Section L DISC DRAFT 11 Dec 20.docx

HQ855-21-R-0004

Section L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

HQ855-21-R-0004

DTRI Instrumentation Support Contract (DISC)

HQ0855-21-R-0004

Section L: Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

Pursuant to FAR 15.204-1, this section will be removed upon award of the contract and retained in the contract file.

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1.1 General.

The proposal instructions are designed to assist Offerors in preparing a complete response that reflects a full understanding of the approach proposed to accomplish all contractual requirements. The Government will not reimburse Offerors for proposal preparation costs. Section M details how proposals will be evaluated.

1.2 Facility Security Clearance

Entities (including companies and academic institutions) engaged in providing goods or services to the U.S. Government involving access to, or creation of, classified information must have an approved facility security clearance (FCL) as required by the DD Form 254. FCLs must be in place prior to contract award. For more information about obtaining a FCL, please visit https://www.dcsa.mil/mc/ctp/fc/. For additional questions regarding a sponsorship, please contact the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO).

1.3 Official Points of Contact:

The PCO is the primary point of contact for this acquisition. The Contract Specialist is the secondary point of contact. Written requests for exchanges of information may be sent to the PCO via email. Email is the preferred method for exchanges of information.

The PCO for this acquisition is:

Attn: Ms. J. Michelle Leger

MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY (MDA)

CONTRACTS DIRECTORATE - MDA/DTK

Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-0001 Email: Jennifer.leger@mda.mil

The secondary point of contact is:

Attn: Ms. LaShonda Fletcher

MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY (MDA)

CONTRACTS DIRECTORATE – MDA/DTK

5222 Martin Road Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-0001 Email: lashonda.fletcher@mda.mil

1.3.1 Address any questions or concerns you may have to the PCO.

1.3.1.1 Offerors may submit written questions requesting clarification of RFP requirements via electronic mail to the following address: MDADISC@mda.mil. Subject line shall state "HQ0855-21-R-0004- RFP Questions." NOTE: Only written questions to the PCO will receive a response. Information provided with each question shall include the document name, document date, specific page, paragraph, clause or other definitive citation requiring clarification

1.3.1.2. It is requested that all questions be received within 10 days after receipt of RFP to allow the Government adequate time to prepare and issue responses to all Offerors prior to the date and time set for receipt of proposals.

1.3.1.3 The Government will continue to accept questions up to the closing time of the solicitation; however, time may not permit responses to questions received after the aforementioned timeframe.

1.3.1.4 The Government will answer questions (providing both the question and the answer) via RFP amendment(s). The Government will not answer questions with restrictive markings. The Government will omit all Company-specific information from all questions and answers.

1.4 Proposal Submission

1.4.1 The proposal shall be received prior to [Insert Time] central time on [Insert Date]. Late submissions will not be accepted. The Government prefers proposal submissions be conducted via the DoD Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE).

To initiate the proposal submission through DoD SAFE, the offeror must pre-coordinate point of contact (POC) information with MDA so that the PCO, in turn, can establish the required DoD SAFE “drop-off” to provide for the exchange. Offerors are strongly encouraged to provide this contact information well in advance of the proposal suspense date, preferably 14 days prior to proposal due date or earlier. To be clear, the offeror is solely responsible for ensuring its proposal is submitted in a complete and timely manner.

For proposal submission through DoD SAFE, implement the following steps:

1. Email the name, email address, and phone number for up to three (3) points of contact for the offeror’s designated individual(s) for the DoD SAFE exchange to the following addresses:

a. Jennifer.leger@mda.mil

b. lashonda.fletcher@mda.mil

c. MDADISC@mda.mil

2. The PCO will establish a DoD SAFE “drop-off” for the identified offeror POC(s), which is the location where the offeror will upload its proposal.

3. The offeror POC(s) will receive an email notification from DoD SAFE (to include a web link) when the drop-off location is available for document submission. That link will only be available/accessible for 14 days from date of this email notification. The PCO will establish the drop-off location within 14 days of the proposal due date, regardless of how early the offeror provides POC information.

4. When accessing the DoD Safe “drop-off” location, the offeror shall identify the following addresses for proposal receipt:

a. Jennifer.leger@mda.mil

b. lashonda.fletcher@mda.mil

5. Offeror will click to add files and make a determination whether or not to encrypt each file. If encrypting, the offeror will be prompted to enter a “passphrase”.

6. Add all required files and click “Drop-off Files”. The files will now be available for pickup by the Government.

NOTE: A single submission can only accommodate up to 25 attachment files for a maximum 8 gigabytes of data. Therefore, if additional files must be transmitted, the offeror may create additional submissions using the “Drop-Off” item on the DoD SAFE menu bar.

