axle and counterweight (if applicable) are retracted.

TO:

3.2.1.3 Steering Controltc "3.2.1.3 Steering Control" \f 92l3 The crane shall change directions under the control of the operator.

a. Steering Ratio Maximum turning limits shall be achieved with not more than 3.5 turns of the steering wheel stop to stop.

b. Turning Radius The turning radius shall be 35 ft maximum (30 ft as a goal), wall-to-wall when both extendable axle and counterweight (if applicable) are retracted.

Question 11. Regarding, Attachment 1 Crash and Salvage Cranes SOW, Appendix B TMCR NO. 17-010, paragraph 4.5.2 states: "4.5.2 Commercial Off-The-Shelf (COTS)TMs. COTS TMs shall be acquired in accordance with MIL-PRF-32216. All COTS TMs applicable to the ACSC shall be included and referenced. Linking not required." Should this paragraph include CCSC as well as the ACSC?

Answer 11. The SOW was revised to also reference the CCSC.

Question 12. Regarding, Attachment 1 Crash and Salvage Cranes SOW, paragraph 3.2.2.6 Test Readiness Review (TRR). Is it NAVAIR’s intent to conduct the TRR at the contractor’s facility?

Answer 12. The TRR will be conducted at the contractor’s facility as stated in SOW paragraph 3.2.2.

Question 13. Regarding, Attachment 1 Crash and Salvage Cranes SOW, paragraph 3.2.3.12, 3rd sentence states: The Maintainability Program shall be planned and accomplished in accordance with SAE JA1010, MIL-HDBK-470A, Section 4 of the Performance Specification, and the ALSSOW. Can the ALSSOW be provided?

Answer 13. The SOW paragraph 3.2.2.12 was revised to change the reference from “and the ALSSOW” to “and this SOW”.

2. The following Performance Specification paragraph has changed:

FROM:

4.2.32 Rain Testtc "4.2.32 Rain Test" \f \l3

This test shall verify the crane performs (with engine running for the full duration of test) during rainfall in accordance with MIL-STD-810, Method 506.6, Procedure I, at a rate of 4 inches per hour driven by 40 mph wind. Expose all four sides (including the top) for a period of 30 minutes each.

The test shall be repeated with the water sprayed on the top without wind blowing for 30 minutes.

Immediately following this test the unit will be closely examined and any indication of corrosion, deterioration of finish or material, release of corrosion-inducing materials, or water inside sealed areas will be reported and submitted for review. Application of wind loads shall not result in yielding, breaking, or damage of any part of the unit.

In addition to the MIL-STD-810 test, this rain test also shall include an additional 30 minutes with the water falling on the top of the crane without the wind.

TO:

This test shall verify the crane performs (with engine running for the full duration of test) during rainfall in accordance with MIL-STD-810, Method 506.6, Procedure I, at a rate of 4 inches per hour driven by 40 mph wind. Expose all four sides (including the top) for a period of 30 minutes each.

The test shall be repeated with the water sprayed on the top without wind blowing for 30 minutes.

Immediately following this test the unit will be closely examined and any indication of corrosion, deterioration of finish or material, release of corrosion-inducing materials, or water inside sealed areas will be reported and submitted for review. Application of wind loads shall not result in yielding, breaking, or damage of any part of the unit.

3. The Statement of Work (SOW) and Performance Specification have been revised to reflect the changes listed above and is attached.

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

The following have been modified:

EXHIBITS/ATTACHMENTS

DOCUMENT TYPE

DESCRIPTION

PAGES

DATE

Exhibit E, L, P & T Contract Data Requirements List

02 May 2018 Attachment 1

Statement of Work (SOW)

02 May 2018 Attachment 2

Performance Specification

30 April 2018

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

L – [ 1 ] CONTENT OF PROPOSALS

PART A GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 GENERAL

The Offeror is required to submit sufficient information concerning the following areas to enable Government personnel to fully ascertain capabilities of the Offeror to perform the requirements. The proposal must be sufficient in detail and scope to permit evaluation and provide the evaluators a clear understanding of the Offeror’s capability to meet the defined elements as required by the solicitation. All proposals must clearly and convincingly demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements, associated risks and is able, willing and competent to devote the resources necessary to meet the requirements, and that the Offeror has valid and practical solutions for all requirements and potential risk areas. The Offeror must respond to all requirements of the solicitation and not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The Offeror has the burden of proof to demonstrate compliance with all the evaluation factors and or subfactors identified in this solicitation. The Offeror is advised that the Government may incorporate into the final contract strengths included in the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government. With the exception of the Price volume, no cost or pricing information should appear in any volume.

