Amendment_0002.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

The purpose of this amendment is to clarify Section L requirements. See continuation sheet for details.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

1 17

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 15-Nov-2018

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 N6833519R0030

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

25-Oct-2018

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 2 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

15-Nov-2018

CODE

NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER AD (LKE)

CODE 2.5.2.5.1

HIGHWAY 547

BUILDING 562-3, ROOM 306

JOINT BASE MDL NJ 08733-5000

N68335 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6833519R0030

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 02

The purpose of this amendment is to revise Section L, Volume II Past Performance, to remove the statement "Note that the Offeror should not reference the solicitation number when distributing the past performance questionnaires to customers."

All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION L

L-1 CONTENT OF PROPOSALS

L-1 INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, CONTENT OF PROPOSALS

PART A - GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION

Offerors are required to submit sufficient information concerning all evaluation factors to enable Government personnel to fully assess the capabilities of the Offeror to perform all requirements. The proposal must be sufficient in detail and scope to permit evaluation and provide 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 all requirements and associated risks, and is able, willing, and competent to devote the resources necessary to meet all requirements, and 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 burden of proof for all substantiation within the proposal rests with the Offeror.

Unsubstantiated statements that the Offeror understands, and can or will comply with the specifications, and paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof are considered inadequate and may render a rating of unacceptable.

Alternate proposals are not acceptable.

Offerors are advised that the Government may incorporate any part of the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government into the final contract.

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 shall not alter or rearrange the solicitation.

The Offeror shall include any data necessary to illustrate the adequacy of the proposal and identify any applicable ground rules, assumptions, approaches, and solutions to requirements and problems. Failure to address clearly a specific factor or element may result in an “unacceptable” rating. There is no need to repeat information in more than one volume. The detailed information should be included in the most logical place and summarized and referenced in other areas if an overlap exists. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation beyond that which is sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

Throughout these instructions, Offeror is defined as the Prime Contractor with its Commercial and Government

Entity (CAGE) code identified in Block 15A on Standard Form 33 (SF 33), Solicitation, Offer, and Award. A

“Principal Subcontractor” is defined as a subcontractor who provides at least 10% of the proposed total price 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. A “JV Team Member” is an entity that makes up a Joint Venture. “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. The term “entity” is used to mean any or all of the following: Prime, principal subcontractor, critical subcontractor, JV, JV team member, or other subcontractor. Offerors are reminded to supply the information required in accordance with NAVAIR Clause

5252.215-9505 (as detailed in full text in Section H of the solicitation) should it apply.

2. PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES

The Offeror shall present its proposal information in a manner that facilitates a one for one comparison between the information presented and these proposal instructions. Proposal information must be structured such that paragraph numbers/letters correspond to the proposal instructions paragraph numbers/letters, although the Offeror may add lower tier subparagraphs.

In addition to the electronic copies requested below, “Electronic Proposal Format,” each volume, book, and annex of the proposal shall be submitted as one (1) paper original and additional paper copies as specified in Table G-1

Proposal Structure below. The Offeror shall submit all paper and electronic copies of the proposal to the address provided in section 4.1. Page limits for each volume, if any, are also specified in Table G-1 Proposal Structure below. Title, table of contents, and Annex pages are not included in the page limit. Additionally, the individual subcontracting reports for the past performance volume is not included in the page limit. Pages in excess of the stated page limits will not be evaluated.

Information submitted as an Annex to a particular proposal volume may include manuals, specifications, plans, procedures, and company policies, as well as other information requested in Section L, Part B - Specific

Instructions.

Table G-1 Proposal Structure

VOLUME TITLE PAGE LIMITS NO. OF ELECTRONIC (CD)

COPIES

NO. OF

PAPER

COPIES

1 Technical 50 2 sets 4

2 Past Performance 7 pages per contract

2 sets 4

3 Contract Administration As Needed 2 sets 2

Each volume must contain the following information. Use tabs and dividers.

a. Cover and title page;

b. Title of proposal and proposal number as applicable;

c. Offeror’s name, address, and POC;

d. Solicitation/RFP number N68335-19-R-0030;

e. Proposal volume/book number/annex number; and copy number;

f. Table of Contents providing sufficient detail to enable easy location of important elements

The following Table G-2 lists the RFP attachments provided to the Offeror with Section L, to assist with proposal development.

