Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

L-1 SPECIAL NOTICE TO OFFERORS

L-1.1. This is a best-value source selection conducted in accordance with (IAW) Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO) 15.2, Department of Defense (DoD) Source Selection Procedures dated 20 August 2022 as supplemented.

L-1.1.2. This requirement is solicited as a non-commercial, competitive acquisition under NAICS Code 481211 - Nonscheduled Chartered Passenger Air Transportation; Size Standard of 1,500 employees.

L-1.1.3. 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 upfront.

L-1.2. Funds have been programmed but 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 proposal preparation costs.

L-1.3. 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 include it in Volume II, Price, of the proposal.

L-1.4. Section L of this solicitation provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the required proposal volumes. Proposals must include all data and information requested in this solicitation.

L-1.5. Offerors submitting a proposal as the prime contractor in response to this solicitation are not permitted to submit a separate proposal under which they would be a subcontractor, or team member to another prime. Subcontractors are permitted to support multiple prime contractors.

L-2 USE OF NON-GOVERNMENT TECHNICAL ADVISOR

L-2.1. Offerors are advised that proposals submitted in response to this solicitation will be disclosed to a non-U.S.

Government technical advisor who serves as a mission partner under the joint U.S.-Canada North Warning System (NWS) program. This individual is an official representative of the Canadian Department of National Defense (DND) and is not a contracted Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS) provider. The technical advisor for this acquisition is:

Name: Menan Fikak Organization: Canadian Department of National Defense (Liaison to HQ ACC AMIC/Det 1)

L-2.2. Mr. Fikak will provide technical subject matter expertise and analysis regarding arctic fixed-wing airlift operations and DND requirements to the U.S. Government's source selection team. He will not serve as a voting member of the Source Selection Evaluation Board (SSEB). All inherently governmental functions, to include the formal evaluation, scoring, rating of proposals, and the final source selection decision, will be performed exclusively by U.S. Government personnel.

L-2.3. In providing this support, the named advisor will be required to safeguard all offeror proprietary data. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 3.104, the advisor has executed a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) with the U.S. Government, which is on file.

L-2.4. Offerors with a legitimate concern regarding the non-Government technical advisor’s review of the proposal are required to notify the government and provide detailed justification prior to the proposal submission date. Mere notification of a concern without detailed justification may limit evaluation and may result in the rejection of the proposal. Finally, submission of a proposal without notification of a concern constitutes the offeror’s consent to the disclosure of its proprietary data to the non-Government technical advisor.

L-3 FORMAL COMMUNICATIONS

L-3.1. Any formal communication such as requests for clarification, negotiations, and information concerning this solicitation shall be submitted by e-mail to the Contracting Officer (CO)/Contract Manager (CM) at the address below:

ACC AMIC/PKBA

ATTN: Maj Ryan Tagatac (CO) / TSgt Nelson Sosa (CM) Reference:

Solicitation No. FA489026R0027 E-mail: ryan_mark.tagatac.3@us.af.mil / nelson.sosa@us.af.mil

L-3.2. Questions in response to this solicitation are due no later than 15 calendar days after final solicitation release date by 12:00 noon ET to the POCs listed above. Questions received after this date and time are considered late and will be addressed at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer. All questions impacting the solicitation will be posted to SAM.gov without referencing the originating sources. NOTE: This solicitation stands independently from prior draft notices. Any previous questions or concerns that may be outstanding must be submitted again.

L-4 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

L-4.1. Proposals in response to this solicitation shall be valid for 270 calendar days (RFO 52.215-1(d)). Block 12 of Standard Form (SF) 33 is completed to read 270 calendar days.

L-4.2. Per RFO 52.215-1(c)(1), offerors will submit a proposal package electronically via Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) Solicitation module on or before the date and time specified on the SF 33. Alternate submission methods (i.e. email) may be granted at the Government’s discretion only if the offeror notifies the CO in writing no later than two (2) business days before the solicitation deadline and receives approval by the CO in writing. Any proposal(s) received through other methods that have not been previously approved by the CO may not be considered. A request for alternate proposal submission methods will not extend the time or date that the offerors’ proposals are due. Additionally, offerors are advised that DoD and Air Force (AF) cyber-security systems may significantly delay or even halt delivery of proposals. Therefore, Offerors are strongly encouraged to plan accordingly, submit proposals at least one business day prior to the designated submission deadline, and ensure affirmative receipt of proposals (including all proposal attachments) through use of read/delivery receipts or confirmation from the Contracting Office. In the absence of confirmation from the Contracting Office or other affirmative evidence of receipt, offerors shall assume the proposal has not been received. Proposals not received by the proposal due date on the SF 33 will be regarded as “late” and will not be considered.