In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. The Offeror is responsible to present enough information to allow the Government to evaluate the proposed work effort, support, and approach, as well as the price proposal without opening discussions. Statements that the prospective Offeror understands, or can and/or will comply with, the specifications, and paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof without supporting information are considered inadequate by the Government, and may render a rating of unacceptable. For the purpose of this solicitation, relevance is defined as something that has a logical connection with the matter under consideration. Such aspects of relevance include the type of effort (e.g., technical design, logistics development, testing, production), the type of requirements (e.g., shipboard, environmental), similarity, complexity, contract type, contract dollar value, the division of the company that will perform the work, and degree of participation by principal subcontractors, team members, or critical team members. Recency is defined as performance within 5 years of the date of this proposal submission.

The Offeror must include any data that illustrates the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. Failure to address a specific factor or subfactor, or element clearly may be considered a deficiency. There is no need to repeat information in more than one volume if an overlap exists; the detailed information must be included in the most logical place and summarized and referenced in other areas. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

The Offeror is expected to comply with all requirements of the RFP. The Government advises the Offeror that taking exception or deviating from any term or condition of the RFP may make an offer unacceptable, and the proposal unawardable, unless the RFP expressly authorizes such an exception or deviation with regard to that specific term or condition. The Government may consider any exception or deviation to any term or condition of the RFP that is not expressly authorized by the RFP to be a deficiency.

Throughout these instructions, a “principal subcontractor” is defined as a subcontractor who provides at least 10% of the proposed total price (excluding the Offeror’s profit/fee), for the contract. “Team member” is defined as those entities that make up a joint venture or any other partnership or teaming arrangement formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation. “Critical team member” is defined as those entities of the Offeror that perform a critical function in the performance of the resulting contract, whether it is technical or financial, and/or that have important roles in any high or medium risk areas identified in the Offeror’s proposal.

2.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT

Written proposals must be formatted using a Times New Roman 12 pt normal font (no reduction permitted), single-spaced with 1-inch margins all around, and formatted for standard 8.5 x 11 inch paper. All pages should be numbered with section and page numbers. When foldout pages are used for drawings, schematics or spreadsheets they must not exceed 11 x 17 inches and will be counted as 1 page. Foldout pages that contain only text information will be counted as two pages. Fold out pages not exceeding 11 x 17 inches can be used for the Integrated Master Schedule (IMS). The IMS is not included in the 120 page limit for Volume I. Graphic resolution should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented. If an introductory letter is submitted it should only be included in Volume I and limited to 2 pages. This letter is not included in the 120 page limit for Volume I.

In addition to the instructions provided in 3.0, the Offeror will provide one complete copy of the written proposal to the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) as electronic files fully compatible with Microsoft Office 2010 and for information not supported by MS Office products, with the latest Adobe Acrobat reader on a CD-ROM. The Offeror will ensure that the Price Volume is provided on a separate CD-ROM. Each CD-ROM is to be labeled for content and the Offeror’s name. If a discrepancy exists between the original paper copy of the proposal and the disk copy, the paper copy will take precedence.

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES

Each volume of the proposal shall be submitted as one original and additional copies as specified in the table below. All volumes shall be delivered to the address provided in Section 4.0 prior to the closing date/time stated in this solicitation. Page limitations for each volume if any, are also specified in the table below; title, tab, and table of contents pages do not count towards the page limit. Proposal pages beyond the specified maximum limit will not be reviewed or considered as part of the evaluation.

The authorized Annexes to the proposal are summarized in the table below. Annexes do not have page limitations.

