RFP NWS Fixed Wing Airlift.pdf

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

52.215-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFEROR – Competitive Acquisition (Jan 2017) FAR Clause 52.215-1(d) Offer expiration date. Proposals in response to this solicitation will be valid for 180 calendar days.

SPECIAL NOTICES TO OFFERORS

This solicitation is to provide non-personal services for the follow-on NWS Fixed Wing Airlift services in Canada.

Notice to Offerors: Funds are not presently available for this effort. No award will be made under this solicitation until funds are available. The Government reserves the right to cancel this solicitation, either before or after the closing date for receipt of proposals. In the event the Government cancels this solicitation, the Government has no obligation to reimburse an Offeror for any costs incurred in the development of the proposal.

Proprietary information submitted in response to this solicitation will be protected from unauthorized disclosure as required by Subsection 27 of the Office of Procurement Policy Act as amended (41 U.S.C.423) (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") as implemented in the FAR.

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 This section of the RFP provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the required proposal volumes. Each proposal must be complete, self-sufficient, and respond directly to the requirements of this solicitation. The offeror shall comply with the solicitation requirements as stated and the PWS. The offeror’s proposal must reflect a thorough understanding of the services required and display a logical development of the offeror’s plans to implement all PWS requirements as assessed by the RFP evaluation criteria. The response shall consist of three (3) separate volumes; Part I – Prerequisite, Part II - Technical Capability, and Part III – Price.

1.2 Efforts shall be made to keep offers as concise as possible with the emphasis being on providing information essential for proper evaluation. The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail to provide for adequate evaluation and for substantiation of the validity of stated claims. Submitted documents must contain adequate information to enable the evaluation team to fully ascertain an offeror’s capability to perform contract requirements, must meet the requirements of the RFP, and must address the evaluation factors for award.

1.3 All information contained in the proposal an offeror feels is “Proprietary Information” and therefore not releasable under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), should be labeled “Proprietary Information, Source Selection Information—See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.” Any unmarked information, which may include proprietary information, will be considered releasable under the restrictions of the Freedom of Information Act.

1.4 In accordance with the Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures, dated 31 Mar 2016, past performance evaluation factor need not be evaluated if the Contracting Officer (CO), after consultation with the Source Selection Authority and Program Manager, waives this requirement. The past performance evaluation factor has been waived by the CO to assist with the efficiency of this requirement. The contractor base is known and the contracting officer, IAW FAR 9.105-2, will document and report past performance prior to award.

1.5 Offerors shall acknowledge awareness of all amendments to the solicitation by signing and dating Page 1 of each Standard Form 30, Amendment of Solicitation/Modification of Contract, and including it in Volume III, Price.

1.6 The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition for this acquisition so offerors are cautioned to submit their best pricing and technical information up-front.

2.0 FORMAL COMMUNICATIONS

Any formal communication shall be submitted in writing (via email) to the POCs below. It is the offeror’s responsibility to confirm receipt of all formal communications.

ACC AMIC/PKB:

Contract Managers (CM):

Primary – MSgt Joshua Collins, Joshua.Collins.3@us.af.mil Secondary - Ms. Jasmine Griffith jasmine.griffith.5@us.af.mil

Contracting Officers (CO):

Primary - Mrs. Christin L. Lockhart, Christin.Lockhart@us.af.mil Secondary - Capt Ashley S. Chung, Ashley.Chung.1@us.af.mil

300 Exploration Way, Suite 416 Hampton, VA 23666 Reference: Solicitation FA4890-22-R-0007

3.0 PRICE COMPETITION

The Contracting Officer has determined there is a high probability of adequate price competition for this acquisition. Therefore, offerors are cautioned to submit their best pricing and technical information up-front. Upon examination of the initial offers, the Contracting Officer will review this determination and if adequate price competition exists, no additional cost information will be requested and certification under FAR 15.406-2 will not be required. However, if at any time during this review process, the Contracting Officer determines that adequate price competition no longer exists; offerors may be required to submit “Other than cost and pricing data” to the extent necessary for the Contracting Officer to determine the reasonableness and affordability of the proposed price. If only one offer is received the Contracting Officer may request additional cost or pricing data IAW DFARS 252.215-7008, Only One Offer.

4.0 SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS

4.1 Prior to proposal submission, offerors should email MSgt Joshua R. Collins at Joshua.Collins.3@us.af.mil and Jasmine Griffith at jasmine.griffith.5@us.af.mil requesting a DoD SAFE Drop off. Offerors will then receive a Drop-off URL and Claim Information in the drop-off notification email.

The original proposal and copies as specified in this document shall be sent to the issuing office listed in Block 9 of Standard Form (SF) 33; on or before the date and time specified in Block 9 of SF33 via DoD SAFE (https://safe.apps.mil/).