7. If encrypting, provide a separate email containing the “passphrase” to the following recipients:

a. Jennifer.leger@mda.mil

b. lashonda.fletcher@mda.mil

8. The offeror’s identified POC(s) should receive an email notification from DoD SAFE when the files are picked up by the Government.

1.5 Nongovernmental Advisors

1.5.1 The Government may release submitted proposal data to nongovernment advisors for review, analysis, and evaluation. The following firm(s) may assist in the proposal evaluation process in an advisory capacity. The Government may also employ administrative and engineering support services contractors in the handling of solicitation documentation for purposes of security and document control. All such personnel will be required to execute a statement to preserve and protect from disclosure any source selection and contractor proprietary information disclosed to them during the course of these evaluations. It is anticipated that the following firm(s) will be involved in the source selection process:

Company Contact Information

BCF Solutions, Inc. 14325 Willard Road, Suite 107, Chantilly, VA 20151

CACI Federal, Inc., CACI, Inc. – Federal, 7725 West Reno Ave.,Oklahoma City, OK 73127 Attn: Regan Anderson (405)367-2486

Canvas, Inc., 228 Holmes Avenue NE, Suite 209, Huntsville, AL 35801

Kepler Research, 13663 Office Place Suite 202, Woodbridge, VA 22192

LinTech Global, Inc., 31600 W 13 Mile Rd, Ste 122, Farmington Hills, MI 48334-1407

Torch Technologies, 4035 Chris Drive, Suite C, Huntsville, AL 35802

1.5.2 The nongovernment advisors are subject to contractual Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) restrictions and are expressly prohibited from competing on this acquisition in any fashion, i.e., being a prime, subcontractor, or teaming partner. Contractor personnel supporting this acquisition have signed Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDAs) and are subject to OCI restrictions. Individuals will be authorized access only to those portions of the proposal data and discussions that are necessary for them to perform their respective duties.

1.5.3 Objections to disclosure of proposals, or specific portions, to the nongovernment advisors listed above must be provided in writing to the PCO within five (5) business days of solicitation issuance. If no objections are submitted, the Offeror(s) must enter into a non-disclosure agreement with the nongovernment advisor(s), or with the company employing the nongovernment advisor before the nongovernment advisor(s) are given access to the Offeror(s) proprietary or source selection information in accordance with DoD Source Selection Procedures, paragraph 1.4.6.2.1. A copy of the fully executed NDAs are encouraged to be submitted NLT 10 days prior to the proposal submission. The NDAs can be sent to MDADISC@mda.mil. The subject line shall read: HQ0855-21-R-0004 NDA

WRITTEN OBJECTIONS MUST INCLUDE A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE BASIS FOR THE OFFEROR’S OBJECTION AND IDENTIFY SPECIFIC PORTIONS OF THE PROPOSAL THE OFFEROR OBJECTS TO DISCLOSE TO NONGOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS ADVISORS.

1.6 Notice Regarding OCI – Determination to Participate in This Acquisition

a) In assessing and addressing conflicts of interest, MDA will follow the guidance in FAR subpart 9.5. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that both it and its proposed prospective subcontractors are not restricted from participating in this acquisition due to an OCI caused by any MDA-funded contract or subcontract; Missile Defense System (MDS)-related contract or subcontract; or, other significant, non-MDS related business relationships with firms doing business with or in support of MDA.

b) Procedures to follow with proposal submission:

1) Each Offeror must submit, for itself, partners, and subcontractors, an "OCI Disclosure Form", Attachment L1 and applicable supporting documents. The submission shall identify all of the team's MDA-funded contracts or subcontracts; BMDS-related contracts or subcontracts; and any significant, non-MDS related business relationships with firms doing business with or in support of MDA. For each identified contract, the Offeror shall disclose the contract number; name, and telephone number of the PCO; a description of the work performed or being performed; and such additional information as the PCO may request to assist in the identification of actual or potential OCIs.

2) The Agency prefers that Offerors competing for DISC requirements be free from OCIs and that they avoid or neutralize potential conflicts as opposed to proposing mitigation strategies. While mitigation strategies will not be prohibited, a high standard will be applied when determining the sufficiency of any proposed strategy. MDA does not intend to waive OCIs for DISC except under very limited, and unusual and compelling circumstances. Any such waiver will require review and approval by the MDA Director. Consequently, Industry is encouraged to avoid OCIs to the maximum extent practicable and to submit OCI free proposals for DISC efforts.

3) If an Offeror determines that an actual or potential OCI does not exist, it shall include a statement to that effect as part of its proposal, and does not need to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan with its proposal. However, if an OCI is present and an Offeror fails to provide an acceptable OCI mitigation strategy, the Offeror’s proposal may be rejected, relieving the Government of any further responsibility to resolve the OCI(s). See FAR 9.504(e).