Each volume shall contain the following information:

Cover and Title Page which includes the following information:

Title of proposal and proposal # if applicable

- Solicitation number

- Offeror’s name, address and POC

Proposal volume number

- Copy number (e.g., original, copy 1 of 7, etc.)

Table of Contents (arranged to enable easy location of information and corresponding to evaluation factors, subfactors and elements)

Use tabs and dividers

4.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION:

Clearly mark all packages with the solicitation number. The submission date for the proposal shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 9 of Standard Form 33 of the RFP.

Offeror shall submit proposals via United States Postal Service or through a commercial carrier using the address provided below. Offeror shall not submit proposals by facsimile or electronically via email.

Contracts Department

Route 547, Attn: Gianna Gatto, B562-3C

Joint Base MDL, NJ 08733-5000

Solicitation Number: N68335-14-R-0276

Hand carried proposals may be delivered to Bldg 562-1, Rm 134 of the address above, and attention: Gianna Gatto and/or Alan McCarty.

5.0 PROPOSAL PACKAGING:

The Offeror shall package the proposal volumes in cartons or equivalent packaging containers in the most efficient manner possible grouping like volumes to the maximum extent possible. Each container shall be single person portable. One container shall include all Original Proposal volumes including the original/signed documents.

Each box should include a packing slip detailing the contents to include the volume number, title, and copy number. Also, each box should be stamped or marked “For Official Use Only” and “Source Selection Information – See FAR-2.101 and 3.104”.

6.0 CLASSIFIED DATA

All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED

7.0 SOLICITATION CHANGES

For any changes and additional information for the solicitation please go to http://www.fbo.gov search by Solicitation Number N68335-14-R-0276.

PART B SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

EVALUATION FACTORS

The proposal shall be subdivided into the following sections, in the order listed, and shall be written to match the following format:

I. Technical Factor

A. Technical Approach Subfactor

* System Performance

* Testing

B. Logistics Subfactor

* Logistics Product Data

* Supply Support

* Technical Manual

* Training

C. Management Subfactor

* Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

* Manufacturing Capacity/Facilities/Personnel Resources

* Small Business Utilization II. Experience Factor

III. Past Performance Factor

* Recency

* Relevancy (including context of data)

* Past Performance Information

IV. Price Factor

1.0 VOLUME I: TECHNICAL

Note: This volume shall not contain any reference to price aspects of the offer.

This section shall be prepared to address the Offeror’s understanding and ability to meet the Request for Proposal’s (RFP) Statement of Work (SOW) and Performance Specification (PS) requirements. All technical, logistics and program requirements, including Systems Engineering Technical Review (SETR) meetings, Integrated Master Schedules (IMS) and Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs) shall be discussed.

The Offeror shall provide all information and data required to conduct a thorough and complete technical evaluation. The Offeror shall address the following in the proposal:

I.A. Technical Approach: This section shall clearly discuss in detail the capabilities and performance of the Offeror’s proposed Cranes. The requirements of the PS shall be discussed as required below.

Exceeding the specified performance or capability for the following requirements may be advantageous to the Government. In addition to meeting all the Solicitation's requirements, Offerors who propose Crane designs that exceed these requirements may be given strengths in the technical evaluation rating:

- A Crane that has a greater lift capacity / outreach than required by the specification.

- A Crane that has a greater lift and move capacity / outreach than required by the specification.

- A Crane that has a digital Human Machine Interface (HMI) type trouble shooting aid both in the operator’s cab and on ground level.

- A Crane that includes design enhancements that facilitate ease of maintenance for Navy Intermediate Level technicians