After submitting (uploading) proposal documents via DoD SAFE, email Capt Ashley S.

Chung at Ashley.Chung.1@us.af.mil, MSgt Joshua R. Collins at Joshua.Collins.3@us.af.mil, Jasmine Griffith at jasmine.griffith.5@us.af.mil, and Christin Lockhart at christin.lockhart@us.af.mil to confirm receipt by ACC AMIC/PKB. It is the offeror’s responsibility to confirm receipt of the electronic proposal. No hand delivered offers shall be accepted.

To: Capt Ashley S. Chung at Ashley.Chung.1@us.af.mil, MSgt Joshua R. Collins at Joshua.Collins.3@us.af.mil, Jasmine Griffith at jasmine.griffith.5@us.af.mil, and Christin Lockhart at christin.lockhart@us.af.mil Subject: Solicitation No. FA4890-22-R-0007 Volume # and Title Body: Language requesting confirmation on electronic proposal receipt

4.2 Offerors are cautioned to strictly comply with all instructions within this solicitation to ensure submission of a complete proposal. Failure to furnish a complete proposal at the time of proposal submission may result in the proposal being considered non-compliant to the Government and eliminated from consideration for award. Late proposals will be processed in accordance with 52.215-1(c)(3)(ii), late proposals will not be considered unless it is received before award is made and the Contracting Officer determines that accepting the late offer would not unduly delay the acquisition.

4.3 Contact Information. Offeror shall provide:

Names, titles, addresses, telephone and email addresses of persons authorized to negotiate on the offeror’s behalf with the Government in connection with this solicitation.

Name, title, and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, even if that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office.

5.0 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

5.1 The following instructions prescribe the format for proposals, and describe the approach to be used for the development and presentation of the proposal data. The proposal shall include all of the information requested in the specific instructions. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation. A proposal that merely reiterates or promises to accomplish the requirements of the PWS will be considered unacceptable. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will enable the Government to easily understand the proposal and perform a thorough and fair evaluation of it. The Government may incorporate into the contract by reference or full text portions of the successful offeror’s proposal as revised and supplemented through the final proposal revision that is submitted in response to the solicitation.

5.2 Proposal Volumes. Proposals shall be prepared in three (3) separate and distinct volumes:

Volume I – Prerequisite Volume II - Technical Capability Volume III – Price

5.3 Proposal Format. The proposal text shall be printed single-sided. Type size for text shall not be smaller than Microsoft Word Times New Roman, 12 point font, single column, normal proportional spacing and one inch (1”) margins (top, bottom, left and right). The text for charts, tables, graphs, and figures shall be no smaller than Microsoft Word, Times New Roman or Arial Narrow, 8 point font. Text lines and table lines of text shall be single-spaced. Page color for each page of the proposal submission shall be white or ivory stock only. Information submitted shall not exceed the page limits stated below for each volume.

What Counts as a Page. A page shall be an 8 ½” x 11” sheet of paper. Fold-outs shall not exceed 11” x 17” and shall count as two (2) pages. Fold-outs shall be kept at a minimum, and shall be used only where a table or other graphic cannot be accommodated by a single 8-1/2” x 11” page.

All material shall be contained within the page limit identified for each volume, and all appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings, etc., are included in the page count, with exception of items stated in the next paragraph. Page numbering shall be in a sequential order (i.e., 1 through 75). Do not number each section of the proposal volume separately.

Pages Not Included in Page Count. The organizational chart, glossary of abbreviations, acronyms and cross-reference matrix will not be included in the page count. Covers for volumes, tables of contents, indices, title pages, and section dividers/tables will not be included in the page count if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal.

They will be counted if they contain any other information, e.g., diagrams, extraneous data, etc.

Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” and without any additional information will not be counted. Executive Summary will not be included in the proposal page limitation as stated in paragraph 5.5 below, and if applicable exceptions will be documented in each volumes executive summary and clearly marked as such.

5.4 Electronic Copies. Electronic copies of all proposal information for each volume shall be submitted via email and through DoD Safe using Microsoft Office 2010 or later and/or Portable Document Format (PDF) using Adobe Acrobat 9.0 or later. Offerors shall not submit any documents in PDF that cannot be electronically searched. Offerors may use JPEG images for charts or screen shots. Volume II - Price shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel 2010 or later.

Offerors shall name using standard naming conventions for each volume (e.g., Offeror name-volume name.docx). Each volume shall be contained in its own single searchable file, with copy/paste capability, and stored in a folder that corresponds to the proposal volume it represents. Offerors shall insert the file name in the header of each document.