4) Should the Offeror elect to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan, it must address all conflicts in adequate detail for the PCO to determine whether an OCI exists or has been mitigated. To facilitate resolution of OCIs during evaluations, Offerors are encouraged to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan with the proposals. The OCI Mitigation Plan shall specifically address the OCI disclosures required in this section and explain how the prime is in full compliance with H-09 Organizational Conflict of Interest (February 2020).

Note: Notices to Offerors of OCIs and the responses thereto are not negotiations or discussions as those terms are used in FAR 15.306(d).

c) Offerors competing for DISC requirements must be free of OCIs at the time of award. The PCO shall review and determine whether the Offeror selected for award has no OCIs or has addressed and resolved all OCIs before making an award. The PCO reserves the right to reject offers from Offerors which do not adequately resolve all OCIs or are inconsistent with the identified DISC OCI restrictions. If an OCI is not adequately resolved, the PCO reserves the right to notify the Offeror and allow the Offeror a reasonable opportunity to respond before making an award decision. If the likely successful Offeror is rejected due to OCI, the Government will consider the next highest rated Offeror for award. The PCO also reserves the right to obtain an OCI waiver and make an award when in the best interests of the United States.

2.0 GENERAL RFP INFORMATION

2.1 Type of Contract

The Government intends to award a single-award Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contract under FAR Part 15, with Cost Plus Award Fee, Cost Reimbursible, and Firm-Fixed Price CLINs. The contract will be a total small business set-aside.

2.2 Errors or Omissions

If an Offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, ambiguity, or are otherwise unsound, the Offeror shall immediately notify the PCO in writing with supporting rationale no later than five business days after release of this solicitation.

2.3 Request for Proposal (RFP) Amendments

In accordance with FAR 15.206 and 52.215-1, the Government reserves the right to amend any portion of this solicitation. Such amendments will be available at https://beta.sam.gov/ using Standard Form (SF) 33. Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to beta.sam.gov. The amendment will include an announcement of the new proposal due date and time, if appropriate. The Offeror shall provide written acknowledgement of any solicitation amendments issued by the Government.

2.4 Offeror’s Library

2.4.1 The Offeror’s Library contains representative products and reference documents provided to inform Offerors of MDA’s requirements. Requests for the Offeror’s Library may be submitted to MDADISC@mda.mil. The request must include the following information:

Company Name:

Company/Division Address:

CAGE Code:

DUNS Number:

Company Point of Contract for Delivery: (name, email, and phone number) Mailing Address (if different than Company/Division Address):

2.4.2 The Government will verify the company information identified above in the System for Award Management website (www.sam.gov). Firms without a CAGE Code and DUNS number will not be provided the information.

2.4.3 All information provided by electronic means will be unclassified/Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI).

2.5 Contingent Proposals

Contingent proposals are not allowed, nor will they be accepted, considered or evaluated by the Government. Contingent proposals are defined herein as proposals that include terms or conditions that imply that performance is contingent upon any sort of provisioning from the Government that is not set forth in the RFP.

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT

3.1 Proposal Acceptability

Offerors are expected to comply with all requirements of the Request for Proposal (RFP). In order to be eligible for award, 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 factors or subfactors. By submission of its proposal, the Offeror consents and agrees to all solicitation requirements and identified constraints. Non-conformance with the instructions provided may result in an unfavorable proposal evaluation, or rejection of an Offeror’s proposal, rendering it ineligible for award. Non-conformance includes, but is not limited to, failure to follow the instructions required by the RFP and/or failure to submit all required information for each volume described in the Proposal Organizational Table L-1.

3.2 Proposal Quality

3.2.1 In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to present enough information to allow the various technical and management approaches, past performance, information management control plan, as well as cost and price, to be meaningfully evaluated without discussions. All Offeror and team member information must be incorporated into one coherent submittal. The Offeror must include any data necessary to illustrate the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

3.2.2 The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation by the Government and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal shall provide convincing rationale to address how the Offeror intends to meet the areas to be evaluated. Proposals shall not simply rephrase or restate the Government's statement of work (SOW) requirements nor restate applicable laws, policy, or regulations.

3.2.3 Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of the Offeror’s experience and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the Offeror’s proposal. Alternate proposals – defined herein as proposals that deviate in any way from the solicitation terms and conditions and the stated SOW requirement – will not be considered nor evaluated.

4.0 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

4.1 Markings

Be sure to identify appropriate markings such as the legend at FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data.

4.2 Proposal Cross Reference

Each proposal volume shall be unclassified. Each volume shall be written in Standard English and be complete in and of itself. 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. The Offeror shall provide a Proposal Cross Reference Matrix as set forth in Table L-2. This proposal matrix is only a tool to assist in the proposal evaluation process.