L-4.2.1. PIEE Submission. Procurement Integrated Enterprise Environment (PIEE) address is “https://piee.eb.mil” (RFO 52.215-1(c)(1)).

L-4.2.2. PIEE Solicitation Module Registration. The Solicitation Module is a vendor portal for solicitations within the PIEE platform to automate and secure the process for capturing solicitations, attachments, and responses from industry. The Solicitation Module allows vendors to retrieve and respond to solicitations and communicate directly with Government Solicitation Managers in a secure environment. Vendors submitting an offer/proposal in the Solicitation Module must register in PIEE and submit a request for the Proposal Manager role. Training resources are provided below (there are additional resources available online as well).

Vendor Access Instructions:

https://piee.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/web/homepage/vendorGettingStartedHelp.xhtml

Proposal Manager Instructions in the Solicitation Module:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/documents/Proposal_Manager.pdf

All PIEE Solicitation Module Web Based Training:

https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/sol/index.xhtml

The Government strongly recommends that Offerors register and familiarize themselves with the system well in advance of the proposal deadline both for retrieving information and to enable them to submit their offers in a timely manner.

L-4.2.3. The Government does not issue automatic or unilateral confirmations of receipt. It is the offeror’s sole responsibility to confirm the Government's receipt of their electronic proposal prior to the submission deadline. Offerors must email the CO and/or Contract Manager(s) (CM) to request confirmation that their submission has been received by ACC-AMIC/PKBA.

L-4.3. Offerors Contact Information. Offeror shall provide:

mailto:ryan_mark.tagatac.3@us.af.mil mailto:nelson.sosa@us.af.mil https://piee.eb.mil/ https://piee.eb.mil/xhtml/unauth/web/homepage/vendorGettingStartedHelp.xhtml https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/sol/documents/Proposal_Manager.pdf https://pieetraining.eb.mil/wbt/xhtml/wbt/sol/index.xhtml

L-4.3.1. 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. (RFO 52.215-1(c)(2)(iv))

L-4.3.2. 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.

(RFO 52.215-1(c)(2)(v))

L-4.4. Late proposals will be processed in accordance with RFO 52.215-1(c)(3)(ii) “Submission, modifications, revisions, and withdrawals of offers.” The Government will retain the unopened proposal. However, the proposal will not be evaluated or considered for award.

L-5 EXCEPTIONS

L-5.1. 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 subfactors. Failure to meet a requirement may result in an offer being ineligible for award. If offerors find it necessary to take exception to any of the requirements specified in this solicitation (Sections A through M, to include the Performance Work Statement [PWS] and attachments), clearly identify each exception at the front of the appropriate volume along with a complete explanation of why the exception was taken and the resulting benefit to the Government as well as 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 shown below.

Solicitation Document Page/Paragraph Requirement/Portion Rationale and Impact CLIN section PWS, Section X RFP, Section X Section L and M section, etc.

Applicable page and paragraph numbers

Identify the requirement or portion to which exception is taken

Describe the rationale and impact of the exception

L-5.2. If the offeror takes no exception to the stated requirements, a statement to this effect shall be included at the front of the subject volume. The Government will consider the absence of a stated exception at the front of the subject volume to mean the offeror takes no exception to the solicitation and the proposal will be evaluated as submitted.

L-6 PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS

L-6.1. The instructions below prescribe the format of proposals. The proposal shall include all the information requested in the specific instructions. Failure to include all information requested may adversely affect the evaluation and may result in the proposal being ineligible for award.

L-6.2. A proposal that is orderly and sufficiently documented will enable the Government to easily understand and perform a thorough and fair evaluation. The Government may incorporate into this contract, by reference or full text, portions of the successful offeror’s proposal submitted in response to this solicitation as revised and supplemented through the final proposal revision.

L-6.3. Proposal Format. A complete proposal consists of two (2) separate volumes: Technical and Price. Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated with no 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.