5.5 Copies and Page Limits. Evaluators will only read up to the maximum number of pages specified. If the page limit is exceeded, all excess pages will not be evaluated. The Electronic File (E-File) of each Volume shall be marked “Original” and shall include a signature on the SF33 in Volume III, Price. Requirements and page limitations are as follows:

VOLUME TITLE PAPER

E-FILE

PAGE LIMIT

DUE DATE

I PREREQUISITE 1 40 Please See Date on Solicitation II** TECHNICAL

CAPABILITY

1 50

III PRICE 1 None

** The Price Volume is for price only – Technical information shall not be included in this volume.

Page limitation is subject to exclusions stated in the paragraph titled “Exceptions” below.

Further, the Government will not include the following in the page limitation: Cover page(s), title pages or tables of contents, tab/section-divider pages, technical definition page(s), organizational chart, acronym list, cross reference matrix. Note: These pages will be counted if they contain any other information, (i.e., diagrams, extraneous data, etc.). Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will also not be counted.

5.6 Cross-Referencing. Offerors shall not cross reference between Volumes I and II. Each Volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to the other Volume of the proposal. NOTE: Information required for proposal evaluation, which is not found in its designated Volume, will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal.

5.7 Exceptions. Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or aspects. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. If the offeror finds it necessary to take exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation, the offeror shall clearly identify the applicable Volume and exceptions with a complete explanation of why the exception was taken, what benefit accrues to the Government (if any), and its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, price and specific requirements of the solicitation.

It is required that each exception have a complete explanation of why the exception was taken, what benefit accrues to the Government (if any), and its impact (if any) on the performance, schedule, price, and specific requirements of the solicitation. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken.

Offerors are cautioned that taking an exception may render the offer ineligible for award.

This information shall be provided in the format below.

Table 1 – Solicitation Exceptions Solicitation Document

Page/Paragraph Requirement/Porti on

Rationale & Impact

Contract Line Items section, PWS, Section L and Section M, etc.

Applicable Page and Paragraph Numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe the rationale and impact of the exception

5.7.1 If the offeror takes no exception to any of the stated requirements in the solicitation, a statement to this effect is required at the front of each proposal volume in the Executive Summary.

6.0 INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME I – PREREQUISITES

6.1 The Prerequisite Volume should be detailed and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate that the offeror has a thorough understanding of the PWS plans and prerequisite requirement to accomplishment the effort. Statements that the offeror understands, can, or will comply with the PWS (including Air Force (AF) publications, technical requirements, etc.); statements paraphrasing the PWS or parts thereof (including applicable AF publications, technical data requirements, etc.);

and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used” etc., will be considered unacceptable. All information that the offeror deems appropriate to address prerequisite requirements must be included in an orderly format. The Prerequisite Volume shall not contain any cross referencing to the Technical or Pricing Volumes. The Prerequisite Volume shall be completed as follows:

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Capability - Under this prerequisite, the Government will evaluate the following:

IFR Utilization and Pilot Qualifications - In accordance with PWS paragraph 1.7, provide a comprehensive plan that describes the understanding and ability to effectively utilize IFR equipment.

Provide a listing of pilot qualifications to ensure competency and safe operations. Additionally, thoroughly substantiate the following:

Proposal shall demonstrate ability to achieve certified IFR aviation capability at contract start date.

6.2 Technical Contents

A. Table of Contents. A table of contents shall be included in the Prerequisite Volume for each the Requirement. Each section will be clearly marked and tabbed for easy reference and pages shall be numbered in a consistent/sequential manner as stated under Proposal Preparation Instructions.

B. Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms. Each section shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each.

6.3 INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME II - TECHNICAL CAPABILITY (FACTOR 1)

6.4 To facilitate the evaluation, the Technical Volume should be specific, detailed, succinct, and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate that the offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements to accomplishment the effort. This volume of the proposal shall consist of the offeror’s technical approach, addressing risk management or mitigation strategies, if applicable. The offeror shall provide a clear and concise description of how the offeror plans to meet or exceed the requirements of the RFP, specifically identifying any innovations or efficiencies that would result in cost reductions, cost avoidance, or qualitative improvements resulting in a benefit to the Government in relation to the PWS and the technical capability. The SSA, in consultation with the SST and advisors, is the sole arbiter of whether or not qualitative improvements represent a benefit to the Government. Statements that the offeror understands, can, or will comply with the PWS (including Air Force (AF) publications, technical requirements, etc.); statements paraphrasing the PWS or parts thereof (including applicable AF publications, technical data requirements, etc.); and phrases such as “standard procedures will be employed” or “well known techniques will be used” etc., will be considered unacceptable. Offerors should note that data submitted prior to the proposal submission including data submitted for current contracts and other solicitations will not be considered in the Government’s evaluation. Therefore, such data should not be relied upon nor incorporated in the Technical proposal by reference. Offerors shall address the requirements noted in this section by imperative verbs regardless of whether such requirements are preceded by “the offeror shall”. The offeror’s proposal shall, at a minimum, be prepared in a form consistent with the Technical criteria set forth in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award, of this solicitation. All information that the offeror deems appropriate to address for this factor must be included in the proposal in an orderly format. The Technical Volume shall address all the technical aspects of the requirement. This section shall not contain any pricing data.