System Performance: The Offeror shall provide a detailed discussion of the approach that will be taken to meet the technical specifications for the Cranes as described in the PS. The Offeror’s technical proposal shall follow the paragraph-by-paragraph order of the PS section 3.0 (System Requirements), in order to show that the requirements are met. The Offeror shall provide sufficient details to support the claims in meeting the requirement. A detailed analysis showing how the design meets the required lift capacity and deck loading limits shall be provided. Calculations shall assume the lifted aircraft’s center of gravity is 110” off the deck surface and is secured to the crane via straps. Calculations shall be provided for load chart limits based on tipping (inrigger deployed and retracted (on tires)). Calculations showing compliance with deck loading limits shall be provided. Explanations of approach used shall accompany all calculations. Calculations shall be provided in an unlocked electronic format (Excel or MathCAD on a CD included with Volume I) in addition to being presented in the technical volume. The Offeror shall provide detailed information identifying design consideration for structure, mobility, and environmental conditions. The offeror shall detail the extent of commonality (components, sub systems, etc.) between the CCSC and ACSC. The Offeror shall describe the types of analysis used, the use of computer software such as Finite Element Method Analysis (FEMA) or vehicle dynamics simulations, design assumptions and the importance placed on some design parameters over others. The Offeror shall detail any special or unique capabilities and how those will enhance the Crane’s capability. If the proposed Cranes are based on an existing item, the Offeror shall identify the existing item (i.e. model number of the unit and/or components) and detail in a comparison matrix any modifications that are being proposed to successfully meet the Crane’s performance specification requirements.

Testing: The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative discussing the testing approach that will be taken to meet the requirements for the EDM, LRIP and Production Unit testing provisions as specified in the Solicitation. The Offeror’s proposal shall follow the paragraph-by-paragraph order of the PS section 4.0 (Quality Assurance Provisions). The Offeror shall provide detailed information explaining their testing standards and methods including any unique test equipment required. The offeror shall detail how the extent of commonality between the CCSC and ACSC will eliminate duplicative tests. The offeror shall identify planned locations for each test. The Offeror shall address all Test CDRLs in this section of the proposal.

I.B. Logistics: This section shall clearly demonstrate the Offeror’s capability, capacity, and approach for meeting the logistics requirements. The Offeror shall discuss their plan to develop and manage the IMS to align the logistics deliverables with the systems engineering requirements and overall program schedule. The offeror shall detail how the extent of commonality between the CCSC and ACSC will reduce logistics deliverables. If the offeror plans to utilize a Logistics sub-contractor, the offer shall provide a detailed narrative describing how all necessary source data will be transmitted to the sub-contractor in a timely manner to ensure that all logistics deliverables mature at the same rate as the hardware and testing requirements. The logistics section shall be subdivided in the order listed and shall address all logistics CDRLs in this section of the proposal.

Logistics Product Data: The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative describing the development and delivery (including file type format) of a Logistics Product Data Record (LPDR). The Offeror shall describe in detail the type of LPDR electronic database software they will utilize. The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative that clearly demonstrates their understanding of the Logistics Product Data (LPD) Data Attribute Selection Sheets (Appendix A in the SOW). In this section, the Offeror shall discuss how Navy’s three levels of maintenance will be used to determine Source, Maintenance & Recoverability (SM&R) Codes. The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative describing how they plan to conduct a level of repair analysis to identify SM&R codes and how system breakdown will reflect the Navy’s Intermediate level of maintenance. The offeror shall discuss their internal process to perform quality assurance to ensure data corresponds accurately with Technical Manual (TM), Group Assembly Parts List (GAPL) and Engineering Drawings.

Supply Support: The Offeror shall describe the proposed maintenance philosophy and support plan for the Cranes. Furthermore, the Offeror shall provide a narrative describing their plan to develop the Cranes using commercially available, multi-source components, to the greatest extent possible for standardization, interoperability, commonality, and logistics footprint reduction. The Offeror shall address to what extent are common items referred to by part numbers from US Military, US and International standard organizations such as; Compressed Gas Association (CGA), Deutsches Institute Fuer Normung/German Industrial Standard (DIN), International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC), International Organization for Standards (ISO, EN-ISO), National Aerospace Standard (NAS, NAS-M), National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA), Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) and Tire And Rim Association (TR, TRA). The offeror shall describe how the technical drawing package will be organized in a top-down breakdown format to support development of Logistics Product Data. The Offeror shall describe how the technical drawing package will be delivered for both repairable assemblies and consumables and provide a sample of each.