L-6.3.1. General Page Instructions. Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches unless stated otherwise within this document. Pages shall be single spaced, and the text size shall be no smaller than Microsoft Word, Times New Roman 10-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 10-point font. Text lines and table lines of text shall be single-spaced. All pages provided by the offeror more than the stated limitations will not be evaluated. These page size and format restrictions shall apply to responses to ENs if determined necessary.

L-6.3.2. Table, Chart, and other graphics Instructions. Legible tables, charts, graphics, figures, etc. may be used where a single 8 ½” x 11” page cannot accommodate a table or other graphic. These displays shall not exceed 11” x 17” in size and they shall not be used for pages of text. Each 11” x 17” page shall count as 1 page and are included in the page count, with exception of items stated in L-6.3.5. Text shall be no less than 10-point Times New Roman font, and margins shall be no less than ½-inch on all sides unless stated otherwise within this document.

L-6.3.3. Submission Format. The Offeror shall submit each volume in electronic format readable by Microsoft (MS) Office Word 365, MS Office Excel 365 (ensure all documents are saved in .docx or .xlsx format) or Adobe PDF. Each proposal volume shall be in a single searchable file, with copy/paste capability. Offerors shall label each document with the volume and section numbers to which it belongs. This will provide organizational structure and allow rapid location of all portions of the proposal. The offeror shall use the following labeling format for their submissions: [Offeror Name]_[Volume #- Subfactor/Aspect #]_[Document/File Name]: i.e., Acme_Vol II_Price].

L-6.3.4. Organization/Page Limit. Information submitted shall not exceed the page limits stated below for each volume.

Evaluators will only read up to the maximum number of pages specified. If the page limit is exceeded, the excess pages will be unread and will not be considered for evaluation purposes. Offerors may submit an executive summary for Volume I – Technical; the executive summary shall not exceed two (2) pages and will not be included in the page count. Page limitations are as follows:

Volume Title Page Limit

I Technical 50 II Price NONE

L-6.3.5. Pages Not Included in Page Count. The organizational chart, acronym list, cross-reference matrix, and overview section (for exceptions) 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” will not be counted.

L-6.3.6. Offerors shall ensure that their proposed technical and price volumes are consistent and accurately reflect the proposed performance/technical approach and price. Any inconsistency between the proposal volumes shall be explained within the proposal. The burden of proposal accuracy rests with the offeror. The technical and price factors will be evaluated in accordance with the evaluation criteria stated in Section M.

L-6.3.7. Proposal Markings. Proposals shall be marked IAW RFO 52.215-1(e), Restriction on Disclosure and Use of Data, and RFO 3.104-4, Disclosure, Protection, and Marking of Contractor Bid or Proposal Information and Source Selection Information. Offerors shall not include proprietary markings on attachments and documents that will become a part of the contract (i.e., L-10.2. Proposal Documentation.)

L-7 INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME I, FACTOR 1 - TECHNICAL

L-7.1. To facilitate evaluation, the Technical Volume shall be specific, detailed, succinct, and complete to clearly and fully demonstrate that the offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements to accomplish 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 this solicitation, 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 evaluation subfactors. The Source Selection Authority, in consultation with the Source Selection Team, 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 referenced AF publications, etc.), statements paraphrasing the PWS or parts thereof (including applicable AF publications, technical data, 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 and such data should not be relied upon or 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 and subfactors must be included in the proposal in an orderly format. This section shall not contain pricing data.

L-7.2.Technical Contents

L-7.2.1. Table of Contents. A table of contents shall be included in Volume I. 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.

L-7.2.2. Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms. A glossary of all abbreviations and acronyms used, and an explanation for each, shall be provided as an attachment within the Technical Volume. Glossaries do not count against the page limitations.

L-7.2.3. Optional Executive Summary (limit is 2 pages). If provided, the optional executive summary should include a concise summary of the offeror’s proposed approach to the NWS Fixed-Wing Airlift Services effort.

L-7.2.4. Cross-Reference Matrix. As part of the offeror’s proposal, a separate cross-reference matrix shall be completed and submitted with the Technical Volume. All referenced paragraphs include all subsequent subparagraphs (for example, 5.0 includes 5.1, 5.2, 5.2.1, etc.). Offeror shall fill in the columns related to their proposal. Offerors are ultimately responsible for ensuring that their proposal fully addresses all areas and that all requested information is completed IAW Sections L and M of this solicitation. Offerors shall complete the last column of this matrix with paragraph number references from the Technical Volume.

