16-R-0029_RFP_Amendment_3.docx

N68936-16-R-0029

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been added by full text:

AMENDMENT 3 INDUSTRY QUESTIONS

1. Industry requests Site Visit in accordance with FAR Clause 52.237-1 Site Visit.

ANSWER: NAWCWD Contracts has received a request for site visit of workspaces at China Lake, CA and Point Mugu, CA. In accordance with FAR 52.237-1 NAWCWD Contracts is preparing a general tour of facilities at these two locations. No access to Government or contractor employees will be permitted during the tour.

SDVOSBs seeking to participate in this site visit event will need to submit Form SECNAV_5512/1, and NAWCWD Badge Request Form no later than Tuesday 16 MAY 2017. Submit completed forms to Joel.Ashworth@navy.mil.

Site Visits will be conducted at Point Mugu, CA Thursday May 25th and at China Lake, CA Friday May 26th with additional information to follow.

2. May offerors add T&M to the “Contract Type” pull-down options on the Past Performance Information Form?

ANSWER: Yes

3. The Answer to question 36 states that offerors shall propose the level of effort as listed in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.7.1. The answer to question 37 states that the Government has provided hours for three FTEs in the Key Personnel labor category and believes the requirements could be achieved with either two or three FTEs. Each offeror shall determine the personnel they believe necessary for contract performance.

The answers to questions 36 and 37 seem to contradict each other. Is it the Government’s intent that the offerors shall bid the LOE as provided exactly or determine personnel necessary for performance?

If the key personnel requirements can be achieved with either two or three FTEs, this seems to imply that either 1.) Offerors may deviate from the LOE provided in 3.7.1 and propose only two FTEs or 2.) Offerors can determine that only 2 of the FTEs in the General and Operations Manager labor category are key and must still propose hours for three FTEs. Can you please clarify?

ANSWER: Yes to #2. Offerors shall submit price/cost information as instructed in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.3.

Industry Question #37 in Amendment 01 specifically refers to an offeror’s approach to management of Key Personnel.

Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.7.2 identifies 3 roles which the Government believes are Key Positions in executing a successful contract.

1. Chief Engineer,

2. Program Manager,

3. Deputy/Local Organization Manager

Each of these roles is covered under the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) for General and Operations Manager. The Government recognizes that some companies may elect to propose an individual person for each of the Key Roles. The Government also recognizes some offeror’s business strategy and management approach may determine greater efficiency by having one person assume two of the three Key Roles identified in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 1, paragraph 1.3 & Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.7.2. The Government does not prefer one strategy over the other and each offeror should support their position regarding Key Roles/Positions identifying their strategy, whom will perform what roles, and how the offeror’s strategy/management approach will benefit the Government.

4. Please clarify the substitution for levels of education and experience.

Section 6.2 and 6.3 of the Government RFP seem vague and may be interpreted to mean that the substitution applies only to the education portion of the qualifications (and not the years of experience). If this is the correct interpretation it would mean that the minimum qualifications are not Journeyman = BS + 3 or AS + 6, and Sr = MS + 10 or BS + 12, but instead are Journeyman = BS + 3 or AS + 9, and Sr = MS + 10 or BS + 22.

Please clarify if the substitution replaces only the education portion or both the education and the experience.

ANSWER: Request for Proposal (RFP) Section C. Statement of Work (SOW) paragraph 6.2 defines the requirements necessary for each level of experience. Each level of experience (Junior, Journeyman, Senior, Subject Matter Expert) also identifies what educational requirements are necessary in conjunction with experience to qualify. The Government’s intent is Journeyman = BS + 3 or AS + 6, and Sr = MS + 10 or BS + 12

The following have been modified:

Amendment 02 INDUSTRY QUESTIONS

1. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; what aircraft have recently been used as part of ESSM testing, and in what phases?

Answer: The Raytheon Convair aircraft is being used to support the ESSM Block 2 Captive Carry tests for Engineering and Manufacturing Development.

2. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; Has SDTS been used in ESSM testing, and in what phase?

Answer: The Self Defense Test Ship (SDTS) was used for the ESSM Block 1 E&MD, Demonstration Test/ Operational Testing (DT/OT), and Follow-On Test & Evaluation (FOT&E) test phases. The SDTS will also be used for ESSM Block 2 E&MD, and DT/OT test phases.

3. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; in the Technical Sample Task, reference is made for a trip to Portsmouth, VA. Did the government intend for this to be Portsmouth, RI? If this is a trip to Portsmouth, VA, is this a required trip to Raytheon? Please Clarify.

Answer: The Government intended this to be RIDS at Portsmouth, RI.

4. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; the Labor mix stated in the sample task calls for a mix of 5 Engineer Scientists and one Technician. If the offeror believes the effort can be completed with different labor mix, will the government accept a justification and rational for the deviation/recommendation? Is this labor mix based on historical tasking of the labor categories mentioned, or a level of competence desired by the government?

Answer: The Government will consider a different labor mix if so proposed with rationale. This labor mix is based upon both the historical tasking and the desired level of competence.

5. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; does the government intend for the ESSM Mod to focus on air launched offensive Anti Surface Warfare (OASuW)?” consider “Clarify the roles and relationships of ESSM with regard to OASuW?”

Answer: OASuW is a very limited subset of the operational requirements for the ESSM. Paragraph 3.1.4 should have referenced support for the ESSM Technical Program Office (TPO).

6. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; is the target set both for Land Based and Sea based?

Answer: The ESSM target set could be either Land Based or Sea based.

7. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; is the T&E effort support a demonstration program with a transition to a full Program of Record? (PoR)

Answer: There are Test and Evaluation activities ongoing for both the fielded ESSM Block 1 missile, and the ESSM Block 2 in E&MD.

8. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; one of the reference documents is a training plan, so is the government expecting offerors to review this sample training plan for completeness and make recommendations for that plan, or is the government expecting a full training plan to be developed by the offeror.

Answer: The Government expects that the awardee of the contract may be given tasking to develop and/or aid in the development of training plans / classes.

9. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; are the trips to various facilities (Tyndall, Portsmouth, and Tucson) for meetings with the Manufacturer, or for Test events? Or, are the trips for both meetings and test events?

Answer: The trips can be for either engineering interchange meetings, or to support test events.

Amendment 01 INDUSTRY QUESTIONS

1. Question: SF 33, Block 9 indicates that the proposal is due 29 May 2017, which falls under U.S federal holiday, Memorial Day, and is considered a non-business day. We request that the submission is extended to the next business day, 30 May 2017.

a. The Government will extend the RFP response date to 30 MAY 2017.

2. Question: Will there be a wage determination sheet for Patuxent River, Maryland?

a. The Government will provide an additional Wage Determination for Saint Mary’s County, MD. Attachment 1 in Section J changed from GFP to Wage Determination for Saint Mary’s County, MD.

3. Question: Exhibit A lists CDRL A00E “Incurred Cost and Progress Reporting; however, this data requirement is not listed in the SOW.

a. CDRL A00E will be removed from Exhibit A in another amendment.

4. Question: Since Point Mugu and Patuxent River are listed as anticipated travel locations can it be assumed that there is no contractor facility requirement at these two locations. This aligns with 4.1.2.1 facility location.

a. The only facility requirement an offeror is required to provide is at China Lake, CA in accordance with SOW at 4.1.2.1.

5. Question: CDRL A002 listed is actually the Contractor Personnel Roster. The CDRL does not reference this para (4.11).

a. There is NO SOW paragraph 4.11. CDRL A002 “Contractor Personnel Roster” is listed in SOW paragraphs 3.0 and 4.7. Please ensure offerors are viewing the most current RFP.

6. Question: There was no DD 254 attached as Attachment 3 as noted under Section J – List of Attachments. Are they going to attach one before the RFP is due.

a. Offerors should note that sensitive/secure information, such as the DD254, is listed as an attachment to the RFP in a secure section requiring additional login. Additional instructions listed in help section of FBO.gov.

7. Question: The labor category Administrative Assistant is actually a Personnel Assistant (Employment) III as listed in the SCLS Occupational Title – The occupational code (01263) also refers to a Personnel Assistant (Employment) III.

a. The Government will revise the SCLS Code for Administrative Assistant to 01020. This code is listed in the RFP Section C SOW paragraph 6.4.

8. Question: How will Government Furnished Equipment/Property (GFE/GFP) be assigned? Basic Contract or Task Order Level?

a. At this time the contract does not contain any GFE/GFP, and all GFE/GFP originally provided under the solicitation will be removed from Section J herein to reflect this fact. However, if at any time GFE/GFP is required as a part of the contract's level of effort GFE/GFP will be assigned at the Task Order level and incorporated at the Basic Contract Level.

9. Question: NAVAIR Clause 5252.209-9513 Paragraph (e) appears to reference a list of suppliers and/or equipment – will the Government be providing this list and incorporating it as an Attachment?

a. The language in this section is referring to GFE/GFP. At this time no GFE/GFP exists on the contract.