Technical Manual: The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative describing their plans to comply with the Technical Manual Contractual Requirements (TMCR) portion of the SOW. The Offeror shall provide a narrative that demonstrates their understanding of the Navy’s operator and maintenance levels and how the TM will be developed in accordance with operator and maintainer skill level. The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative that illustrates their understanding of the required level of maturity of the technical manuals to support the programs test phase. The Offeror shall provide an outline of the contents of each manual and discuss the manual development process they intend to use to deliver the final products. The Offeror shall provide a description of operation and trouble-shooting procedures, illustrations, Illustrated Parts Breakdown (IPB), how they will be captured in publication format and how updates will be provided. The Offeror can provide references to NAVAIR Technical Manuals they have developed previously (2 maximum). A sample TM can be provided as Annex 1 only if it is not a NAVAIR Technical Manual.

Training: The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative describing their plans to comply with the training requirements of the SOW. The Offeror shall provide details of scheduling, training personnel and their skills, training products, and trainee evaluation methods. The Offeror shall identify if training personnel have received training in AIM Content Planning Module/Learning Objectives (CPM/LO) Module and what clearance/Common Access Card they possess in order to work in Government software or how they plan to obtain such training and clearances/Common Access Card.

I.C. Management: This section shall clearly demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding of the management required to successfully perform on this contract. The Offeror shall provide a detailed narrative that addresses SOW requirements that are not addressed in other sections of the proposal including meetings, SETR Entrance and Exit Criteria, CDRLs, major component procurement / manufacture, EDM and LRIP assembly, testing and delivery of production units as specified in the solicitation. The Offeror shall describe in detail the project management processes which will be followed to track performance on the program and describe how program risk will be managed and mitigated. The Offeror shall provide 5 drawings, on a CD in AUTOCAD (DWG) format, of fabricated items of medium complexity that illustrate how the requirements of CDRL P003 will be met. Additionally, the following information is required:

Integrated Master Schedule (IMS): The Offeror shall provide an IMS that illustrates a logical progression of all tasks required in performance of this contract. SOW requirements (including CDRLs, meetings, SETRs, major component procurement, manufacture, PPU assembly, testing, logistics product development and delivery of production units) shall be identified in the IMS. The IMS shall include individual tasks for each test required in PS section 4.0 along with realistic time frames for each test.

Manufacturing Capacity/Facilities/Personnel Resources: The Offeror shall describe the overall production capability, including facilities, plant layout, major equipment, personnel and space (square footage) considered necessary to perform successfully on this contract. The Offeror shall also discuss the qualifications of critical personnel that will be assigned to this contract and whether these personnel are currently employed by the company or will be hired to meet the contractual requirements.

Small Business Utilization:

(1) Strategies for using Small Business (SB) Concerns: All Offerors (Large and Small Businesses) shall address their strategies for utilizing SB concerns in the performance of this contract, whether as a joint venture, teaming arrangement or subcontractor. For purposes of this solicitation, the term SB Concern shall also include the subcategories of Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), HUBZone Small Business (HUBZone), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), and Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB). Each subcategory of SB shall be addressed. (This strategy is separate from, but shall be consistent with, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, if the Plan is required.) In describing its strategy for this solicitation, the Offeror shall, as applicable:

- Describe its approach to identifying SB Concerns;

- Describe the extent of participation of SB Concerns on this contract, especially as principal subcontractors;

- Describe the extent of commitment to use such SB Concerns;

- Describe the complexity and variety of the work SB Concerns are to perform;

- Identify what processes have been implemented to correct past inabilities to meet proposed goals;

- Demonstrate (Large Business only) that its SB strategy is consistent with its SB Subcontracting

Plan.

- Demonstrating Realism through Submission of Reports: To demonstrate the realism of the utilization strategy, the Large Business Offeror shall provide copies of the final or most recent

SF 294s/Individual Subcontracting Reports (ISRs) for the most current three relevant contracts, that best demonstrate the Offeror's ability to achieve the proposed subcontracting goals. If the Offeror is a participant in the DoD Comprehensive Subcontracting Test Program, they shall provide copies of three final or most recent SF 295s/Summary Subcontracting Reports (SSRs). Explain how the results shown in the recent SF 295/SSR demonstrates the realism of the plan. The Small Business Offeror may provide this information in a format substantially the same as the ISR or SSR.