CROSS-REFERENCE MATRIX EXAMPLE

Subfactors PWS Paragraph(s) & Appendices Section L Section M Technical Proposal

Paragraph(s) A – Technical Experience N/A L-7.3.1. M-2.1.2.

B – Payload and Distance Requirements PWS paras 1.1, 1.1.1, 1.7

L-7.3.2.

M-2.1.3.

C – Operations L-7.3.3. M-2.1.4.

Aspect I – Approach to Simultaneous Fixed-Wing Operations PWS para 5.2 L-7.3.3.1. M-2.1.4.1.

Aspect II – Approach to Cross-Zone Airlift Operations PWS para 5.3 L-7.3.3.2. M-2.1.4.2.

L-7.3. Technical Subfactors. The purpose of section L-7.3. is to set forth, in the most comprehensive manner, offerors’ understanding of the program requirements and to demonstrate their ability to meet the evaluation requirements of Section M-

2.1 FACTOR 1 - TECHNICAL. The Technical volume shall present a clear, concise description of how offerors plan to meet award requirements and shall not contain pricing data.

L-7.3.1. Subfactor A: Technical Experience. Provide evidence of technical fixed-wing airlift services experience performing similar scope of work in the arctic for a minimum of 12 months within the last five (5) years preceding the date of issuance of this solicitation. The Government will not consider performance on an effort that concluded more than five (5) years prior to the issuance date of this solicitation. The offeror shall include (1) a summary of the technical experience, and (2) contract references corroborating recent and similar technical scope experience.

a. Summary. Describe roles of offerors and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners in relation to technical experience information. This summary shall include the contract number/task order number, contracting organization, and government point(s) of contact for the contract. The Government reserves the right to contact the POC to validate the technical experience submitted.

b. Technical Experience References (see Attachment 1). Technical Experience Information shall be submitted using

Attachment 1. The Offeror shall provide a Technical Experience Contract Reference sheet for each referenced contract.

The offeror shall submit a maximum of three (3) contract references corroborating recent and similar scope of work as the prime contractor. If the Offeror does not have any technical experience where it performed as a prime contractor, the Government will accept technical experience from a teaming partner, mentor/protégé, subcontractor, or where the offeror performed as a major subcontractor if the portion of the work completed was similar in size/scope to this requirement. Any teaming partner arrangements, joint ventures, mentor/protégé, or subcontracting teams will be considered. Contract references are required on the offeror and any teaming partner, to include major subcontractors, that will perform at least 20% of this effort.

c. Similar Scope Work. Offerors shall submit experience information on contracts they consider demonstrate their ability to perform the North Warning System (NWS) Fixed-Wing Airlift requirement IAW the PWS 1.1.1. This information should include rationale supporting their assertion of similar scoped work of this solicitation to include fixed wing airlift operations as specified in PWS para 1.1.1 and 5.3, based in arctic and isolated environments with sustained subzero temperatures and where airlift is the sole transportation method. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed similar in scope to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the NWS Fixed Wing Airlift Services PWS they relate. The Government is not bound by the Offeror’s opinion.

d. Multiple-award IDIQ. Multiple award IDIQ contracts are not allowed to be used as a technical experience reference however; an individual task order issued against the multiple-award IDIQ is allowed. Multiple task orders issued against a multiple-award IDIQ cannot be combined and counted as one technical experience reference.

e. Single-award IDIQ. Offerors using single-award IDIQ contracts as a technical experience reference shall include BOTH the IDIQ contract number AND the individual task order number(s) to verify and validate that the IDIQ being referenced is in fact a single-award IDIQ contract. A maximum of three (3) task orders issued against a single-award IDIQ can be combined and counted as one (1) technical experience reference to address the criteria.

f. Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs). BPA contract numbers are not allowed to be used as a technical experience reference. However, the individual call/delivery order numbers issued against the BPA are allowed. Offerors using single-award BPA call/order numbers as a technical experience reference shall include BOTH the BPA number AND the individual call/order number to verify and validate that the BPA being referenced is in fact a single award BPA. A maximum of three (3) single-award BPA call/orders issued against a single-award IDIQ can be combined and counted as one (1) technical experience reference to address the criteria. Multiple award BPA call/delivery orders issued against a multiple-award BPA cannot be combined and will count as one contract reference

g. Organizational Structure Change History. Many companies have acquired, have been acquired by, or have otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of similar scope efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what technical experience is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate the Government’s technical experience evaluation, offerors shall include in this proposal volume a detailed “roadmap” describing all such organizational changes (if applicable), to include specific names of “sister”, predecessor, subsidiary companies with their applicable CAGE codes, and dates of organizational changes.