10. Question: NAVAIR Clause 5252.209-9510 Paragraph (c) appears to reference a list of suppliers and/or equipment – will the Government be providing this list and incorporating it as an Attachment?

a. The language in this section is referring to GFE/GFP. At this time no GFE/GFP exists on the contract.

11. Question: The Government lists “NATO SEASPARROW training curriculum/presentation material” under 2.0 Applicable Documents in Attachment L-1 “Technical Sample Task”. Is the “Evolved SEASPARROW training material” provided in Attachment L-1A the applicable documents which the Government is referencing in section 2.0 of the Technical Sample Task or will there be a separate document uploaded?

a. The NATO SEASPARROW training curriculum/presentation material listed under 2.0 of Attachment L-1 Technical Sample Task and the EVOLVED SEASPARROW training material provided in Attachment L-1A is one in the same.

12. Question: Attachment L-2 “Technical Sample Task Estimate” does not identify Program Manager hours. How does the offeror address management and oversight for the sample task order and subsequent task orders?

a. Attachment L-2 does not preclude any offeror from proposing Program Management hours. The Government seeks to understand an offeror's process for determining the Level of Effort (LOE) necessary to support a given requirement such as the Technical Sample Task.

13. Question: For the Technical Sample Task; are the trips to various facilities (Tyndall, Portsmouth, and Tucson) for meetings with the Manufacturer, or for Test events? Or, are the trips for both meetings and test events?

a. Offerors shall regard travel listed in Attachment L-1 Technical Sample Task and Attachment L-2 Technical Sample Task Estimate for the purpose of various reviews and meetings.

14. Question: The Attachment L-3 format as a fillable PDF limits the amount of data that may be presented on 2-pages. May a Microsoft Word document be used for this form if all fields are represented?

a. The Government has no objection to converting Attachment L-3 to MS Word so long as no information in Attachment L-3 is neither omitted or added from the template. Offerors opting to convert Attachment L-3 to MS Word for the purpose of providing additional information must first convert their completed form into Adobe prior to proposal submission.

15. Question: The Attachment L-4 contains a header labeled “Attachment L-3”. Will the Government revise Attachment L-4’s header to read Attachment L-4?

a. The Government will revise the header in Attachment L-4.

16. Question: Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire (CPAQ) instructions ask the assessing official to sign the completed form however the form does not provide signature placeholder/location. Which page does the government desire to signature to be placed?

a. PCOs, ACOs, and Program Managers are familiar with CPAQs and may place their signature on either page after their write-up.

17. Question: Does the government want the sample task order pricing added as a separate of attachment L-5, or as a separate attachment in volume 3?

a. Please see instructions in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.5. Offerors shall provide their pricing to Attachment L-1 and Attachment L-2 as a separate attachment in contractor format.

18. Question: The spreadsheet mentions SeaPort-e pass-through, but the RFP is not under SeaPort-e. Is this relevant to the current procurement?

a. SeaPort-e is not relevant to this procurement and Offerors shall disregard row 59 in Attachment L-5 “Cost Summary Spreadsheet”.

19. Question: Please provide clarification to what information the Government is seeking in Attachment L-6?

a. Attachment L-6 has been revised to only require disclosure of any individual personnel whose annual fully burdened labor rate proposed is over $300,000. In accordance with this change, SECTION L 3.0 VOLUME 3: PRICE/COST PROPOSAL, 3.3 Price/Cost Information have been updated.

20. Question: NAVAIR Clause 5252.228-9501 requires offerors to provide $200,000 in liability insurance for aircraft liability. The FAR states that this is only a requirement if aircraft are being used. Will the Government include this language so that this insurance will only be required if aircraft are being used.

a. The Government will revise the section of NAVAIR clause 5252.228.9501 relating to aircraft liability to N/A.

21. Question: “Principal subcontractor” is defined as providing 20% of the proposed total cost for the contract, or provides one or more Key Personnel. Section L, Page 96, 2.1 cites “no more than three forms for each principal subcontractor”. Request this be changed to “no more than three forms for each subcontractor” to allow submission of Past Performance Information Forms for subcontractors that do not meet the definition of principal subcontractor, but are providing key niche past performance and capabilities on the Offeror’s team.

a. The Government will revise the definition of Principle Subcontractor in Section L-1, Part A, paragraph 1.0 to include “is so integral to an offeror’s business strategy that exclusion from Past Performance evaluation would significantly weaken an offerors proposal”.

22. Question: Request confirmation that the portions of final versions of previous SOWs refers only to extracting and submitting the task Lists in those SOWs. For submitted IDIQ Past Performance, do we include SOW portions for both the ID/IQ SOW and for any work performed under awarded task orders referenced in the ID/IQ Past Performance Information Form?

a. The Government requests offerors provide the relevant portions of final versions of previous SOWs, in accordance with Section L-1, Part A, paragraph 3.0, which they feel best supports their past performance.