(2) SB Subcontracting Plans: The Large Business Offeror shall provide its SB Subcontracting Plan conforming to the requirements of FAR 19.7 and DFARS 219.7 as Annex 3. If the Offeror is a participant in the DoD Comprehensive Subcontracting Test Program specified in DFARS 219.7, the Offeror shall describe how SB participation on this contract will contribute to its overall Comprehensive Subcontracting goals. The Offeror shall describe its specific efforts to ensure the resulting contract meets or exceeds proposed goals. These efforts shall include, but are not limited to: sponsoring program specific outreach programs and industry conferences, establishing Mentor-Protégé relationships and using the NAVAIR Office of Small Business Programs website (http://www.navair.navy.mil/osbp) to locate small business concerns.

2.0 VOLUME II: EXPERIENCE

Experience: The Offeror shall provide information that describes the Offeror, the Offeror’s principal subcontractors’ and critical team members’ (as defined in Part A, Section 1.0 of Section L-1) experience similar to that required for this contract. Specifically describe and provide examples of experience, which demonstrates the ability to perform the required effort as delineated within the solicitation, including design, test and logistics efforts. In addition, explain why the experience should be considered relevant. The offeror shall specifically describe and compare the product/technology involved and tests conducted (including where, when and with whom). The Offeror shall also specifically address experience related to designing mobile crane equipment, shipboard mobile equipment or conducting shipboard shock or shipboard EMI/EMV tests. Also, describe the extent to which the Offeror and the Offeror’s subcontractors/team members have worked with DOD program and contracting teams, including NAVAIR. For each example, the contract number, title of the program and performance dates shall be provided.

3.0 VOLUME III: PAST PERFORMANCE

Past Performance: The Offeror shall identify any contracts performed within five years of this proposal submission date which contain efforts similar to those required which were performed by the Offeror (under the same Cage Code), the Offeror’s principal subcontractors, and critical team members. Commercial contracts may be included. In general, recent performance will be considered more relevant than older performance. When possible, these contracts should include five of the most relevant contracts for the prime contractor, and two of the most relevant contracts for each principal subcontractor (as defined in Paragraph I, General Instructions). If proposing as joint venture/single legal entity (JV/SLE), the Offeror shall provide the five past performance references for the JV/SLE. If less than the five past performance references are available for the JV/SLE, each member of the JV/SLE shall individually submit the five references in addition to their JV/SLE references.

For each contract identified, provide the contract data and past performance information as described below.

For contracts that have Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) Reports that are more than six months old, e.g., the completion date is more than six months before the due date for this Past Performance Volume; the Offeror will forward a copy of the CPARS Update Questionnaire (Attachment 1) to that contract customer’s Program Manager. For all contracts identified which do not have CPARS Reports the Offeror will forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 2) to that contract customer’s PCO, Administrative Contracting Officer, and Program Manager. All questionnaires shall be forwarded within two weeks from the RFP release date with enough lead-time so that responses can be received by the Government concurrent with the Government’s receipt of the Offeror’s proposal. The Offeror shall include instructions for the customers to send completed questionnaires within two weeks of its receipt via e-mail to Ms. Gianna Gatto, Contracts, at Email: gianna.gatto@navy.mil or via fax number: 732-323-7440, thereby allowing the customer approximately 2 weeks to complete their response. This submittal information is provided at the top of the questionnaires to facilitate the Offeror’s effort in meeting these instructions. The Offeror shall not conduct follow-up actions with regard to this questionnaire. The Government may send any other questionnaires as necessary.

The Offeror shall provide written consent from their principal subcontractors and critical team members that will allow the Government to coordinate their Past Performance issue(s) with the Offeror. If the Offeror does not submit such written consent, then the Government will address any past performance issues directly with the principal subcontractor or critical team member and the Offeror will forfeit the opportunity to participate in any related discussions. Consequently, for any principal subcontractors and critical team members that do not provide such written consent, provide a point of contact (name, address, phone number, and email address) with which the Government may coordinate these issues and obtain any responses as needed.