Table G-2 Section L List of Attachments

Attachment

Number

Electronic File Title Attachment Name

L-1 MAC SOW MAC SOW

L-2 CPARs Update Questionnaire CPARs Update Questionnaire

L-3 Past Performance Questionnaire Past Performance Questionnaire

3. WRITTEN PROPOSAL FORMAT

Written Proposals must be formatted using a Times New Roman 12-point normal font (no reduction permitted), single-spaced with 1-inch margins all around, and formatted for/ printed on, standard 8.5 x 11-inch paper. All pages should be numbered with section, volume, paragraph, and page numbers. When fold-out pages are used they must not exceed 11 x 17 inches and will be counted as 1 page. If the Offeror uses graphs to convey information, the graphs must show enough detail to easily discern the information described. Drawings may be provided separately and may be any size but should be folded to approximately 8.5 x 11-inch standard size and will count as one page.

Graphs and tables shall be presented in no smaller than a 10 pt. font. Graphs should contain a grid that allows values to be read directly from the graph to the same detail that a 10 x 10 to the ½ inch grid provides. Graphic resolution should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented. Text utilized in charts, figures, and graphics shall also be no smaller than a 10 pt. font and may use a font type selected by the Offeror. Each volume, book, or annex shall be provided separately in a 3-ring binder, unless otherwise indicated. The binders shall be of an appropriate thickness for the number of pages it contains (e.g., a 30-page book shall not be placed in a 2-inch binder).

4. ELECTRONIC PROPOSAL FORMAT

This section is intended to provide information to the Offeror on the electronic format and application software to be used for submitting proposals.

4.1.1 Electronic Proposal Media

The Offeror should submit all volumes of its proposal electronically on Compact Disc Read-Only Memory (CD-

ROM) disk(s) compatible with the operating system and applications defined in Section 2.1.2 below. The Offeror should put as much proposal material as possible on each CD-ROM disk. For this solicitation, Volume 3 (Contract

Administration) should be delivered on separate CD-ROM disk(s) from the remainder of the proposal. The Offeror should submit two sets of CD-ROM disks that contain its proposal. One set of CD-ROM disks should be marked

"Master" and the other should be marked "Back-Up." Both sets of CD-ROM disks should be clearly marked with the Offeror's name and address, the POC's name and phone number, and proposal volumes contained therein. The

Offeror is responsible for ensuring electronic proposals are virus free in accordance with Section 2.1.4. If a discrepancy exists between the original paper copy of the proposal and the CD-ROM disk copy, the original paper copy shall take precedence.

4.1.2 Operating System and Applications

The proposals will be accessed utilizing Microsoft Office 2010 or 2016. The Offeror shall submit two identical proposals in separate, electronic versions with one version in Portable Document Format (.pdf) and one version in

Microsoft Office 2010 or 2016 Applications (Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft PowerPoint, and

Microsoft Project). The .pdf document must be fully searchable. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that the

.pdf and the appropriate Microsoft Office 2010 or 2016 applications versions contain identical information. The

Government shall have the discretion to use the information in either version, and shall not be responsible for any differences in content between the two proposal formats submitted by the Offeror. Use of other application software for submission of proposals is prohibited except where specific instructions for non- PDF or Office 2010 or 2016 applications are provided.

4.1.3 Virus Free Electronic Submission

The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that its electronic proposal is virus free. The Offeror shall certify in its proposal cover letter that all electronic proposal information has been checked for viruses, and specify the software, version, and virus definition used to check the data. With each subsequent submission of proposal information (e.g.

responses to Evaluation Notices (EN), Final Proposal Revisions, etc.) the Offeror shall ensure and certify that its files are virus free.

4.1.4 Multimedia

The Offeror should not embed sound or video (e.g., MPEG) files within the proposal submission.

4.1.5 Graphics

Large files require greater computer system resources and are discouraged. The Offeror is encouraged to:

Simplify the color palette used in creating figures;

Minimize size of graphics files; and

Avoid scanned images.

4.0 PROPOSAL PACKAGING AND SUBMISSION

All Proposals shall be UNCLASSIFIED.