23. Question: Section L-1, Part A, paragraph 1.0 provides that all questions be received within 10 calendar days of the date this solicitation is issued. Would the government please consider an additional timeframe to accept questions – or possibly update to 10 working calendar days to allow for additional time?

a. Offeror’s may submit questions until 5:00 PM PST, 10 MAY 2017.

24. Question: The Offeror shall submit no more than five forms as the Prime Contractor, no more than three forms for each principal subcontractor, and/or no more than three forms for each JV team member. Can the Offeror submit past performance for subcontractors that are not defined as a “Principal Subcontractor”?

a. Offerors shall only submit past performance for Principal Subcontractors. See, question #24.

25. Question: Does the government have an estimate of the amount and/or frequency of task orders to be issued?

a. The current Engineering Support Services (ESS) contract maintains approximately 50 task orders at any given time.

26. Question: Is it the intention of the government to fully fund the 3 key positions concurrent with contract award?

a. The Government will not fully fund any of the key personnel through a single task order.

27. The RFP Level 3 headings in 1.1 Technical Sample Task and 1.3 Management Plan is inconsistent. The level 3 heading in the Technical Sample Task is a number, whereas the level 3 heading for the Management Plan is a letter. For ease and consistency of one-on-one comparison between the information presented in the offeror’s proposal and the proposal instructions, we request that the ESS RFP Solicitation section L.1.1.1 is renumbered to L.1.1.a.

a. The Government will revise heading to align with the rest of Section L’s configuration.

28. Section 3.6 is not included in the numerically ascending headings. Can the Government confirm that there is not any pertinent information that is missing from this section?

a. The Government confirms there is no Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.6. The Government will revise Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3 to add paragraph 3.6 as Reserved.

29. Question: There is a discrepancy between 30 days and 45 days for transition period in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 1, paragraph 1.3(c) Transition.

a. The Government will revise Section L-1, Part B, Volume 1, paragraph 1.3(c) to specify 30 days.

30. Question: Request the Government remove evaluation requirement for transition out plan under Section L-1, Part B, Volume 1, paragraph 1.3(c) Transition.

a. The Government will remove the Transition Out evaluation element from Section L-1, Part B, Volume 1, paragraph 1.3(c) Transition.

31. Question: The RFP states, “It is requested that Volume 2 Past Performance be submitted 14 days prior to the submission date specified in Block 9 of the SF 33 of the RFP.” Please confirm that the Past Performance volume may be submitted along with the other volumes on May 29 (current due date). Since the word requested was used, it appears offerors are only be asked for an earlier submission and that this is not a requirement to submit Past Performance within 14 days.

a. It is a request and not a requirement.

32. Question: Can the Government please clarify how past performance citations that feature work as a subcontractor are going to be evaluated? Will the Government use CPARs as an evaluation method for subcontracting work or should a Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire (CPAQ) be completed?

a. The Government will evaluate principal subcontractors as defined in Section L-1, Part A, paragraph 1.0 in the same manner as the offeror with the exception that principal subcontractors will be a contributing factor to the Primes overall Past Performance evaluation.

33. Question: Does the Government require Subcontractors to submit either the SF33 signed or a completed Section B? RFP says subs are to provide the same information as the prime for the price/cost proposal Do subcontractors submit fully disclosed packages simultaneously with prime?

a. Subcontractors will not sign an SF33 or competed section B. The note under Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3 that “Subcontractors proposed shall provide the same information required for the prime contractor, unless otherwise noted below” will be moved to under Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.3 for Price/Cost Information.

34. Question: The RFP requires offerors guarantee proposal validity for at least 180 days under Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.1(a)(iv). There are 245 days from submission to estimated award date, can the government please clarify if they intend to award earlier than the 1/29/2018 estimates award date listed in 5252.215-9503 ANTICIPATED AWARD DATE (NAVAIR)(FEB 1995)?

a. The Government requires offerors guarantee proposal validity for at least 180 days.

35. Question: The Limitation on Subcontracting under Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.3(g) states that the 50% SDVOSB calculation is done utilizing personnel costs that are inclusive of direct labor costs, overhead that has only direct labor as its base, and G&A multiplied by the labor cost. This does not account for all of the indirect rates applied to labor as part of most standard accounting practices. Is it possible to update the wording as follows: “Cost of contract incurred for personnel includes direct labor cost, overhead that has only direct labor as its base, fringe, if applicable, and the SDVOSBs General and Administrative rate multiplied by the labor cost”?

a. This language will not be revised.