L-7.3.2. Subfactor B: Payload and Distance Capabilities. In accordance with paragraph 1.1.1 of the PWS , provide a comprehensive approach to successfully accomplish mission requirements with Fixed Wing Airlift assets that thoroughly substantiate the following:

a. The Fixed Wing aircraft and crew in each Zone shall be certified and qualified to operate with Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) and Visual Flight Rules (VFR) as flight conditions dictate IAW PWS para 1.7.

b. Demonstrate the capacity of transporting, on each flight, any combination of passenger(s) and/or cargo totaling a minimum payload of 2,100 pounds and 3,000 pounds in all zones, IAW PWS, para 1.1.1.

c. Demonstrate the capacity of transporting the total payload for a range of 500 statute miles for 2,100-pound airlift and 280 statute miles for 3,000-pound airlift, in all zones IAW PWS, para 1.1.1.

L-7.3.3. Subfactor C: Operations. Under this subfactor, the Government will evaluate two (2) aspects.

L-7.3.3.1. Aspect 1 – Approach to Simultaneous Fixed Wing Operations. Provide a detailed approach describing your proposed methodology for successfully conducting simultaneous Fixed Wing airlift operations in all zones. Your description should articulate the end-to-end sequence of activities, including the management of aircraft, personnel, to include any ground support assets. Furthermore, describe your approach to risk management and outline the contingency procedures you would enact to address potential disruptions, all while adhering to the 48-hour call out requirements specified in PWS Section 5.

L-7.3.3.2. Aspect 2 – Approach to Cross-Zone Airlift Operations Provide a comprehensive narrative that demonstrates an understanding of cross-zone airlift requirements including type of aircraft assigned to the cross-zone mission. Additionally, proposals must thoroughly substantiate the following:

(a) The Fixed Wing aircraft assigned to the Cross-Zone airlift shall be capable of transporting a minimum of 6,000 pounds of cargo or passengers per trip in accordance with PWS, para 5.3.

(b) The Fixed Wing aircraft assigned to the Cross-Zone airlift missions will perform two trips per month during May through September each year of the contract. Proposals must describe prioritization of this airlift mission over other non-NWS taskings.

L-8 INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME II, FACTOR 2 - PRICE

L-8.1. The offeror shall provide all Schedule B information (Schedule of Supplies and Services) Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) information. The offeror shall insert the price elements (unit price and extended amount) for all Firm Fixed Price (FFP) 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. The Government has pre-filled a not-to-exceed (NTE) amount for Cost Reimbursable (CR) CLINs. These pre-established amounts are to be included in the offeror’s proposal exclusive of indirect rates and fees. Offerors shall not change the pre-established NTE amounts for the CLIN. Each offeror’s proposed prices will be evaluated by adding the reimbursable expenses not to exceed amount and the FFP CLINs, that total will be used in the total overall evaluated price.

L-8.2. Supporting Price Backup Data. Certified cost or pricing data is not required at this time. Additionally, supporting data other than certified cost and pricing data may be requested at any time at the discretion of the contracting officer. Supporting data should explain the methodology used in developing your price. If requested, this information shall be submitted in Microsoft Excel and supplemented with a Microsoft Word document as needed. The documentation provided shall provide support for all direct and indirect costs proposed based on the offeror’s accounting system and any applicable Forward Pricing Rate Agreements.

L-8.3. Unbalanced Offers. Offerors are cautioned against submitting an offer with unbalanced pricing as defined in Section M-

2.2.5. and RFO 15.404-6.

L-8.4. Proposal Documentation. In addition to the pricing information requested above, offerors must ensure that submitted documentation is clearly authentic. Documents which are not clearly authentic (e.g., lacking signature or bank stamp) may result in adverse determination this volume shall also contain the following documents:

L-8.4.1. Section A. Complete in its entirety the “Offeror” portion of the SF 33; an official having the authority to bind your company contractually must sign and date the SF 33 IAW RFO 4.207. In doing so, the offeror accedes to the contract terms and conditions as written in solicitation Sections A through J. These sections constitute the model contract. One copy of the SF 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.