With the exception of the Cost and Price Volume, no cost or pricing information should appear in any other volume. The Government advises Offerors that taking exception to, or deviating from, any term or condition of the RFP may make an offer unacceptable and the Offeror ineligible for award.

4.3 Proposal Organization and Content

4.3.1 The Offeror shall prepare the proposal as set forth in the Proposal Organization Table L-1 below. The titles and contents of the volumes shall be as defined in this table, all of which shall be within the required page limits and with the number of copies as specified in Table L-1. The contents of each proposal volume are described in the Proposal Organization paragraphs as noted in the table below.

Table L-1: Proposal Organization and Content

Tab 1: Master Table of Contents

Tab 2: Model Contract

Tab 3: Solicitation Exceptions Matrix

Tab 4: Ground Rules and Assumptions

Tab 5: OCI Disclosure Forms and Attachments

Tab 6: OCI Mitigation Plan (if required)*

Tab 1: Executive Summary Content

Tab 2: Proposal Cross Reference Matrix unlimited

Tab 3: Limitations on Subcontracting

Tab 1: TS1 Pacific Collector Range Safety System (PCRSS)

Tab 2: TS2 X-Band Transportable Radar-1 (XTR-1)

Tab 3: TS3 Mission Execution and Display Distribution (MEDDS)

Tab 4: TS4 Cyber Compliance

Tab 1: MS1 Recruitment, Retention, Surge Support

Tab 2: MS2 Management Approach

Tab 3: MS3 Transition Planning

Tab 1: Cost/Price Narrative unlimited

* - If the Offeror elects to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan, it should be provided as Tab 6 to Volume I (see paragraph 1.6(c)(4)). If required, the OCI Mitigation Plan will be included as a Section J attachment at award. The OCI Mitigation plan is separate and distinct plan from the required OCI Management Plan covered in Factor 3.

4.3.2 Page limitations shall be treated as maximums. If exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Each page shall be counted except the following:

a) Volume Cover Pages

b) Table of Contents

c) List of Tables and Figures

d) Glossaries and Acronym List

e) Tabs and Dividers

f) Blank pages

4.4 Proposal Formatting

4.4.1 Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document and any non-narrative sections (e.g., tables, graphs, charts, figures), the text size shall be no less than Microsoft Word Times New Roman 12 point font, single-spaced. Pages shall be numbered sequentially by volume. In the event the Offeror creates an ambiguity, the Government may exercise its own discretion in counting pages. If the page count is exceeded, the excess pages will not be read or considered in the evaluation of the proposal. Special consideration will not be given for colors, pictures or unnecessary graphics. Other than the electronic media solicited, audio and video recordings, or any other electronic media (i.e., CD & tape) will not be accepted.

4.4.2 Foldout pages may only be used for large tables, charts, graphs, diagrams and schematics. Foldout pages may not be used for pages of text. Legible tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, schematics and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, and plans. These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. The 11 x 17 inch size page will count as two pages. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the font shall be no smaller than 8 point. All information (except documentation numbers, classification markings, and page numbers) shall be contained within an image area of 9 x 15 inches. The 11 x 17 inch size pages shall print so that the Government can read and evaluate them

4.5 Glossary

Each volume shall contain a glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used for the entire proposal, with an explanation for each. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.

4.6 Table of Contents and Indexing

4.6.1 Each volume shall contain a detailed Table of Contents to delineate the subparagraphs within that volume. A Master Table of Contents, contained in Volume I, shall contain a consolidation of the individual Table of Contents for all Volumes. See Section 5.1.

4.6.2 Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections within each volume. The Offeror shall index the sections identified in the volume organization outlined in each volume. Tabs do not count against the page limitations for these respective volumes.

4.7 Tables and Figures

Tables and figures can be used to illustrate quantitative or qualitative data. Tables and figures are not required. If provided, each volume shall contain a list of all tables and figures within that volume. The List of Tables and Figures will not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes. Tables, graphs, charts, and figures are considered non-narrative sections of the proposal and are only to be provided to enhance the proposal narrative. If, at the PCO’s discretion, an excessive amount of narrative is included in a table, chart, graphic, or illustration in an effort to subvert the proposal’s page limitations, the text may be severed from the non-narrative section and included in the page count of the narrative section of the proposal.

4.8 Electronic Proposal Instructions

Complete electronic volumes shall be submitted in Microsoft Office 2016 or earlier compatible version. Offerors are permitted to submit documents such as signed letters (i.e., OCI, Consent and Client Authorization Letters) and embedded graphics (if applicable) in .pdf format, with the exception of cost/price spreadsheets. See Attachment L-11 for detailed cost/price software instructions.