36. Question: Concerning the Direct Labor Hour Level-of-Effort tables provided in Section L (page 102 of 112), does the government anticipate that any of the listed hours include overtime or surge?

a. Offerors shall propose to the level of effort as listed in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.7.1.

37. Question: Please clarify if the Chief Engineer and Program Manager are to be executed as one or two separate personnel? On page 94, paragraph (2), the Government lists the functional areas separately. On page 95, paragraph (5), the positions are listed as what appears to be one functional role. On page 102, the applicable labor category, General and Operations Managers, notes that there are three (3) FTE work years. Please confirm our interpretation of the government’s requirement is correct: General and Operations Manager #1: Program Manager, General and Operations Manager #2: Chief Engineer, General and Operations Manager #3: Deputy/Local Operations Manager?

a. The Government has provided enough hours for three FTEs and believes the Key Personnel requirement in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.7.2 could be achieved with either two or three FTEs. Each offeror shall determine the personnel they believe necessary for contract performance and support their rationale in the proposal’s Technical Volume.

38. Question: RFP Section C, SOW Para 4.1.1 indicates that approximately 88% of the total level of effort is performed on-site at China Lake, Point Mugu, or Patuxent River and approximately 12% is off-site in support of efforts in the same locations. It further indicates that a total of approx. 70% is at China Lake, 26% is at Point Mugu, and 4% is at Patuxent River. Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.3 states that the offeror shall propose the labor categories and labor hours provided in Attachment L-5. Since Attachment L-5 provided with the RFP contains no labor categories – please confirm that offerors are to fill in Attachment L-5 using the labor categories provided in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.7 Government Furnished Information (GFI)? GFI Section 3.7.1 Labor Hours does not indicate which labor categories or hours should be proposed for each of the locations listed in RFP Section C, or which labor categories are on-site vs off-site. As pricing differs according to location and/or site, please advise how the Government intends offerors to propose the location and site for positions and hours provided?

a. The Government will revise Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.3 to specify offerors shall propose, utilizing Attachment L-5, the Labor Categories and labor hours provided in paragraph 3.7.1 of this volume in conjunction with percentages identified in RFP Section C SOW paragraph 4.1.1. Offerors shall utilize the percentages: 70% China Lake, 26% Point Mugu, and 4% Patuxent River as if all work will be conducted on-site.

a. The Government response to Question #38 is hereby changed for the purpose of proposal and evaluation to revise Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.3 to specify offerors shall propose, utilizing Attachment L-5, the Labor Categories and labor hours provided in paragraph 3.7.1 of this volume AS IF ALL WORK WILL BE CONDUCTED ON-SITE AT CHINA LAKE, CA.

39. Question: Are the rates for the Subject Matter Expert (SMEs) exclusive of indirects and fee?

a. Offerors shall use the following SME level of effort direct labor rates for FY2018 and provide escalation as applicable to each offeror’s accounting practice as instructed in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.3(c ).

40. Question: Section L-1, Part B, Volume 1, paragraph 1.3(d)(3) asks offerors to describe the process that will be used to determine the complexity and variety of the work small businesses are to perform, and the process that will be used to ensure maximum practicable participation of small businesses for each task order. Given that ESS is an SDVOSB set-aside and the prime contractor is required to maintain a minimum of 50% of the work to be performed, we request that items 3a and 3b listed above be removed from the solicitation?

a. The Government will remove Section L-1, Part B, Volume 1, paragraph 1.3(d)(3).

41. Question: Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.3(a) discusses traceability. Because there is only (1) labor CLIN listed in the solicitation what level of traceability does the government want to show traceability with the CLINS, SubCLINs, the SOW, proposed effort, proposed manning levels, and the prices/costs.

a. The Government asks offerors to ensure all elements in an offerors cost proposal are traceable to the CLINS, level of effort, and work established in Section C of the RFP. The Government will remove language specifying SubCLINs as no SubCLINs exist at this time.

42. Question: Section L-1, Part A, paragraph 3.0 asks offerors to provide electronic copies of previous SOWs (column 2) and hard copies of each SOW (column 4), can the government please clarify if electronic or hard copies are desired?

a. The Government will revise the table to remove the note in Annex A. for offerors to provide electronic copies only.

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

L – 1 CONTENT OF PROPOSALS (SERVICES)

PART A GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 GENERAL

The Offeror must respond to all requirements of the solicitation and not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The Offeror is advised that the Government may incorporate any portions of the Offeror’s proposal into the resulting 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 shall be emphasized during proposal preparation. Statements that the prospective Offeror understands, can comply with, or will comply with, the specifications, and paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof without supporting information are considered inadequate by the Government, and may result in assessing weaknesses and/or deficiencies.