4.1 PROPOSAL MARKING AND SUBMISSION

The Offeror shall clearly mark all packages with the solicitation number. The submission date for all volumes shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 9 of SF 33 of the Solicitation/RFP.

Method of delivery, such as by hand, United States Postal Service, or commercial carrier, shall be coordinated with

Angela Slater, Contract Specialist, telephone number: (732) 323-4573 and/or e-mail address:

Angela.Slater@navy.mil. Proposals shall be submitted using the address provided below. Unless otherwise provided for by the PCO, Matthew Ludwig, Initial and Final Proposals shall not be submitted by facsimile or electronically via email.

Naval Air Warfare Center

ATTN: Angela Slater. AIR-2.5.2.5.4

HWY 547, Bldg 562, Room 310

Joint Base MDL, NJ 08733

N00019-19-R-0030

4.2 PROPOSAL PACKAGING

The Offeror shall package the proposal volumes in cartons or equivalent packaging containers (hereinafter

“carton”) in the most efficient manner possible and grouping like volumes to the maximum extent possible.

Each carton should identify its contents by including a packing slip detailing each volume/book number, title, and copy number. Each carton should be double wrapped. The outside of the carton should be plain and the inside carton shall be stamped or marked ― For Official Use Only and Source Selection Information – See FAR

2.101 and 3.104, marked for the intended recipient as identified below. The master set of proposals and set No.

1 copy shall be marked for NAVAIR PCO, AIR-2.5.2.5. The Master Set shall include the following: all original proposal volumes; all proposal volumes on CD-ROM disk; a completed and original signed SF 33; all signed solicitation amendments SF 30, if applicable; and Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of

Offerors or Respondents (Section K of the Solicitation) and other applicable fill-ins.

5.0 CHANGES TO SOLICITATION

All amendments to this solicitation will be posted at https://www.fbo.gov/.

Search the database for the solicitation number N68335-19-R-0030.

7.0 POINTS OF CONTACT (POC)

If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are unclear, the

Offeror shall immediately notify the PCO AIR-2.5.2.5 Matthew Ludwig, at Matthew.Ludwig2@navy.mil or by phone (732) 323-7953 or Contract Specialist, Angela Slater at Angela.Slater@navy.mil or by phone (732) 323-4573.

https://www.fbo.gov/ mailto:ig2@navy.mil mailto:Angela.Slater@navy.mil

PART B - SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

Note: All proposals shall remain valid for a period of 180 days from the time of solicitation closing. Pricing information is not requested nor shall it be provided.

The proposal shall include information/documentation in sufficient detail to clearly identify the Offeror’s overall qualifications to accomplish the scope of the work of the contract. The proposal shall be subdivided into the following sections, in the order listed, and shall be written to match the following format:

I. Technical

Quality

Experience

Capability

II. Past Performance

Recency

Relevancy

Past Performance Information (Quality of Products or Services)

VOLUME I - TECHNICAL

NOTE: THIS VOLUME SHALL NOT CONTAIN ANY REFERENCE TO ANY PRICE ASPECTS

Table T-1. Cross Reference Matrix

A Government Cross Reference Matrix (CRM) is provided below to help the Offeror ensure that all requirements are addressed, are easily accessible to the evaluators, and to aid in ensuring accurate format and mapping of the

CRM to its proposal. The Offeror is required to provide a CRM for the Technical Volume only. The Offeror’s

CRM’s shall cross-reference its proposal volume, page and paragraph to specific RFP requirements, as well as other parts of the proposal that contain relevant information. The CRM provided in the Technical proposal volume is not included in the page count. The Offeror’s Technical CRM may be identical to the one provided below or revised to add columns to indicate the page number on which information may be found or to provide other comments.

Section L – Proposal

Instructions Volume or

Paragraph Numbers

Section L – Proposal Instructions

Volume or Paragraph Title

Volume / Page Location within Offeror’s

Proposal

3.1 Critical Safety/Critical Application

Items (CSIs/CAIs)

3.2 Product Requirements

3.3 Government Furnished Material

(GFM)

3.4 Program Management

3.4.1 Technical Interchange Meetings

(TIMs)

3.4.2 Progress Reporting

3.5 Quality Assurance

3.6 Item Unique Identification (IUID)

Marking of US Military Property

3.7 Packaging, Preservation and Shipping

Note: Table T-1. (CRM) is provided as a guide and should only be used for information only.