Sound or video files shall not be embedded into the proposal files.

5.0 CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION (VOLUME I)

5.1 The Offeror shall include a master table of contents of the entire proposal (include in Contract Documentation volume only). See Section 4.6 and Table L-1: Proposal Organization and Content.

5.2 Model Contract (SF33)

The Offeror shall provide a complete copy of this RFP (including Section L and Section M, less other attachments, with any amendments) with the electronic signature of an official authorized to contractually bind the Offeror in Block 30 of the SF33. The Offeror must complete the following sections within the RFP:

· Section A (SF33, Blocks 13 through 18)

· Section B Offerors will populate the estimated cost and award fee values for Section B of each of the four Task Order Solicitations. Offerors will populate the quantity tab on the labor CLINs with the hours in the EPW and annotate the unit tab with “hours”. Offerors should ensure that the fill-ins in Section B are consistent with the pricing information provided in the attachment L-8, EPW.

· Section K, Representations, Certifications and other Statements of Offeror Offerors shall complete representations, certifications, acknowledgments and statements via the System for Award Management (SAM) at https://www.sam.gov. An electronic copy shall be included in the Contract Documentation volume. Any additional Section K information shall also be included in this section. NOTE: Offerors shall verify that “reps and certs” are also contained in SAM to ensure that all “reps and certs” completed and submitted via SAM correspond with those included in the solicitation. For example, the solicitation may contain new cybersecurity clauses that are not available in SAM. In such cases, the Offeror shall complete the applicable “reps and certs” included in the solicitation and submit with its proposal.

5.3 The offeror is required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements. The offeror must clearly identify any exceptions to the solicitation terms and conditions and provide complete accompanying rationale. Each exception shall refer to a paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation to document any exceptions to, or deviations from, any of the clauses or special contract requirements along with justification.

5.4 Ground Rules and Assumptions

The Offeror must clearly identify any ground rules and assumptions made in preparing the proposal.

5.5 OCI Disclosures

The Offeror must submit an OCI Disclosure Form for each instance of MDA related work (e.g. subcontract, prime contract, etc.), whether contracted by MDA or another Government Agency as detailed in paragraph 1.6(b)(1).

5.6 OCI Mitigation Plan

If the Offeror elects to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan, it should be included in Volume I at Tab 6. See paragraphs 1.6(b)(2) through 1.6(b)(4)for additional considerations. The PCO may request mitigation plans as required depending on the content provided in the OCI disclosure forms.

6.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (VOLUME II)

6.1 Company Information and Proposal Validity

The Executive Summary shall include company information and a summary of the Offeror’s proposal. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the solicitation requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal. The Offeror shall make a clear statement in the Executive Summary that the proposal is valid at least 365 days from the proposal due date.

6.1.2 Company Information: The Offeror shall provide the Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations, company/division's street address, county and facility code, CAGE code, DUNS code, and size of business (large or small). The Offeror shall also provide the mailing address, telephone and fax numbers and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA), and Government Paying Office including the name, telephone and fax number for the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO). The Offeror shall provide a single point of contact and one alternate for all matters dealing with its proposal including name, position title, address, phone number, fax number and email address. In addition, the Offeror shall provide the name and contact information for its Facility Security Officer that is responsible for managing the Offeror’s facility and personnel clearance actions.

6.1.3 Proposal Summary: The Offeror shall provide a top-level summary of its proposal suitable for describing its approach to Agency senior leadership.

Include documentation to facilitate the PCO’s determination that the Offeror has adequate financial resources to perform the contract or ability to obtain them (e.g. a letter of credit from a bank or other applicable information). Title this section of the Executive Summary: Financial Resources Information. The information provided shall not be dated earlier than three (3) months from the date of the solicitation.

6.2 Proposal Cross Reference Matrix

The Offeror shall provide a matrix using the format below (Table L-2) to cross reference its proposal to, at a minimum, the SOW, Section L, and Section M. The Offeror’s proposal paragraph number and format shall mirror Section L and Section M paragraph numbering to the maximum extent practicable. The Offeror shall include and populate additional columns as it sees fit to accommodate a more efficient evaluation.

TABLE L-2: Proposal Cross Reference Matrix Format

6.3 Limitation on Subcontracting

6.3.1 Offeror’s proposal shall describe an approach the prime contractor will use to comply with Department of Defense (DoD) Class Deviation 2020-O0008, Revision 1 to FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on Subcontracting, for small businesses during efficient performance of the contract’s entire period of performance. When applicable, the proposed approach shall clearly specify any similarly situated entity(s) used to comply with Limitations on Subcontracting for small businesses. "Similarly situated entity" means a first-tier subcontractor, including an independent contractor, that has the same small business program status as that which qualified the prime contractor for the award; and is considered small for the NAICS code the prime contractor assigned to the subcontract the subcontractor will perform.