L-8.4.2. Sections C Through K. Complete the necessary fill-ins and certifications, and provide any information requested in Sections C through K. For Sections C through I, the offeror shall submit only those pages that require a fill-in. For Section K, complete Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offerors, or provide a copy of completed System for Award Management (SAM) located at https://www.sam.gov.

L-8.4.3. Amendments. 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 include it in Volume II, Factor 2 – Price, of the proposal.

L-8.4.4. Responsibility Information. Contracts shall be awarded to responsible prospective contractors. To assist the Contracting Officer in making the responsibility determination IAW RFO 9.1, Responsible Prospective Contractors, provide the following information.

(a) A written statement explaining the offeror’s ability to obtain required resources to perform the contract requirements per RFO 9.104-1(a). The offeror shall also provide evidence to support the explanation. Evidence may include, official letter(s) from financial institutions demonstrating that the offeror has the financial resources required to cover all financial commitment.

(b) An explanation of the offeror’s organizational controls and measures per RFO 9.104-1(e). At a minimum, the offeror shall address their accounting controls, operational controls, quality assurance measures, and safety program. The offeror shall also provide evidence to support the explanation. Evidence may include a list of organizational policies or Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) which demonstrates the organizational controls and measures of the offeror. If a list is provided, the offeror shall include the title of each policy or SOP, the date of each document, and a brief description of each document. The offeror shall also define which element of RFO 9.104-1(e) the policy or SOP applies to.

(c) For the purposes of making a determination of contractor responsibility, the Government reserves the right to obtain data https://www.sam.gov/ from any source that they deem appropriate.

L-8.4.5. Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI). Offerors shall identify any potential or actual OCIs related to this acquisition and follow the instructions below. If the offeror determines that there is no appearance or actual conflict of interest, the offeror must affirmatively represent that “There is no appearance or actual conflict of interest.” Otherwise, the offeror must provide comprehensive information regarding the appearance or actual conflict of interest, including as specified in paragraph (a) below.

(a) There is potential organizational conflict of interest (see RFO Subpart 9.5, Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest) due to (state the nature of the proposed conflict). Accordingly:

(1) Restrictions are needed to ensure that (state the nature of the proposed restraint and the applicable time period).

(2) As a part of the proposal, the offeror shall provide the contracting officer with complete information of previous or ongoing work that is in any way associated with the contemplated acquisition.

(b) If award is made to the offeror, the resulting contract may include an organizational conflict of interest limitation applicable to subsequent Government work, at either a prime contract level, at any subcontract tier, or both. During evaluation of proposals, the Government may, after negotiations with the offeror and consideration of ways to avoid the conflict of interest, insert a special provision in the resulting contract which shall disqualify the offeror from further consideration for award of future contracts.

(c) The organizational conflict of interest clause included in this solicitation may be modified or deleted during negotiations.

L-8.4.6. Changes Resulting from Negotiations. In the event any adjustment of price becomes necessary to reflect changes resulting from negotiations, if negotiations are held, a complete traceable trail shall be provided to show how the changes took place.

L-9. Debriefing of Offerors. Debriefings are conducted to identify offerors their evaluated weaknesses and/or deficiencies for consideration in preparation of future proposals. Successful or unsuccessful offerors may request debriefings by providing a written request to the Contracting Officer. Debriefings shall be conducted IAW RFO 15.206 for pre-award debriefings and RFO 15.301 for post-award debriefings.

SECTION L ATTACHMENT 1

TECHNICAL EXPERIENCE REFERENCE

A. General Information

Offeror Name (Company/Division)

CAGE Code UEID Number

Program Title

Contracting Agency or Customer

Contract Type (FFP, CR, ID/IQ, Task Order, LH, etc.)

Period of Performance

(PoP)

Contract Number

Total Contract Dollar Value including all option years

B. Brief Description of Effort as (check):

Prime Subcontractor Teaming Partner Joint Venture

C. Primary Customer Points of Contact (For Government contracts, provide current information on all three individuals. For commercial contracts, provide points of contact fulfilling these same roles.)

Name Telephone Office

Address

Email

Other (please specify)

D. Describe the nature and portion (percentage) of the work on the provided technical experience effort performed by the company referenced on this technical experience reference and whether this company performed as the Prime, subcontractor, or a corporate division related to the prime (define relationship).