Throughout the Technical Volumes, the Offeror should identify any proposed capability, approach or feature that exceeds a requirement or provides merit associated with a performance or operational benefit to the Government.

The Offeror should also identify proposed capability, approach or feature that reduces risk inherent in the program.

Specifically, explain the benefits to the Government in technical terms and the degree of impact it will have to performance, operations and/or risk. A proposal that provides the Government with a capability, service, or resource that is not specifically required, but benefits the Government can have merit consistent with the evaluation rating definitions herein. Offerors are advised that any offer to exceed a requirement or to provide a feature with performance and/or operational benefits may be included in the resulting Contract.

MAC EVALUATION FACTORS

The technical proposal submitted for the MAC will be evaluated with the following technical elements which are not individually weighted:

Quality

Experience

Capability

QUALITY

The Offeror must demonstrate that it has a Quality Planning and Process Control certified in ISO 9001 Standards and utilizes state of the art inspection equipment including Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM) and Laser

Trackers for in-process and final inspections at their facility. The Offeror shall demonstrate their process for 100% inspection and (or) testing of all critical, major, and minor dimensions and (or) requirements identified in the drawings, drawing notes, and process and fabrication specifications. The Offeror shall demonstrate their process for documenting results that shall consist of actual dimensions, measurements, and test outcomes and shall be recorded and included in the First Article test report as required. The Offeror shall demonstrate that they can provide all certifications, test reports, and in-process inspection documents needed to substantiate product quality to include milling and material certifications. The Offeror shall demonstrate adequate facilities, inspection equipment, and skilled personnel, to support the NAVAIR Inspector in the conduct of the interim inspection(s). The Offeror must provide a written narrative on the Offeror’s understanding of the current handling of and test approach to Critical

Safety Items (CSI) or Critical Application Items (CAI) and the necessary testing requirements including Quality

Conformance Inspection (QCI) tests when manufacturing these items.

EXPERIENCE

The Offeror shall describe and provide examples of experience within the past 2 years at minimum which demonstrates the ability to perform the required effort as delineated within the solicitation, including utilizing state of the art inspection equipment including a Coordinate Measuring Machine (CMM) and/or Laser Tracker for in-process and final inspections. The Offeror shall demonstrate experience utilizing multiple 5 axis machining centers in both horizontal and vertical that can accommodate parts up to 40 feet long, 15 feet wide and 6 feet tall, holding tolerance less than or within .001” to include multiple CNC turning centers with capacity ranging from 108 inches in diameter by 118 inches tall with weights of up to 10,000 lbs. The Offeror shall cite experience to ensure capability to include gauges, tools, fixtures, and jigs necessary to perform the highly complex machining. The Offeror shall cite experience with CSI/CAI items. The Offeror shall also cite experience including sufficient rigging and (or) material handling services and highly skilled manpower to setup, configure, and operate equipment and machines used to accomplish the task. In addition, the Offeror shall explain why the experience should be considered relevant. The Offeror shall specifically describe no less than two (2) complex components they have machined/manufactured, including where, when and with whom, and proof that the components were acceptable by the customer and Quality Assurance. Also, the Offeror shall describe the extent to which the Offeror and the

Offeror’s team members have worked with the DOD program and contracting teams. For each example, the contract number, title of the program and performance dates shall be provided, to include what was performed. The

Offeror shall provide and demonstrate experience with CSIs or CAIs and the necessary testing requirements including QCIs tests when manufacturing these items.

CAPABILITY

The Offeror shall demonstrate their ability to test and inspect components (Government Furnished Property (GFP)

GFP items exempted) to include those identified as CSI or CAI as outlined in applicable NAVAIR Drawings. The

CSI items will be used in a crucial shipboard system supporting the launch and/or recovery of aircraft. The use of incorrect or defective material would create a high probability of failure resulting in a serious personnel injury, loss of life, loss of vital shipboard systems, or loss of aircraft. Therefore, the material has been designated as Critical

Safety Item (CSI) and special control procedures are invoked to ensure receipt of correct material. The Offeror shall specify how they conduct the inspections (both final and interim) that are necessary to ensure components are manufactured in accordance with the technical data package received at time of delivery order.