6.3.2 Team Members are the entities that make up a joint venture or any other partnership or teaming arrangement that is formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation. All forms of joint ventures that are classified as a small business in accordance with FAR part 19 and the Small Business Administration (SBA) requirements are acceptable for this acquisition. Industry should review FAR subpart 9.6, FAR part 19, and 13 CFR part 121 for information on joint ventures. The responsibility for ensuring that any joint venture meets the SBA requirements to be classified as a Small Business rests with the Offeror. Teaming agreements should be provided with a joint venture’s proposal.

6.3.3 Calculation of the amount that can be subcontracted (Limitations on Subcontracting)

A small business shall not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid to it by the government to firms that are not similarly situated.

6.3.4 The proposed approach to comply with Limitations on Subcontracting for small businesses must not violate the ostensible subcontractor rule. The ostensible subcontractor rule treats a prime Offeror and its subcontractor “as joint ventures, and therefore affiliates, for size determination purposes” when the subcontractor “performs primary and vital requirements of a contract,” or the prime Offeror is “unusually reliant” upon the subcontractor.

The following four key factors contributed to the findings of unusual reliance:

1) The proposed subcontractor is the incumbent contractor and is ineligible to compete for the procurement;

2) The prime Offeror plans to hire the large majority of its workforce from the subcontractor;

3) The prime Offeror’s proposed management previously served with the subcontractor on the incumbent contract; and

4) The prime Offeror lacks relevant experience and must rely upon its more experienced subcontractor to win the contract.

When these four factors are present, “violation of the ostensible subcontractor rule is more likely to be found if the proposed subcontractor will perform 40% or more of the contract.”

7.0 FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL, (VOLUME III)

7.1 The Offeror’s Technical Volume will consist of the following subfactors:

7.2 Subfactor TS1: Pacific Collector Range Safety System (PCRSS)

The winning Offeror will be required to perform all PWS requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to, and understanding of maintaining System Readiness, Test Execution, and System Development and Integration of Pacific Collector Range Safety System (PCRSS), PCRSS Test Bed (PTB), and Pacific Collector Weather System (PCWX).

The Offeror’s proposal shall describe its approach and understanding to:

Mission Support:

a) Providing mission planning support to meet mission test requirements, which includes day-to-day mission coordination, implementation, documentation of mission requirements, analysis, creation of deployment plans, mission countdown checklists, concept of operations, and provision planning (PWS 3.3.1.1)

b) Performing on-site system preparation and activation, to include, testing, troubleshooting, and identifying and executing corrective actions to ensure PCRSS and the PC Weather System are mission-ready. (PWS 3.3.3.2)

c) Providing all required data products to the Missile Defense Data Center (MDDC). (PWS 3.3.1.10) Operations & Sustainment and Improvement & Modernization:

d) Providing operations and maintenance of the PCRSS, PCRSS Test Bed, and the Pacific Collector Weather System. Maintaining these systems to ensure they are in an operational status for MDA missions. Maintenance generally includes O&M support plans and recommendations, performing regularly scheduled inspections, operation, testing, and diagnosis, repair or replacement of parts or units. Providing a maintenance plan, maintenance results, and execution of maintenance plans of these systems at their current in-field deployed locations when maintenance/repair is required (PWS 3.4.1.3).

e) Performing engineering and re-engineering of instrumentation systems as a result of parts or technology obsolescence, new requirements, and new technologies. Suggesting new solutions to the Government regarding parts obsolescence. Re-designing or upgrading hardware, software, firmware, wiring, and interfaces, at any or all of the component, unit, or system levels. Providing associated technical drawings and documentation. Integrating and testing the affected systems for requirements compliance. (PWS 3.4.1.5) Configuration Management:

f) Establishing and maintaining a Configuration Management (CM) Program for DISC instrumentation systems. Developing a Contractor Configuration Management Plan IAW best practices and guidelines documented in EIA-649 and MIL-HDBK-61A, tailored to meet Government requirements to document the CM program. The CM program will consist of, at minimum, configuration management and planning configuration identification, configuration change management, configuration status accounting, and configuration verification and audits (PWS 3.4.1.8) Frequency/Spectrum Allocation:

g) Coordinating with regional frequency managers, local frequency authorization resources and organizations, or the State Department to assist in obtaining frequency assignments in broad open ocean areas, near the Continental United States (CONUS) and other US facilities, or foreign ports. Ensuring frequency allocation documentation is provided such that mission needs in areas of operation are met (PWS 3.4.1.7) Range Safety Certification:

h) Ensuring the PCRSS Range Safety Certification stays current and valid as the system goes through its operational life until PCRSS is decommissioned and properly disposed of (PWS 3.4.1.3.1)

7.3 Subfactor TS2: X-Band Transportable Radar-1 (XTR-1)

The winning Offeror will be required to perform all PWS requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the offeror shall propose its capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to, and understanding of maintaining System Readiness, Test Execution, and System Development and Integration of X-Band Transportable Radar (XTR-1).