6.5 Technical Contents

A. Table of Contents. A table of contents shall be included in Volume II. Each subfactor, aspect, and section will be clearly marked for easy reference and pages shall be numbered in a consistent manner as stated under Proposal Preparation Instructions.

B. Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms. Each section shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and with an explanation for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

C. Executive Summary. Included in this volume is the offeror’s Executive Summary (limit is 2 pages). It should include a concise summary of the offeror’s proposed approach to the NWS Fixed Wing Airlift effort.

D. Technical Factor Cross Reference Matrix. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. The offeror shall fill out the Technical cross reference matrix indicating the proposal reference information as it relates to the RFP, PWS, and CLIN references found therein. Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross referencing to other volumes of the proposal. Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal. See Appendix 1 for instruction on cross-referencing. PWS paragraph references are cited regarding each aspect of the requirement. These paragraph references are not however, exclusive, and offerors must thoroughly review the complete PWS.

E. Technical Capability Section - The purpose of this section is to allow the offeror to set forth in the most comprehensive manner its understanding of the program requirements and to demonstrate its ability to meet the evaluation requirements of Section M, Evaluation Criteria for Technical Capability. In this section the offeror shall present a clear and concise description of how it plans to meet contract requirements. The offeror shall describe the performance standards that have been established in each area and explain how performance standards will be met or exceeded. This section shall not contain any pricing data. The Technical Capability Section shall be completed as follows:

Subfactor A:

Fixed Wing Capacity and Distance Requirements - Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate two (2) aspects:

Aspect 1) Payload Capacity – In accordance with PWS Appendix 1, provide a comprehensive plan to successfully accomplish mission requirements with the following:

Fixed Wing aircraft to take-off and land at all airfields in the proposed aircraft’s operating area as referenced in PWS - Appendix 1, having a capability of transporting any combination of passenger(s) and/or cargo totaling a minimum of 2,100, and 3,000 pounds in accordance with CLIN requirements.

Fixed Wing aircraft to take-off and land at all NWS Logistics Support Sites (LSS) as referenced in the PWS paragraph 5.3 with a capability of transporting any combination of passengers(s) and or/cargo totaling 6,000 pounds between 1 June and 30 September.

The proposal will address mitigation factors for unimproved surface operations and factors for potential adverse weather operations found in the arctic environment.

Aspect 2) Nautical Mile Requirement - In accordance with PWS Appendix 1, provide a comprehensive plan to successfully accomplish mission requirements with the following:

Provide a comprehensive plan that demonstrates the ability to provide Fixed Wing Airlift capable of transporting the total payload of 2,100 pounds a distance of 500 Statute Miles, a total payload of 3,000 pounds a distance of 280 Statute Miles, and 6,000 pounds between each of the LSS locations.

Subfactor B:

Managing Aircraft Utilization Across the NWS - Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate one (1) aspect:

Aspect 1) Maximize Performance, Availability, and Responsiveness - In accordance with PWS Appendix 1, provide a comprehensive plan that demonstrates innovation in providing resource efficiencies to maximize air asset performance, availability and responsiveness to meet NWS mission. Additionally, offeror shall thoroughly substantiate the following:

Proposal shall demonstrate ability to support fixed-wing airlift service requirements, upon 48 hours’ notice, as required in accordance with paragraph 5.2 of the PWS.

Alternative air asset basing plan- offeror is encouraged to develop alternative strategy for asset utilization to increase flexibility and find efficiencies to support adjacent Zone missions and minimize response times.

Subfactor C:

Operations - Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate two (2) aspects:

Aspect 1) Approach to Simultaneous Operations - Provide a comprehensive plan that describes your approach to effectively plan and execute operations with fixed wing assets able to provide 3,000 pound lift service to each of the five operating Zones simultaneously in accordance of Appendix 1. The plan shall demonstrate surge capability (including aircraft and crew) in order to accomplish five simultaneous operations from five different operating locations.

Aspect 2) Risk Assessment - In accordance with PWS paragraph 17.1, provide a detailed risk assessment that demonstrates a clear risk mitigation strategy that includes adequate supporting documentation. Examples of supporting documentation include but are not limited to: equipment certifications, engineering & safety test results, and real world operational records.

Subfactor D:

Plans - Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate three (3) aspects:

Aspect 1) Canadian Transportation and Aviation Act Conformance Plan - Provide an executable plan to effectively comply with the standards and timelines of the Canadian Transportation Act, Part II, Sections 57 and 61 and the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) subparts, 702, 703, & 704 in accordance with paragraph 1.1.2 of the PWS.