The Offeror shall identify overall system and detailed factors necessary to achieve an effective manufacturing program. All aspects of production shall be addressed including: tooling, equipment and equipment calibration, training, manufacturing support, manufacturing documentation, production control, configuration management, quality assurance support, procurement, management tools, and oversight. The Offeror must provide a list of machinery available to support the upcoming NAVAIR requirements, to include at least 5 large CNC milling machines, 3-5 vertical CNC machines, 3-5 horizontal CNC machines, at least (2) two 5- axis machines with automatic tool changers and overhead crane with capacity up to 50,000 pounds.

The proposal shall include a detailed description of how the Offeror will manage (1) execution of work as outlined in MAC SOW (Attachment L-1); (2) coordinating with Government program and contracting teams; and (3) managing subcontractors.

The Offeror shall provide a written narrative describing the Offeror’s understanding of the capability necessary to perform the efforts required in the MAC SOW (Attachment L-1). The narrative shall address the Offeror’s plans for facilities (size and description), labor requirements, handling of GFP, troubleshooting failures, parts controls, required test equipment, machining equipment, and disassembly and assembly processes. The Offeror should cite facilities as necessary to ensure the Government of the Offeror’s capability of performance to include gauges, tools, fixtures, and jigs necessary to perform the highly complex machining.

The Offeror shall provide a written narrative describing the Offeror’s understanding of Coordinating with

Government Program and Contracting Teams, including DCMA coordination, Contract Data Requirements List

(CDRL) submittals, contract management, and technical meetings.

The Offeror shall describe a material strategy that demonstrates a capability to select the best-qualified sources to continuously deliver the requisite materials/processes in a timely manner. The Offeror shall explain the methodologies used to ensure that the parts/services supplied from outside sources meet all requirements.

3.0 VOLUME II - PAST PERFORMANCE

NOTE: THIS VOLUME SHALL NOT CONTAIN ANY REFERENCE TO PRICE.

The Government will evaluate this volume for the MAC evaluation only.

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, the Offeror’s principal subcontractors, and critical team members. Commercial contracts may be included. List the contracts from the most relevant to the least relevant. 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 fewer than 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, relevancy 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. Angela Slater, Contracts, at Email:

Angela.slater@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 Offeror shall ensure that all POCs are current and include an email address and phone number for each POC. The Government will ensure that the customers have received and will respond to the questionnaires.

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, Offerors shall 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.

1. Contractor name

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

3. Title of contract

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

5. Relevant Delivery/Task Order Numbers (if applicable)

6. Subcontract Number/PO Number

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

8. Description of product or service

9. Quantities procured

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

11. Place of performance

12. CAGE Code/ DUNs #

13. Dollar value of contract

14. Brief Work Description and/or Program Responsibility for this past contract.

15. Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) information

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

17. Identify the last CPARS completion date

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

19. Identify questionnaire sent (#1 CPARS Update Questionnaire or #2 Past Performance Questionnaire) and date(s) sent

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

21. Gov't PCO or Commercial Purchasing Agent: Name, Phone, Email mailto:Angela.slater@navy.mil

22. Gov't ACO: Name, Phone, Email

23. Gov't PM or Commercial PM: Name, Phone, Email

24. Other: Name, Phone, Email

(1) Relevancy: The Offeror shall explain what aspects of the contract are deemed relevant to this solicitation’s requirements. To demonstrate relevancy, Offerors should provide a comparative analysis to this solicitation’s requirements. Within the comparative analysis, Offerors should identify the relevant portions (sections, paragraphs and page numbers) of the referenced contract’s SOW to clearly identify how past tasks performed are similar to this solicitation’s requirements. The comparative analysis utilized to determine relevancy should show how similar the past performance contract reference is to this solicitation with regard to scope of effort

(consider Statement of Objective (SOO)/SOW/PWS tasks), magnitude of effort, and complexity (consider attributes of the work being performed such as type of effort, end product, frequency such as turn-around-time or delivery rate, number of sites, skills, processes, contract type, etc.). Also Offerors shall 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.

The following definitions are provided as guidance for relevancy:

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

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

Consider the following ground rules when performing the comparative analysis:

(2) The Offeror is advised that the Government will assess each contract and assign it as relevant or not relevant.