The Offeror’s proposal shall describe its approach and understanding to :

Mission Support:

a) Providing mission planning support to meet mission test requirements, which includes day-to-day mission coordination, implementation, documentation of mission requirements, analysis, creation of deployment plans, mission countdown checklists, concept of operations, and provision planning (PWS 3.3.1.1)

b) Performing on-site system preparation and activation, to include, testing, troubleshooting, and identifying and executing corrective actions to ensure XTR-1 is mission-ready. (PWS 3.3.3.2)

c) Providing all required data products to the Missile Defense Data Center (MDDC). (PWS 3.3.1.10)

Operations & Sustainment and Improvement & Modernization:

d) Providing operations and maintenance of the XTR-1. Maintaining these systems to ensure they are in an operational status for MDA missions. Maintenance generally includes O&M support plans and recommendations, performing regularly scheduled inspections, operation, testing, and diagnosis, repair or replacement of parts or units. Providing a maintenance plan, maintenance results, and execution of maintenance plans of these systems at their current in-field deployed locations when maintenance/repair is required (PWS 3.4.1.3).

e) Performing engineering and re-engineering of instrumentation systems as a result of parts or technology obsolescence, new requirements, and new technologies. Suggesting new solutions to the Government regarding parts obsolescence. Re-designing or upgrading hardware, software, firmware, wiring, and interfaces, at any or all of the component, unit, or system levels. Providing associated technical drawings and documentation. Integrating and testing the affected systems for requirements compliance. (PWS 3.4.1.5) Configuration Management:

f) Establishing and maintaining a Configuration Management (CM) Program for DISC instrumentation systems. Developing a Contractor Configuration Management Plan IAW best practices and guidelines documented in EIA-649 and MIL-HDBK-61A, tailored to meet Government requirements to document the CM program. The CM program will consist of, at minimum, configuration management and planning configuration identification, configuration change management, configuration status accounting, and configuration verification and audits (PWS 3.4.1.8) Frequency/Spectrum Allocation:

g) Coordinating with regional frequency managers, local frequency authorization resources and organizations, or the State Department to assist in obtaining frequency assignments in broad open ocean areas, near the Continental United States (CONUS) and other US facilities, or foreign ports. Ensuring frequency allocation documentation is provided such that mission needs in areas of operation are met (PWS 3.4.1.7) Range Safety Certification:

h) Ensuring the PCRSS Range Safety Certification stays current and valid as the system goes through its operational life until PCRSS is decommissioned and properly disposed of (PWS 3.4.1.3.1)

7.4 Subfactor TS3: Mission Execution and Display Distribution (MEDDS)

The winning Offeror will be required to perform all PWS requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offerors shall propose its capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to, and understanding of meeting the MDA MEDDS requirements for System Readiness, Test Execution, and System Development and Integration.

The Offeror’s proposal shall describe its approach and understanding to:

a. Transitioning current MDA system requirements into MEDDS to ensure an efficient process and orderly transition with minimal disruption to test operations.

b. Providing support for MDA flight tests, ground tests, data collection events and operational testing. Managing system capacity, procedures, and configuration control to support multiple disparate same day test events.

c. Maintaining the MEDDS systems to ensure an operational status for MDA missions including O&S support plans and recommendations, performing regularly scheduled inspections, operation, testing, and diagnosis, repair or replacement of parts or units and performing maintenance of these MEDDS systems at their current in-field deployed locations.

d. Providing expertise in the areas of mission and test audio/video (situational awareness) and data (telemetry, radar, meta-data) distribution over local and wide area networks in a secure environment.

e. Ensuring that data transport systems are configured to receive and relay source data across the MEDDS enterprise to execution nodes, acquisition sites, and remote mission monitoring nodes.

f. Operating the Radio Frequency Telemetry Validation Unit (RFTVU) and Flight Termination System Test Set (FTSTS) for telemetry checkout and simulation recording activities required to support flight test vehicle Integration and Check Out (I&CO), and verification prior to the test execution phase of operations.

g. Planning, developing, operating, and distributing specialized missile defense test assurance products including time synchronized telemetry site playback data files.

h. Engineering and re-engineering of instrumentation systems as a result of parts or technology obsolescence, new requirements, and new technologies; Integrating and testing the affected systems for requirements compliance.