Aspect 2) Transition Plan - In accordance with paragraph 17 of the PWS, provide an executable Transition Plan that demonstrates a comprehensive approach which describes, in detail, how the Contractor will be on-station and able to accomplish missions the first day of the performance period. Additionally, provide a transition plan that describes, in detail, how the Contractor will support follow-on Contractors for mission accomplishment on the first day of the performance period should they not be awarded a follow-on contract.

Aspect 3) Maintenance Plan - In accordance the PWS 1.4.1, provide an executable Maintenance Plan describing how maintenance activities at the aircraft staging locations across the NWS will be conducted with minimal impact on flying operations, to include detailed information on both known/phase maintenance requirements and contingencies for unplanned/emergency maintenance.

7.0 INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME III - PRICE PROPOSAL (FACTOR 2)

7.1 The offeror shall complete Section 3 of the solicitation (Schedule of Supplies and Services (CLINS)) by inserting the price elements (unit price and extended amount) for all Firm Fixed Price (FFP) contract line item numbers (CLINS), including Phase-In, Base Year, Option Years, and Optional CLINs. For ease of administration, all TOTAL pricing should be rounded to whole dollar amounts and divisible by 12. Cost Reimbursable CLIN series X0003 and X0005, the Government provided a pre-established Not to Exceed (NTE) amount for Cost Reimbursable CLINs, each offeror’s proposed prices will be evaluated by adding the reimbursable expenses NTE amount and the FFP CLINs, that total will be used in the total overall evaluated price.

7.2 Complete in its entirety the "Offeror" portion of the Standard Form 33. An official having authority to legally bind the company contractually must sign and date the Standard Form 33.

One copy of the Standard Form 33 must bear an original signature and if applicable, all amendments. Failure to acknowledge any amendment(s) to the solicitation can result in an offeror being deemed non-compliant. Note: Be sure to sign and date where required.

7.3 Representations and Certifications. Complete the required Representations and Certifications or indicate if information is contained in the System for Award Management (SAM) located at https://www.sam.gov.

7.4 Supporting Price Backup Data for Prime and Subcontractors. Certified cost or pricing data is not required. However, supporting data is requested. Supporting data should explain the methodology used in developing proposed CLIN prices. Supporting data shall be provided in a table format, to include, at a minimum, a breakdown (by CLIN) of labor (labor category, number of positions and productive hours and rates used), breakout of Other Direct Costs (ODC), Direct and Indirect Rates, and Subcontract costs. Supporting data may be submitted in a format selected by the offeror, but must address the information requested in this paragraph. The Government reserves the right to request additional pricing information after receipt and evaluation of proposals.

8.0 DEBRIEFING OF OFFERORS

8.1 Debriefings are conducted with the goal of identifying to unsuccessful offerors where changes can be made to improve future source selection participation.

8.2 Successful or unsuccessful offerors may request debriefings by providing a written request to the Contracting Officer. Debriefings shall be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.505 for pre-award debriefings and FAR 15.506 for post-award debriefings.

9.0 RESPONSIBILITY DETERMINATION

9.1 For the purposes of making a determination of contractor responsibility, the Government reserves the right to obtain data from any source that they deem appropriate such Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), the Defense Contract Management Agency, interviews with Program Managers, COs, and Award Fee Determining Officials, and other sources known to the Government.

(Appendix 1 to Section L)

Technical Factor Cross-Reference Matrix

As part of Offerors’ proposals, a separate cross-reference matrix shall be completed and submitted with Volume II, Technical Capability. The cross-reference matrix below is to assist in the proposal preparation process. Offerors shall complete the last column of this attachment with paragraph number references, including all subsequent subparagraphs (for example, 5.0 includes 5.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, etc.) from their Technical Capability Volume. Offerors may provide additional references to the other columns as deemed necessary. Offerors are ultimately responsible for ensuring that their proposal fully addresses all areas and that all requested information is completed in accordance with this solicitation.