(3) Offerors are advised that contracts assessed as Not Relevant by the Government will not be considered in the Past Performance assessment. Contracts or the portion of those contracts submitted by the Offeror that meet any of the conditions below will be assessed as Not Relevant:

i. Contracts from an entity that does not have a defined role and responsibility identified in Table CA-1

(Offeror Summary);

ii. Contracts that involve little to none of the scope, magnitude of effort, and/or complexities required by this solicitation; or

iii. Contracts, or those portions of the contract, whose performance is more than 5 years from the proposal due date (If only a portion of a contract performance is more than 5 years, then only that portion is not relevant for reasons of recency).

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

(1) Technical Performance: meeting technical requirements or the quality of your technical performance (e.g., performing analysis, design, testing, etc.);

(2) Schedule Performance: meeting schedule requirements (e.g., on time or late delivery, modification of original schedules and reasons for any changes, etc.);

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

Also describe past problems, including when they occurred, what the circumstances were surrounding the situation, and what the consequences were as a result of the problem. Identify systemic improvement actions taken to resolve any past problems identified in Past Performance Information. Provide the records of such results and indicate where they are documented, preferably in Government record systems. Describe the techniques, elements, and tools used to correct problems on the contract and, if applicable, how these techniques, elements, and tools may be used for this contract. Provide quantifiable evidence or metrics that substantiate or demonstrate claims of improvement and demonstrate that the past problem will not occur on this contract.

It is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided and substantiate that improvements from past performance problems are being made. Demonstrated systemic improvement may be indicated by information as it relates to preventing recurrence of past problems, including: identification of the root cause of a problem, a corrective action plan that systemically addresses the past problem, how and when the plan was implemented, documented timeframe to demonstrate when corrective action was implemented and became successful; and performance data, preferably through Government records, to show performance improvements demonstrated systemic improvement. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to demonstrate that the problem(s) will not reoccur or the extent and the likelihood that reoccurrence is reduced.

4.0 VOLUME 3 – CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION (CA)

This volume shall state the proposal validity date of at least 180 days after proposal submission. The SF 33 Block

12 shall be filled out in accordance with this proposal validity date

The Offeror shall identify the solicitation number, enclosures being transmitted, and completed table CA-1. The CA volume shall be divided into the following sections and appendices:

4.1 OFFEROR REPRESENTATIVES AND INFORMATION

Additionally, a summary sheet, consisting of the information specified below for the entities identified in Table CA -

1 (Offeror Summary), is requested to facilitate proposal evaluation.

1. PRIME CONTRACTOR and

a. Name

b. Address including county

c. CAGE Code

d. DUNS Number

e. Size of Business

f. Principal POC for solicitation (Name, title, phone number, email)

g. Secondary POC for solicitation (Name, title, phone number, email)

h. Individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government and contractually bind the Offeror (Name, title, phone number, email)

i. Establishment Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN)

j. TIN of Parent Corporation (if applicable)

k. DCMA POC and telephone number and mailing address, telephone, number(s), fax number(s), email address and facility codes, if applicable

l. DCAA POC and telephone number and mailing address, telephone, number(s), fax number(s), email address and facility codes, if applicable

m. Defense Finance and Accounting Service(DFAS)

n. Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) at the cognizant DCMA

2. EACH SUBCONTRACTOR/DIVISION/TEAM MEMBER/AFFILIATE (if applicable)

a. Name

b. Address

c. CAGE Code

d. DUNS Number

e. Size of Business

f. DCMA POC and telephone number, if applicable

g. DCAA POC and telephone number, if applicable

4.2 TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Offerors shall not propose exceptions and deviations to the provisions of the solicitation.

An exception is where an Offeror states it will not comply with a solicitation requirement, usually involving contract terms and conditions. A deviation is where an Offeror states it will not comply with a solicitation requirement but proposes an alternative to meet the intent of the requirement, usually involving a Performance Based Work

Statement requirement. An exception or deviation is considered a deficiency.

4.3 THE COMPLETED SOLICITATION

The Offeror shall provide:

1. The original signed SF 33 for the basic solicitation and each amendment (as applicable) (including sections B-

K), and

2. Signed Representations, Certifications, and Acknowledgements (Section K) and System for Award

Management reference.