7.5 Subfactor TS4: Cyber Compliance

The winning Offeror will be required to perform all PWS requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offerors shall propose its capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to and understanding of:

a) Developing and maintaining all of the documentation necessary to ensure acceptance by the MDA Authorizing Official (AO). The documentation must be prepared in accordance with DoD Risk Management Framework (RMF) policy located in DoDI 8500.1 in accordance with PWS 3.3.1. The required artifacts are to be included in each system’s Enterprise Mission Assurance Support Service (eMASS) instance in accordance with PWS 3.3.4.

b) Securing DTR assets through implementation and understanding of Security Technical Implementation Guides (STIGs), Security Requirements Guides (SRGs), and other security best practices as described in PWS 3.3.2.

c) Ensuring an adequately staffed and qualified workforce to operate and maintain DTR assets in accordance with Cyber PWS section 3.3.6. This includes demonstrating that the workforce is provided ample training opportunities to maintain certifications and keep abreast of the latest cybersecurity best practices and available technologies

d) Ensuring a current Authorization to Operate (ATO) is in place for each system for all missions.

e) Ensuring configuration management procedures are in place to provide accurate logging, monitoring, and tracking within eMASS in accordance with RMF policy and DT ISSM guidance.

8.0 FACTOR 2: MANAGEMENT

8.1 The Offeror’s Management Volume shall consist of the following subfactors:

8.2 Subfactor MS1: Recruitment, Retention, Surge Support

The winning Offeror will be required to perform all PWS requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to and understanding of:

a) Organizing, staffing, and allocating resources to meet the all four task order PWS requirements to include surge support.

b) Recruiting and retaining a well-trained workforce to meet all four task order PWS requirements. The approach will be evaluated on how the Offeror will mitigate personnel turnover due to high operations tempo and frequent deployments in stressful environments.

c) Providing a crossed-trained work force for Task Order PWS efficiencies.

8.3 Subfactor MS2: Management Approach

The winning Offeror will be required to perform all PWS requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to and understanding of:

a) Providing a DISC program wide plan for effective planning, allocating and controlling of resources.

b) Providing a DISC program wide approach to executing multiple task orders simultaneously while managing technical, performance, cost, and schedule risks.

c) Providing a program wide approach to efficiently manage human resources, processes, and inventory across common functions and requirements for all task orders.

8.4 Subfactor MS3: Transition Planning

The winning Offeror will be required to perform all PWS requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its capability based on its (inclusive of team members such as prime, subcontractor, or joint venture) approach to and understanding of:

a) Describe the proposed transition process to transition resources and personnel to this contract required to perform the Task Order PWS requirements.

b) Describe the process to work with the incumbent contractor(s) to smoothly transition the DISC Program products / operations.

c) Provide a phased in realistic schedule, which includes key milestones with metrics to measure progress, to successfully transition all tasks within a designated transition period of no more than 90 days.

9.0 FACTOR 3: PAST PERFORMANCE, VOL VI

Even though the evaluation of acceptability of Past Performance is separate and distinct from Determination of Responsibility required by FAR subpart 9.1, past performance information contained herein may be used to support the Determination of Responsibility for the successful Offeror. Information provided on the Past Performance Questionnaires assists the evaluation team in determining the acceptability for past performance.

9.1 The Offeror shall submit a complete list of all teaming members with this volume. Attachment L-3, Past Performance Information (PPI), shall be submitted for the prime and the major subcontractors expected to perform aspects of the effort the Offeror considers critical to the overall successful performance. “Major Subcontractor” is defined as a subcontractor whose proposed effort provides at least 10% of the proposed total price of the contract. For joint ventures PPIs will be submitted from those joint venture team members proposed to perform the effort required by the SOW. Team members are the entities that make up a joint venture or any other partnership or teaming arrangement that is formed for the purpose of responding to this solicitation. PPI can reflect experience at either the prime contractor or subcontractor level. Offerors must demonstrate how the Offeror’s and subcontractors’ past performance meets the relevancy definition in Section M. This information is to assist the evaluators in determining relevancy of past performance submitted for the evaluation by confirming the roles of the team members compared to the scope of the contract(s) submitted for evaluation.

9.2 Organizational Structure Change History

9.2.1 Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant present or past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition.

9.2.2 Offerors shall include a “roadmap” describing all changes in the organization of the Offeror and any teaming partners. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts identified for past performance evaluation/performance assessment. The "roadmap" shall be both specifically applicable to the efforts identified and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources. This information will facilitate relevancy determination for contracts submitted for past performance.

9.2.3 The organizational change…