TECHNICAL FACTOR CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX

Subfactors Reference

Technical Proposal

Paragraph( s)

Page Number

Subfactor A: Fixed Wing Capacity and Distance Requirements Aspect 1, Payload Capacity

PWS Appendix 1

Aspect 2, Nautical Mile Requirement

PWS Appendix 1

Subfactor B: Managing Aircraft Utilization Across the NWS Aspect 1, Maximize Performance, Availability, and Responsiveness

PWS Appendix 1

Subfactor C: Operations

Aspect 1, Approach to Simultaneous Operations

PWS Appendix 1

Aspect 2, Risk Assessment

PWS para 17.1

Subfactor D: Plans Aspect 1, Canadian Transportation and Aviation Act Conformance

PWS para 1.1.2

Aspect 2, Transition Plan

PWS para 17

Aspect 3, Maintenance Plan

PWS para 1.4.1

SECTION M of the Solicitation - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

1.0 BASIS OF AWARD

This competitive best value source selection will be conducted using the Trade-off source selection process in accordance with (IAW) Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation, Department of Defense (DoD) Source Selection Procedures effective 31 Mar 2016 and Air Force Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (AFFARS) Mandatory Procedures

5315.3 as revised 3 Oct 2019. The Government will award one contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible (IAW FAR Part 9) offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

Factor ratings and assessments will focus on each proposal’s technical strengths, deficiencies, weaknesses, risk, and price analysis findings. This may result in an award being made to a higher rated, higher priced offeror where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) determines that the technical superiority of the higher priced offeror outweighs the price difference. The SSA bases the source selection decision on an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors. While the Government evaluation team and the SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective; therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

For evaluation purposes, the Option Years CLINs and Optional CLINs will be priced as part of initial competition. Option will be priced on a Firm Fixed Price basis and evaluated for award purposes as part of the offeror’s proposal in accordance with FAR 52.217-5. The Government will evaluate offers by adding the total proposed price (FP and NTE Travel CLINs) for phase-in, base year, option years, optional CLINs and fifty percent (50%) of the last option year price to cover the option to extend services IAW Clause FAR 52.217-8 as part of the Total Overall Evaluated Price (TOEP). Offerors shall not include pricing in their proposal for this clause.

As set forth in Section L, the Government intends to award without discussions IAW FAR 52.215-1 (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). The Government may make a final determination as to whether the offeror’s proposal is the best value solely on the basis of the initial proposal as submitted. Accordingly, offerors are advised to submit initial proposals that are fully and clearly acceptable without additional information. Should the Government determine it is in their best interest to open and conduct discussions, discussion will be held only with those offerors determined to be in the competitive range. The competitive range will be comprised of the most highly rated proposals based on the ratings of each offeror’s technical and price proposals.

If the Government holds discussions, the Government may issue evaluation notices to offerors in the competitive range. Formal responses to evaluation notices and final proposal revisions will be considered in making the source selection decision for award.

In accordance with the Department of Defense Source Selection Procedures, dated 31 Mar 2016, past performance evaluation factor need not be evaluated if the Contracting Officer (CO), after consultation with the Source Selection Authority and Program Manager, waives this requirement. The past performance evaluation factor has been waived by the CO to assist with the efficiency of this requirement. The contractor base is known and the contracting officer, IAW FAR 9.105-2, will document and report past performance prior to award.

Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) will be requested from each offeror in the competitive range at the conclusion of discussions. Any revision or non-concurrence to contract terms and conditions submitted in the submitted FPR will not be subject to further discussion or negotiation. This provision is not intended to restrict the offeror’s opportunity to revise figures (e.g., prices, discounts, percentages, rates, etc.); rather, it is intended to preclude any misunderstandings by the Government which could result if new or revised terms and conditions are submitted in the FPR that have not been fully disclosed, discussed and understood during discussions. Hence, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the FPR, may render the offer unacceptable to the Government.

2.0 SOURCE SELECTION METHODOLOGY

The SSEB will adhere to FAR 15.3, as supplemented, and the evaluation process and criteria stated in Section M during evaluation of proposals.

This acquisition will be best value using the Technical Capability Trade Off source selection procedures. Proposals will be evaluated using two (2) Factors which are: Factor (1) Technical Capability/Risk, and Factor (2) Price. However, in order to be eligible for award, each offeror must meet all the requirements of the Prerequisites. Technical Factor is most important and more important than the Price Factor. The greater the equality of Technical proposals, the more important Price becomes in selecting the best value for the Government.

The Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest proposed price. Price is not the most significant factor in the selection of an offeror for this solicitation; however, the degree of importance of price as a factor could become greater depending upon the equality of the proposals for the other factors evaluated. When competing proposals are evaluated and determined to be equal, total price and other price factors would become the most significant factor. Prices will be evaluated to determine if the proposed price is reasonable and to assess the offeror’s understanding of the solicitation. Any inconsistency, whether real or apparent, between technical and price must be clearly explained in the price proposal. For example, if unique and innovative approaches are the basis for an abnormally priced cost estimate, the nature of these approaches and their impact on price must be completely documented. The burden of proof of price credibility rests solely with the offeror. Price proposals will not be rated or scored. The Government will make a subjective evaluation to determine if the offeror’s technical approach and proposed price represents the greatest value to the Government.