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 clearly may be considered a deficiency. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

The Government advises the Offeror that taking exception or deviating from any term or condition of the RFP may result in the assessment of a deficiency to the proposal.

Throughout these instructions, a “principal subcontractor” is defined as a subcontractor used to meet the offeror’s Limitation on Subcontracting and Notice of Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business Set-Aside in accordance with FAR 52.219-14 and FAR 52.219-27 respectively, or who provides at least 20% of the proposed total price/cost (excluding the Offeror’s profit/fee) for the contract, is so integral to an offeror’s business strategy that exclusion from Past Performance evaluation would weaken an offerors proposal, or provides one or more Key Personnel. “JV Team member” is defined as one of the entities that make up a joint venture (JV) formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation.

Questions: Offerors may submit questions requesting clarification of solicitation requirements by emailing the contract specialist at joel.ashworth@navy.mil. Offerors may submit questions until 5:00 PM PST 17 MAY 2017.

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 they must not exceed 11 x 17 inches and will be counted as 1 page. 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 1 page. Graphs shall be presented in no smaller than a 10 pt. font and should contain a grid, which allows values to be read directly from the graph to the same accuracy that a 10 x 10 to the ½ inch grid provides. Graphic resolution, including such data as tables or charts, should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented.

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES

The Offeror must present proposal information in a manner that facilitates a one-to-one comparison between the information presented and this Proposal Instruction. Proposal information must be structured such that its Volume/paragraph number matches the Proposal Instructions Volume/paragraph number provided in section “Part B Specific Instructions” to which it is responding, although the Offeror may add lower tier subparagraphs. The Offeror must provide reasons it will not provide information for a particular paragraph. The proposal information instructions are structured by paragraph numbers where first, second, third, and fourth parts correspond to the volume, book, section, and element, etc., in the Offeror’s proposal.

Each volume of the proposal shall be submitted as one original and additional copies as specified in the table below. The table below supersedes the copies requested in Block 9 of the Standard Form (SF) 33. All volumes of the original proposal 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 are also specified in the table below; title and table of contents pages do not count towards page limit. Any pages submitted exceeding the page limit shall be disregarded and NOT evaluated.

Information submitted as an Annex to the proposal includes manuals, specifications, plans, procedures, and policies that exist as an official document of the company or facility, as well as other information requested in Part B Specific Instructions. Page limitations for Annexes are specified below. The authorized Annexes are summarized in the table below.

Each volume shall contain the following information:

The Offeror shall submit a Cross Reference Matrix (CRM) for the Technical Volume, similar to the example below, to help ensure that all solicitation requirements are addressed and to facilitate the evaluators’ review of the Offeror’s proposal. The CRM should be a single integrated matrix and cross-reference the proposal volumes and paragraphs to specific RFP requirements, as well as other parts of the proposal that contain relevant information. The Offeror’s CRM may be identical to the example below or revised such as to add columns to indicate the page number on which information may be found, identify where other relevant information in the proposal is located, or provide other comments. The CRM does not count against any of the proposal page limitations.

EXAMPLE OF A CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX (CRM)

Note: This column shall address all paragraphs in Sections xx and xy of the SOWS.

Volume 1 Technical

Volume 1 Technical

The following is a list of Section L Attachments that the Offeror shall utilize to provide information for this volume:

4.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION:

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 Standard Form 33 of the RFP. However it is requested that Volume 2 Past Performance information be submitted ten (10) days prior to the submission date 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.

Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division Code: 254130D (Blaine Ashworth) 429 E. Bowen Rd. Mailstop 4015 China Lake, CA 93555-6108 Solicitation Number: N68936-16-R-0029

Hand carried proposals may be delivered to the address above, attention J. Blaine Ashworth.

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 submitted as part of Volume 3 Cost/Price.

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 notice of any changes and additional information provided by the Government for this solicitation please go to www.FedBizOpps.gov.

PART B SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL

Note: Cost or pricing information shall not appear in this volume.

The Offeror shall provide all information and data required to conduct a thorough and complete technical evaluation. Throughout the Technical Volume the Offeror should identify any proposed capability, approach, or feature that reduces risk inherent in the program. The Offeror shall address the following in the proposal:

1.1 Technical Sample Task

1.2 Key Personnel

1.3 Management Plan

1.1 Technical Sample Task

The Offeror shall answer as instructed in paragraph (a) in accordance with Attachment L-1 Technical Sample Task, and Attachment L-1A Technical Sample Task Applicable Document. The Level of Effort (LOE) includes the Government's estimate of labor hours, labor mix, and ODC's. The contractor shall complete Attachment L-2 by providing proposed direct and indirect rates in accordance with instructions at Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.5 of this solicitation. Do NOT include cost in this volume.