Section M - Evaluation Factors for Award

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR

AWARD M-1. BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

M-1.1. This competitive best value source selection is conducted using the tradeoff source selection process in accordance with (IAW) Revolutionary FAR Overhaul (RFO) Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation and Department of Defense (DoD) Source Selection Procedures effective 20 August 2022. The Government will award one contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible (IAW RFO Part 9) offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

M-1.2. The Government will utilize evaluation methodology that permits a tradeoff between technical and price factors.

Technical is significantly more important than price. Technical Subfactors B and C are the only two Subfactors included in the Trade-Off. 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 Government reserves the right to award to other than the lowest proposed price. While the technical factor is determined to be significantly more important than price, price will contribute to the award decision. The greater the equality of proposals for technical factor, the more important price becomes in selecting the best value for the Government.

M-1.3. The Government will evaluate the minimum number of proposals for efficiency and to maintain adequate competition, as specified in this section. Upon receipt of the Technical and Price proposals, the Government will follow a two (2) step process as outlined below:

Step 1: Factor Evaluations. The Government will evaluate proposals as follows:

Technical Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the technical proposals of Offerors as specified in paragraph M-2.1.

Price Evaluation. The Government will evaluate the price proposals of Offerors as specified in paragraph M-2.2.

Technically Unacceptable proposals will not be evaluated for price.

Step 2: Government Determinations. At the conclusion of Step 1, the Government reserves the right to award without negotiations but may conduct negotiations if the Government determines it is in the Government’s best interest. The Government may make a final determination as to whether the offeror’s proposal is “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” based on the initial proposal submitted. Therefore, offerors are advised to submit proposals that are fully and clearly acceptable without additional information required. If the Government elects to open negotiations, the competitive range may include proposals rated as “Unacceptable” at the sole discretion of the Government.

M-1.4. The Government contemplates award of one contract resulting from this solicitation. However, the Government reserves the right not to award a contract, depending on the acceptability of proposal(s) submitted and the availability of funds.

M-1.5. Per RFO Clause 52.215-1(f)(4), the Government intends to award without negotiations. The Government may make a final determination as to whether the offeror’s proposal is the best value solely based on the initial proposal as submitted.

Accordingly, offerors are advised to submit initial proposals that are fully and clearly acceptable without additional information. Should the SSA determine that negotiations are necessary, a competitive range determination will be made prior to conducting negotiations. The competitive range will consist of the group of evaluated proposals that the contracting officer determines are best suited for further negotiation.

M-1.5.1. The Contracting Officer will notify Offerors in writing if their proposals are excluded from the competitive range or otherwise eliminated from the competition IAW RFO 15.206. That notice shall state the basis for the determination and that a proposal revision will not be considered.

M-1.5.2. Evaluation Notices (EN) will be issued to Offerors in the Competitive Range. Formal responses to ENs and final proposal revisions (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision for award.

M-1.5.3. Final Proposal Revisions (FPRs) will be requested from each offeror in the competitive range at the conclusion of negotiations. Any revision or non-concurrence to contract terms and conditions submitted in the submitted FPR may not be subject to further 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 negotiations. 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.

M-2. EVALUATION FACTORS. M-2.1. FACTOR 1 -TECHNICAL

M-2.1.1. Offerors’ proposals shall demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of the nature and scope of work required. The focus of the Technical Rating is on the offeror’s ability to satisfactorily meet the evaluation criteria identified within each subfactor and subfactor aspect. The Government will not search for data to cure problems or address inconsistencies in an offeror’s proposal. Technical will be rated using a methodology of Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings for Subfactors A; and combined technical/risk rating for Subfactors B and C per Tables 1-4 listed below. Technical ratings will be assessed at the subfactor level; an overall factor-level rating will not be assigned. Proposals receiving an Unacceptable rating for Factor A may not receive further evaluation. Moreover, proposals rated Unacceptable in any Subfactor are not awardable and may not be included in the competitive range. Finally, all Subfactors are of equal importance.

(a) Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings. The Government will evaluate Subfactor A using an Acceptable or Unacceptable rating as defined in Table 1 and further explained under the subfactor. All criteria in this subfactor must be met to receive an Acceptable rating.