The government reserves the right to award without discussions or to establish the competitive range IAW FAR 15.306(c). If a competitive range is established, discussions will be conducted and Evaluation Notices (ENs) will be issued to those offerors in the competitive range allowing them the opportunity to revise their proposals. Also, once discussions have concluded and an offeror’s proposal has an “Unacceptable” rating for any technical subfactor, this proposal will be unawardable.

PREREQUISITES:

There is one (1) Requirement of the Prerequisite: Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Capability. This requirement will be assessed as either Acceptable or Unacceptable. Should this requirement be considered Unacceptable, then the entire proposal will be deemed Unacceptable and will not be assessed further. No tradeoff will be made for the Prerequisites.

Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) Capability - Under this prerequisite, the Government will evaluate the following:

IFR Utilization and Pilot Qualifications - In accordance with PWS paragraph 1.7, the offeror’s proposed approach must demonstrate their understanding and ability to effectively utilize IFR equipment in support of the mission, and provide a listing of pilot qualifications to ensure competency and safe operations. Additionally, offeror shall thoroughly substantiate the following:

Proposal shall demonstrate ability to achieve certified IFR aviation capability at contract start date.

3.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

3.1 Factor 1 – Technical Capability and Risk

There are four (4) subfactors: (A) Fixed Wing Capacity and Distance Requirements, (B) Managing Aircraft Utilization Across the Zones, (C) Operations, and (D) Plans.

Subfactora (A) and (B) is the most important subfactors, and shall receive a separate technical and risk rating based on the evaluation findings (e.g., strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses and deficiencies) in the offeror’s proposal.

Subfactor (C) and (D) are less important than Subfactor (A) and (B). Subfactors (C) and (D) are of equal importance to each other. Technical Capability for Subfactors (A) and (B) shall be rated using the ratings listed in the DoD Source Selection Procedures and will be considered in the tradeoff decision. Subfactors (C) and (D) will be rated as either “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” and will not be considered in the tradeoff decision. The greater the equality of the non-cost factors, the more important price becomes in selecting the best value for the Government. If an offeror receives an “Unacceptable” rating in one or more Subfactor, they will be considered unawardable unless discussions are opened.

The technical capability subfactors shall receive a separate technical and risk rating in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses and deficiencies in the offeror’s proposal. Technical ratings will be assessed at the subfactor level and overall factor-level rating will not be assigned. In order to be eligible for award, offerors are required to meet all aspects of the technical subfactors and receive a minimum “Green” Technical Rating and “Low” Technical Risk Rating.

Technical Capability Rating. The offeror’s technical solution will be rated separately from the risk associated with its technical approach. The technical capability rating evaluates the quality of the offeror’s technical solution for meeting the Government requirements. If an offeror’s proposal demonstrates a material failure to meet a Government requirement, this is a deficiency in the offeror’s proposal resulting in a Red/Unacceptable rating and the proposal is not awardable. The severity of the deficiency will determine if the offeror will be able to correct the deficiency through discussions. Technical Capability ratings will be assessed at the subfactor level; an overall factor-level rating will not be assigned. The definitions for technical capability ratings used for Subfactors (A) and (B) are IAW the DoD Source Selection Procedures as defined below:

Table A-1 Technical Capability rating

COLOR

RATING

ADJECTIVAL

RATING

DESCRIPTION

Blue

Outstanding

Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths.

Purple

Good

Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength.

Green Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements.

Red

Unacceptable

Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is not awardable.

Subfactor A: Fixed Wing Capacity and Distance Requirements - Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate two (2) aspects:

Aspect 1: Payload Capacity - In accordance with PWS Appendix 1, the offeror’s proposed approach must demonstrate a comprehensive plan to successfully accomplish mission requirements with the following:

Fixed Wing aircraft to take-off and land at all airfields in the proposed aircraft’s operating area as referenced in PWS - Appendix 1, having a capability of transporting any combination of passenger(s) and/or cargo totaling a minimum of 2,100 and 3,000 pounds in accordance with CLIN requirements.

Fixed Wing aircraft to take-off and land at all NWS Logistics Support Sites as referenced in the PWS paragraph 5.3 with a capability of transporting any combination of passengers(s) and or/cargo totaling 6,000 pounds between 1 June and 30 September.

The proposal will address mitigation factors for unimproved surface operations and factors for potential adverse weather operations found in the arctic environment.

Aspect 2: Nautical Mile Requirement - In accordance with PWS Appendix 1, the offeror’s proposed approach must demonstrate a comprehensive plan to successfully accomplish mission requirements with the following:

Provide a comprehensive plan that demonstrates the ability to provide Fixed Wing Airlift capable of transporting the total payload of 2,100 pounds a distance of 500 Statute Miles, a total payload of 3,000 pounds a distance of 280 Statute Miles and 6,000 pounds between each of the LSS locations.