The Government may use information other than that provided by the Offeror in their proposals to evaluate past performance. The Government may use Past Performance information obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror. The Past Performance Information Reporting System (PPIRS) will be a primary source used to evaluate Past Performance. It is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided. The Government has no duty to search for data to cure the problems it finds in the information provided by the Offeror. The Offeror has the burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information.

Contract Data: Provide all the information identified below separately for each contract.

Contractor name

Contractor role (Prime, Principal Sub, Critical Team Member, JV/SLE, JV/SLE Member)

Title of contract

Contract number / type (e.g., firm fixed price, cost, etc)

Procuring agency (including point of contact’s name; phone number and e-mail address)

Description of product or service

Quantities procured

Period of performance (e.g., from month/year to month/year)

Place of performance

CAGE Code/ DUNs #

Dollar value of contract

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) information

Indicate whether or not any CPARS have been completed (yes/no)

Identify the last CPARS completion date

Identify whether information is on DOD Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS) (yes/no)

Identify questionnaire sent (#1 CPARS Update Questionnaire or #2 Past Performance Questionnaire)

For Subs - agreement to allow coordination with Prime (yes/no)

Relevancy: The Offeror shall explain what aspects of the contract are deemed relevant to the proposed contract. Also identify where contract performance took place and provide rationale why it is relevant to the solicitation if the location is different from where the related effort is proposed to take place.

Past Performance Information: The Offeror shall provide a brief description of performance in delivering quality products in each of the following areas:

1 - Meeting technical design, test and logistics requirements.

2 - Meeting schedule requirements (explain any modification of original schedules and reasons for changes, etc.)

3 - Managing the contracted effort (program management, cooperation with customer, subcontract management, etc.)

4.0 VOLUME IV: PRICE PROPOSAL

4.1 Volume Content:

(a) This Volume shall contain the information requested below and shall include a copy of Section B with the Contract Line Item (CLIN) for evaluation purposes, the Total Prices filled in (Supplies and/or Services and Prices.

i. Signed SF33 for basic solicitation and each amendment

ii. Signed Representations, Certifications and Acknowledgements or System for Award Management (SAM) reference

Offers that do not comply with the line items specified in this solicitation may be determined to be nonresponsive or unacceptable.

(b) All price and price supporting information shall be contained in section B and the price proposal. No price or pricing information shall be included in any other technical volume including cover letters. Offeror are responsible for submitting sufficient information to enable the Government to fully evaluate their price proposal.

4.2 Ground Rules and Assumptions:

As this is a competitive acquisition with adequate price competition anticipated, any price documentation requested shall not be certified cost or pricing data in accordance with FAR 15.406-2. However, in the event that adequate price competition does not exist after receipt of proposals, the Government reserves the right to request additional cost or pricing data as necessary from both the Offeror and subcontractors and may conduct negotiations with the Offeror, pursuant to FAR Part 15.403-4, in order to ensure a reasonable and realistic price. Further, the Offeror may be required to provide a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data prior to award, pursuant to FAR 15.406-2. Offeror shall acknowledge the requirement to provide additional cost or pricing information and certify the data prior to award if/when requested by the Government.

4.3 Price Information:

(a) The Offeror shall identify the proposed prices for each CLIN as specified in Section B of this solicitation. The Offeror shall sum up the proposed Total Prices by contract year, and provide a total overall price of the proposal using estimated quantities, and submit a complete Section B. For Fixed Priced CLINs, the Schedule B Total Price is equal to the proposed unit price multiplied by the Section B Estimated Quantity for that CLIN as detailed in the table below:

Two (2) each CCSC Engineering Development Models (EDMs) (CLIN 0001)

One (1) each ACSC EDM (CLIN 0002)

One (1) each CCSC LRIP (CLIN 0007)

One (1) each ACSC LRIP (CLIN 0008)

Three (3) each CCSC Production Units Year One (CLIN 0085)

Four (4) each CCSC Production Units Year Two (CLIN 0086)

Six (6) each CCSC Production Units Year Three (CLIN 0087)

Three (3) each ACSC Production Units Year One (CLIN 0088)

Four (4) each ACSC Production Units Year Two (CLIN 0089)

Five (5) each ACSC Production Units Year Three (CLIN 0090) and associated training, testing, logistics and technical data (CLINs 0003 – 0006 and 0009 – 0084) at the quantities specific in Section B.