(b) Combined technical/risk evaluations shall be utilized to evaluate Subfactors B & C as defined in Table 2 and the risk descriptions set forth in Table 3. The combined technical/risk rating in Table 2 includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings. In conducting the assessment, the Government will also consider the information provided in the proposal as to how the offeror will manage and mitigate risk. The technical rating evaluates the quality of the offeror's technical solution for meeting the Government's 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 nature of deficiencies determine if the offeror will be able to correct the deficiency through negotiations.

To be eligible for award, all Subfactors must receive a minimum color rating of “Green/Acceptable.” Table 4 further defines terminology contained within Tables 2 and 3.

Table 1 – Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Descriptors

Terminology Definition

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation and all criteria in the respective factor, subfactor, and/or aspect is met.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation and some or all of the criteria in the respective factor, subfactor, and/or aspect is not met.

Table 2 - Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

Color Rating Description

Blue

Outstanding Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

Table 3 - Technical Risk Rating

Adjectival Rating Description

Low Proposal may contain weakness/weaknesses which have low potential to cause disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance. Normal contractor emphasis and normal Government monitoring will likely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Moderate

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

High

Proposal contains a significant weakness or combination of weaknesses which is likely to have high potential to cause significant disruption of schedule, increased cost, or degradation of performance.

Special contractor emphasis and close Government monitoring will unlikely be able to overcome any difficulties.

Unacceptable Proposal contains a deficiency or a combination of significant weaknesses that causes an unacceptable level of risk of unsuccessful performance.

Table 4 – Technical Evaluation Descriptors

Terminology Definition

Significant Strength An aspect of an Offeror’s proposal with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Strength An aspect of an offeror's proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Weakness A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See RFO 15.001.

Significant Weaknesses

A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. See RFO 15.001.

Uncertainty

Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offer is unclear (e.g., more than one way to interpret the offer or inconsistencies in the proposal indicating that there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

Deficiency A material failure of a proposal to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

M.2.1.2. Subfactor A: Technical Experience. Evidence of technical experience must demonstrate performing similar scope of work IAW L-7.3.1.(c) Furthermore, experience shall capture airlift performance that meets payload and distance requirements as described in L-7.3.2. (including sub-paragraphs). Finally, technical experience must demonstrate performing similar scope of work for a minimum of 12 months within the last five (5) years preceding the date of issuance of this solicitation.

(a) Any proposal that does not receive an acceptable rating for Subfactor A may not be evaluated under further Subfactors IAW M.2.1.1. and will not be eligible for award.

M-2.1.3. Subfactor B: Payload and Distance Requirements. Proposed approach must demonstrate a solution that will successfully address all of the following criteria. Additionally all of the following criteria are of equal importance.

a. The Fixed Wing aircraft and crew in each Zone shall be certified and qualified to operate with Instrument Flight Rules (IFR) and Visual Flight Rules (VFR) as flight conditions dictate IAW PWS para 1.7.

b. Demonstrate the capacity of transporting, on each flight, any combination of passenger(s) and/or cargo totaling a minimum payload of 2,100 pounds and 3,000 pounds in all zones, IAW PWS, para 1.1.1.

c. D0emonstrate the capacity of transporting the total payload for a range of 500 statute miles for 2,100-pound airlift and 280 statute miles for 3,000-pound airlift, in all zones IAW PWS, para 1.1.1.

M-2.1.4. Subfactor C: Operations. Proposed approach must demonstrate a solution that will successfully address the two (2) aspects below. Additionally all of the following aspects are of equal importance.

M-2.1.4.1. Aspect 1 – Approach to Simultaneous Fixed Wing Operations. Provide a detailed approach describing your proposed methodology for successfully conducting simultaneous Fixed Wing airlift operations in all zones. Your description should articulate the end-to-end sequence of activities, including the management of aircraft, personnel, to include all ground support assets. Furthermore, describe your approach to risk management and outline the contingency procedures you would enact to address potential disruptions, all while adhering to the 48-hour call out requirements specified in PWS Section 5.2.

M-2.1.4.2. Aspect 2 – Approach to Cross-Zone Airlift Operations Provide a comprehensive narrative that demonstrates an understanding of cross-zone airlift requirements including type of aircraft assigned to the cross-zone mission. Additionally, proposals must thoroughly substantiate the following:

(c) The Fixed Wing aircraft assigned to the Cross-Zone airlift shall be capable of transporting a minimum of…