(a) The offeror’s response to Attachment L-1, Technical Sample Task, shall include the following information and outline below:

Team – Attachment L-1 has identified the Technical Personnel believed necessary to perform the requirements. The offeror shall identify any additional contractor team members that need to participate in the effort; and if applicable, describe the roles and responsibilities of any subcontractors, and/or JV team members required to perform the work.

Assumptions – Detail all assumptions (as applicable) relative to the sample task and your technical approach to ensure full understanding of your response by the Government.

Technical Approach – Provide a detailed description of the technical approach including a step-by-step procedure and methodology which would be used in accomplishing the task.

Performance Risk Analysis – Identify contingent events inherent to the nature of the effort that could, if they were to occur, endanger satisfactory performance. Focus on critical events that are realistically likely to occur and that would pose serious problems (do not try to identify every event that could cause some minor difficulty). Provide a contractor mitigation plan for events identified.

Work Breakdown Structure/Integrated Master Schedule – Provide a detailed schedule of events and briefly describe each activity with its inputs and outputs and the interrelationships and interdependencies among the activities.

Models & Tools – Identify the models and / or other tools that would be utilized to perform the task.

Identify process to track progress towards completion of task.

Reports – Provide a list of recommended reports(s) to document the task.

LOE – The LOE and ODC estimate is provided in Attachment L-2.

Management Approach – Describe the process, procedures, and approach to managing OT, travel, and materials purchasing. Briefly describe the Offeror’s methodology to allocate overhead functions, such as management, payroll, personnel, and finance etc. consistent with Offeror’s Management Plan, Paragraph 1.3(a) 2.

1.2 Key Personnel & Functional Positions

Resumes will not count against page count limitations identified in Section L-1, Part A; paragraph 3.0.

(a) Resumes. For all current, prospective, or contingent Key Personnel identified in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.7.2, provide a resume of the work assignments, training, etc., which demonstrates the experience and specialized qualifications of each key position proposed.

The Government may check educational background to verify degrees or certifications received.

If the qualification (i.e. education, experience) does not readily or easily compare to the minimum qualification stated in the SOW the offeror shall provide an explanation as to the equality of the proposed qualification to meet the minimum qualification. Definitions and additional instructions for prospective and contingent may be found in Section L, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.3c.

1.3 Management Plan

Offerors shall address the following:

(a) Management:

(1) An overview of its proposed organization, including an organizational chart showing interfaces, locations, and lines of communication among the Government, the Prime, and its subcontractors. Specifically show where the proposed Key Personnel are located in the organizational chart and their lines of reporting and authority. Also specifically show how proposed lines of responsibility, authority, and communication throughout the tasks will be managed.

(2) A description of the duties and responsibilities for contract support personnel to be employed on this contract, and how the offeror plans to manage the following contract support functions/activities. Contract support personnel may either support a single or multiple functions, and offerors should identify those functions, if any, where a single individual will support multiple functions.

The offeror should specify whether the personnel supporting specific functions will be charged direct or indirect and justify the benefit to the Government. Offerors shall provide the employee location, education, years of experience, and description of work experience for each individual proposed in their management strategy for contract support functions.

The list below is provided as an example of functions historically necessary for successful contract performance and offerors are encouraged to propose in accordance with their business practice and strategy. The list below is not inclusive of all positions an offeror may employ in their management strategy. As it relates to this contract, the Government considers only those positions listed in Section L-1, Part B, Volume 3, paragraph 3.7.2 as Key Personnel.

a. General Operations Manager (Chief Engineer, Program Manager, and Deputy/Local Organization Manager)*

b. Financial Manager

c. Contract Administration

d. Cost Accounting

e. Task Order Processing

f. Task Order Reporting

g. Subcontracting

h. Personnel/Human Resources

i. Facilities Security Officer

j. Property Administration

(3) A description of the offeror’s corporate management and resources to support the technical requirements of the solicitation and ability to function as a viable and productive provider of contracted services to the Government.

(4) The offeror’s internal management and financial reporting system. The offeror should provide enough detail to determine whether the offeror will have sufficient, timely accounting information to manage the contract at the task order level. The offeror should specifically address the capability to track and invoice the costs at the sub-task level and identify to what level of the work breakdown structure within each task order’s costs can be tracked and reported.