(b) In the event that the information provided in the Technical volume supports providing a single solution the pricing across the CLINs should reflect this commonality accordingly.

SECTION L ATTACHMENT 1

CPARS UPDATE QUESTIONNAIRE

The information in this questionnaire is being requested as part of a proposal response to Solicitation Number: N68335-14-R-0276. Within 2 weeks from receipt of this questionnaire return this form to Ms. Gianna Gatto, Contracts Specialist, at gianna.gatto@navy.mil or Contracts Department, Route 547, Attn: Gianna Gatto, B562-3C

Joint Base MDL, NJ 08733-5000.

If the last CPAR on the contract identified in 1.c was completed more than 6 months prior to the receipt of this questionnaire, please complete the questionnaire below.

1. CONTRACTOR IDENTIFICATION

a.

Contractor: ________________________ b.

Program Title: ______________________ c.

Contract Number: ___________________ d.

Date last CPAR was completed: ________

2. RESPONDENT IDENTIFICATION

a.

Name: __________________________________________ b.

Agency: _________________________________________ c.

Position *: _______________________________________ d.

Phone/Fax Number:________________________________ e.

Email Address: ____________________________________ f.

Date Questionnaire Completed: ______________________

*If possible, this questionnaire should be completed by the Program Manager.

3. SCOPE OF WORK CHANGE

Has the scope of work significantly changed since the past CPAR? (YES or NO)

YES_____ Please explain; (For Example; during the last CPAR period, the contractor was primarily doing design work, but now the program has entered into the testing phase).

NO______ Current work is similar to last CPARS efforts.

4. PAST PERFORMANCE UPDATE

Have there been any significant changes in contact performance between your last CPAR and now?

Yes_____ Please explain; 1) for any previous Yellow or Red rating, has the contractor exhibited demonstrated systemic improvements that perhaps would be reflected in a different rating on your next CPAR. Or 2) contractor schedule performance has declined significantly from last CPAR report period, e.g., was a Green and might become Yellow or Red on next CPAR.

NO______

SECTION L ATTACHMENT 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

The information in this questionnaire is being requested as part of a proposal response to Solicitation Number: N68335-14-R-0276. Within 2 weeks from receipt of this questionnaire return this form to Ms. Gianna Gatto, Contracts Specialist, at gianna.gatto@navy.mil or Contracts Department, Route 547, Attn: Gianna Gatto, B562-3C, Joint Base MDL, NJ 08733-5000.

1. CONTRACTOR IDENTIFICATION

a.

Contractor: _______________________ b.

Program Title: _____________________ c.

Contract Number: __________________ d.

Type of Contract: __________________ e.

Percent Complete: _________________ f.

Total Contract Value________________

Note: Whether identified or not, if you have any knowledge of other contracts for the identified contractor, you are requested to complete a questionnaire for each contract or subcontract similar to this acquisition.

2. RESPONDENT IDENTIFICATION

a.

Name: ________________________________________________ b.

Agency: _______________________________________________ c.

Position: _______________________________________________ d.

Relation to Program: _____________________________________ e.

Phone Number: _________________________________________ f.

Email Address: _________________________ g.

Date Questionnaire Completed: ____________________________

3. PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS

a.

Please provide a short description of the subject contract.

b.

Please check those activities which are applicable to your program.

Equipment detailed design_________

Equipment testing ________________

Maintenance support development___

Logistics support development_______

Training support development_______

Equipment production_______________

4. PERFORMANCE LEVELS

4.1 PERFORMANCE GRADES (Use these grades to provide the overall rating where requested below).

Exceptional - Performance meets and exceeds many contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good - Performance meets and exceeds some contractual. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Satisfactory - Performance meets contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal - Performance does not meet…