Subfactor B: Managing Aircraft Utilization Across the NWS - Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate one (1) aspect:

Aspect 1: Maximize Performance, Availability, and Responsiveness - In accordance with PWS Appendix 1, the offeror’s proposed approach must demonstrate innovation in providing resource efficiencies to maximize air asset performance, availability and responsiveness to meet NWS mission. Additionally, offeror shall thoroughly substantiate the following:

Proposal shall demonstrate ability to support fixed-wing airlift service requirements, upon 48 hours’ notice, as required in accordance with paragraph 5.2 of the PWS.

Alternative air asset basing plan- offeror is encouraged to develop alternative strategy for asset utilization to increase flexibility and find efficiencies to support adjacent Zone missions and minimize response times.

Subfactor C: Operations - Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate two (2) aspects:

Aspect 1: Approach to Simultaneous Operations - In accordance of Appendix 1, demonstrates a comprehensive plan that provides an effective approach to execute operations with fixed wing assets able to provide 3,000 pound lift service to each of the five operating Zones simultaneously. The plan shall demonstrate surge capability (including aircraft and crew) in order to accomplish five simultaneous operations from five different operating locations.

Aspect 2: Risk Assessment - In accordance with PWS paragraph 17.1, demonstrates a clear risk mitigation strategy that includes adequate supporting documentation. Examples of supporting documentation include but are not limited to: equipment certifications, engineering & safety test results, and real world operational records.

Subfactor D: Plans - Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate three (3) aspects:

Aspect 1: Canadian Transportation and Aviation Act Conformance Plan - Demonstrates the ability to maintain compliance within the necessary timelines of the Canadian Transportation Act, Part II, Sections 57 and 61 and the Canadian Aviation Regulations (CARs) subparts, 702, 703, & 704 in accordance with paragraph 1.1.2 of the PWS.

Aspect 2: Transition Plan - In accordance with paragraph 17 of the PWS, demonstrates a comprehensive approach that describes, in detail, how the Contractor will be on-station and able to accomplish missions the first day of the performance period. Additionally, provide a transition plan that describes, in detail, how the Contractor will support follow-on Contractors for mission accomplishment on the first day of the performance period should they not be awarded a follow-on contract.

Aspect 3: Maintenance Plan - In accordance the PWS 1.4.1, demonstrates a comprehensive plan to provide maintenance activities at the aircraft staging locations across the NWS with minimal impact on flying operations, to include detailed information on both known/phase maintenance requirements and contingencies for unplanned/emergency maintenance.

3.2 Technical Risk

Technical Risk Rating. Assessment of technical risk considers the risk associated with the technical approach to meeting the Government’s requirements which is manifested by the identification of weakness(es), significant weaknesses(es), and/or deficiencies, considers potential for disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and/or the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance based on the offeror’s identified approach and/or processes. In conducting the risk assessment, the Government will also consider information provided by the offeror in its proposal as to how the contractor will manage and mitigate risk. Ratings will be assessed at the subfactor level and overall factor-level rating will not be assigned. Technical risk for Subfactor (A) and (B), shall be rated using the ratings listed IAW the DoD Source Selection Procedures as defined below:

TABLE 2B

TECHNICAL RISK RATING

ADJECTIVAL

RATING

DESCRIPTION

Low Proposal may contain weakness(es) which have little potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Normal contractor effort and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which may potentially cause disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome difficulties.

High Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance. Is unlikely to overcome any difficulties, even with special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring.

Unacceptable Proposal contains a material failure or a combination of significant weaknesses that increases the risk of unsuccessful performance to an unacceptable level.

Factor 2 – Price

Price will be evaluated using techniques established in FAR 15.404-1 to conduct price analysis to ensure the Government receives a fair, reasonable and balanced price. This source selection is conducted with the expectation of adequate price competition from the interested offerors. As business practice, competition establishes price reasonableness. Color or adjectival ratings will not be assigned to the Price Factor. The Government will evaluate proposed prices to determine whether prices reflect a clear understanding of the requirements and are consistent with the various elements of the offeror’s Technical Capability Proposal. An offeror may be determined unawardable if its proposed price is evaluated as unreasonable or unbalanced. This analysis in no way limits the Government’s right to award to a higher priced offer, if that offer is determined affordable and represents the best value to the Government. If the Government cannot determine the proposed pricing to be fair and reasonable, other than cost and pricing data will be obtained from the offerors.

The techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404-1(b) will be the primary means of accomplishing the price analysis, including reasonableness. Price reasonableness will be determined based on a comparison of offerors’ total overall evaluated price. The total evaluated price will consist of all CLINs including phase-in, basic period, option years, optional CLINS and fifty percent (50%) of the last option period price to cover the Option to Extend Services clause, 52.217-8.

The Government has provided pre-established Not to Exceed (NTE) amounts for the Cost Reimbursable CLINs.