4.4 Table CA-1 Offeror Summary

Offeror Summary Table

(1) The Offeror shall complete Table CA-1 (Offeror Summary) formatted as necessary, provided below, according to the instructions within the attachment and submit it within this section and as a separate electronic file. This table summarizes the Offeror’s proposed type and level of work, indicating its

Technical and management approach which may be considered in the Technical evaluation.

(2) The Offeror shall provide a written explanation if multiple CAGE codes/ Data Universal Numbering

System (DUNS) code for the same physical location appearing in in Table CA-1 (Offeror Summary). The written explanation shall detail the distinct roles and responsibilities for entities with different CAGE codes/DUNS at the same physical location for where the work is being performed or from where the work is being directed. The description shall include all changes in the organization as a result of a corporate acquisition, reorganization, merger, or other administrative reason.

Note: Place of Performance for this solicitation pertains to the physical location of the prime, all subcontractors, and JV team members who will perform the work.

CA-1 Offeror Summary Table

Offeror:

Contractor Name Place of Performance CAGE

Codes/DUNs

Work Description

e. Terms & Conditions, Assumptions, (if proposed)

The Offeror shall provide a summary of the significant assumptions and Terms and Conditions, addressed in

Volume 3.

f. Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), and Defense

Finance and Accounting Service

SECTION L ATTACHMENT 1

CPARS UPDATE QUESTIONNAIRE

The information in this questionnaire is being requested as part of a proposal response to Solicitation Number:

N68335-19-R-0030. Within 2 weeks from receipt of this questionnaire return this form to Ms. Angela Slater, Contracts Specialist, at Angela.slater@navy.mil or

Contracts Department, Route 547, B562-3C

Attn: Angela Slater

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______

mailto:Angela.slater@navy.mil

SECTION L ATTACHMENT 2

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

The information in this questionnaire is being requested as part of a proposal response to Solicitation Number:

N68335-19-R-0030. The information in this questionnaire is being requested as part of a proposal response. Within

2 weeks from receipt of this questionnaire return this form to Ms. Angela Slater, Contracts Specialist, at

Angela.Slater@navy.mil or

Contracts Department, Route 547, B562-3C

Attn: Angela Slater

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.

Manufactured item in accordance with technical data package

Provided material, and milling certifications

In –process inspection documentation

Inspection reports for adherence to major and minor dimensions

__ Item considered a CSI/CAI Component

4. PERFORMANCE LEVELS

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

mailto:Angela.Slater@navy.mil

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 some contractual requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed reflects a serious problem for which the contractor has not yet identified corrective actions. The contractor’s proposed actions appear only marginally effective or were not fully implemented.

Unsatisfactory - Performance does not meet most contractual requirements and recovery is not likely in a timely manner. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element contains serious problem(s) for which the contractor’s corrective actions appear or were ineffective.

4.2 QUESTIONS

4.2.1: TECHNICAL DESIGN, TEST AND LOGISTICS PERFORMANCE

a. What kind of technical design, test or logistics performance problems or strengths were experienced by the contractor?

b. What was the cause of these problems or strengths?

c. Have corrective actions been taken and have they been effective?

d. Overall, the contractor's technical performance is rated ________________________.

4.2.2: SCHEDULE PERFORMANCE

a. What kinds of delivery/schedule problems or strengths were experienced by the contractor?

b. What was the cause of these delivery/schedule problems or strengths?

c. Have corrective actions been taken and have they been effective?

d. Overall, the contractor's delivery/schedule performance is rated _________________.

4.2.3: PROGRAM MANAGEMENT AND OTHER MANAGEMENT

a. To what extent does the contractor identify and apply resources to meet program requirements and communicate appropriate information in a timely manner?

b. What were the contractor’s risk management practices (identify and mitigate risks)?

c. If applicable, identify and provide information on the contractor’s ability to transition from design to test phases of an effort, and/or from test to manufacturing.

d. Overall, the contractor's management performance is rated____________________.

4.2.4. OTHER. Is there any other information regarding this acquisition that you think would be helpful to our evaluation? If so, please explain.

4.3 SUMMARY: If you had the option, knowing what you know today, would you (pick one), 1) definitely would not, 2) probably would not, 3) might, 4) might not, 5) probably would, 6) definitely would award this contract to this contractor, given the choice? Please explain.

(End of Summary of Changes)