Moving indirect charges to direct does not necessarily improve efficiency or reduce cost to the Government, and Cost Realism analysis may reflect such cost. If any individual performing an indirect function will charge direct, identify the technical task to be performed and justify the benefit to the Government of direct charges and the percentage time to be charged direct. Offerors should note insufficient detail supporting their use of direct charging may constitute an area of risk to the Government.

(5) Describe the role of the General Operations Manager (Chief Engineer/Program Manager/Deputy Local Operations Manager) in product/process quality and how these functions are accommodated in the acquisition of overhead structures.

(6) Describe procedures to be taken to ensure quality and cost control.

(7) Discuss an offeror’s process or procedures for early identification and resolution of problems, identification of potential performance risks, and proposed risk mitigation strategies;

(b) Staffing: The Offeror shall address the following:

(1) Describe the processes used in hiring, recruiting, retaining, and training personnel throughout the life of the contract. Address if the Offeror intends to hire the incumbent personnel, percentage, and process for determining their rate of pay and benefits.

(2) Describe the approach for providing workforce improvements, upgrading skills of motivated personnel, and preserve technical competence within the workforce essential in performing tasks detailed in the SOW.

(3) If the offeror chooses to deviate from the government estimated labor mix, the offeror shall provide justification/rationale for the variance that addresses why the offeror’s proposed labor mix and related technical approach should be considered suitable to ensure successful performance of tasking requirements.

(c) Transition Plan: The Offeror shall address the following:

Transition In – The services under this solicitation are vital to the Government and must be continued without interruption. The Offeror is required to submit a written narrative delineating a transition plan based on a 30 day period after award that ensures a smooth workplace changeover from an incumbent with no loss of service as described in 3.7.2 labor hours and mix below, and minimal loss of corporate knowledge. The plan should take into consideration the following elements as well as any additional elements deemed necessary by the Offeror:

(1) Subcontracts: The offeror shall provide a plan of action to ensure that all subcontracts are signed within the 30 day transition period.

(2) Incoming Personnel: The offeror shall provide a plan of action to ensure that all personnel are able to complete their work duties within the 30 day transition period.

(3) Quality Assurance: The offeror shall provide a plan of action to ensure continuation of quality review processes during the transition period from the incumbent to the successful offeror.

(4) Training: The offeror shall provide a plan of action to implement personnel training needed during the transition period to ensure continuity between the services provided by the incumbent and the successful offeror.

(5) Risk Mitigation Strategies: The offeror shall provide a plan of action to mitigate contract performance risk that could be encountered during the transition period.

(6) Security Requirements to include OPSEC, Facility Clearances and Base/Building Access: The offeror shall provide a plan of action to implement the required security clearances and physical access requirements of the contract during the transition period so as to not interrupt services.

(d) Subcontract Management: The Offer shall address the following:

(1) Provide its subcontract management strategy for assembling teams, selecting subcontractors, maintaining subcontractor relationships, communicating information to the subcontractor, managing subcontractor performance, and resolving problems. Explain approach to selecting the best technical capability needed and the technical cost trade-off approach to ensure that the best value subcontractors are used for the effort.

(2) Discuss its approach to determining the work to be performed in-house and the work to be subcontracted.

(3) Describe the value that will be added by proposing subcontractor(s) and how use of subcontractor(s) will not add unnecessary levels of management, impede communication, or delay work completion.

(4) Describe the internal process to fund subcontractors and how that process ensures timely subcontractor payments with no loss of productivity to the Government.

2.0 VOLUME 2 - PAST PERFORMANCE

Note: Cost or pricing information shall not appear in this volume.

2.1 General

Sources of past performance evaluation information include information provided by the Offeror in response to the solicitation information obtained from questionnaires, and any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to, the Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information Systems (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (ESRS), or other databases; the Defense Contract Management Agency; and interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and Fee Determining Officials.

The Offeror shall complete the Past Performance Information Form, Attachment L-3, for each past performance reference performed within five years of the solicitation release date. Offerors may choose to convert Attachment L-3 to Microsoft Word so long as no information is neither omitted from, or added to, the template. Continuation pages or converted forms should be submitted in size 12 Times New Roman font, and offerors opting to convert Attachment L-3 to MS Word must first convert their document back to Adobe format prior to submission of their proposal. The Offeror shall submit no more than five forms as the Prime Contractor, no more than three forms for each principal subcontractor, and/or no more than three forms for each JV team member. The Offeror shall submit written consent from their principal subcontractor(s) and team member(s) that will allow the Government to coordinate any past performance issues directly with the Offeror. If the Offeror does not submit the written consent, the Government will address any past performance issues directly with the principal subcontractor or JV Team member and the Offeror will forfeit the opportunity to participate in any related discussions.