SP4702-22-R-0002 0003 Attachment 1 - Section L.pdf

FUEL DEPOT SYSTEM (FDS) – ASSET VISIBILITY (AV)

SECTION L SP4702-22-R-0002

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

Controlled Unclassified Information – Source Selection Sensitive See FAR 2.101 and 3.104

GENERAL INFORMATION

Solicitation Provisions by Reference

The following Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) and Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) solicitation provisions and/or contract clauses pertinent to this section are hereby incorporated by reference:

FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors-Commercial Items (Nov 2021) FAR 52.215-16 Facilities Capital Cost of Money (Jun 2003) FAR 52.215-22 Limitations on Pass-Through Charges—Identification of Subcontract Effort (Oct

2009) FAR 52.216-1 Type of Contract (Apr 1984) FAR 52.216-27 Single or Multiple Awards (Oct 1995) FAR 52.222-24 Preaward On-Site Equal Opportunity Compliance Evaluation (Feb 1999) FAR 52.222-26 Equal Opportunity (Sep 2016) FAR 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (Feb 1993) FAR 52.233-2 Service of Protest (Sep 2006) FAR 52.237-10 Identification of Uncompensated Overtime (Mar 2015) FAR 52.252-1 Solicitation Provisions Incorporated by Reference (Feb 1998) FAR 52.252-5 Authorized Deviations in Provisions (Nov 2020) DFARS 252.215-7012 Requirements for Submission of Proposals via Electronic Media. Basic

(Jan 2018)

General Instructions

The Offeror is required to submit sufficient information concerning the following areas to enable Government personnel to fully ascertain capabilities of the Offeror to perform the requirements. The proposal must be sufficient in detail and scope to permit evaluation and provide the evaluators a clear understanding of the Offeror’s capability to meet or exceed the defined elements as required by the solicitation. All proposals must clearly and convincingly demonstrate that the Offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements and associated risks; the Offeror is able, willing, and competent to devote the resources necessary to meet the requirements; and the Offeror has valid and practical solutions for all requirements and potential risk areas. The Offeror must respond to all requirements of the solicitation and not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The Offeror has the burden of proof to demonstrate compliance with all the evaluation factors identified in this solicitation. The Offeror is advised that the Government may incorporate into the final contract any portions of the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government. Except for Volume III Price, no cost or pricing information should appear in any other volume. Pricing information that is contained in any other volume, but Volume III, will not be incorporated into the final contract. Alternate proposals are not acceptable.

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 the proposal preparation. The Offeror is responsible for presenting enough information to allow the Government to evaluate the proposed work effort, support, approach, and the price proposal without opening discussions. Statements that the prospective Offeror understands, or can and/or will comply with, the specifications, and paraphrasing the requirements or parts thereof without supporting information are considered inadequate by the Government and may result in a rating of unacceptable.

The Offeror must include any data that illustrates the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. Failure to address a specific factor clearly may be considered a deficiency and/or may result in the factor being rated unacceptable. There is no need to repeat information in more than one volume if an overlap exists; the detailed information must be included in the most logical place and summarized and referenced in other areas. Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

The Offeror is expected to comply with all requirements of the solicitation. The Government advises the Offeror that taking exception or deviating from any term or condition of the solicitation may make an offer technically unacceptable and rejected without further consideration. Any request to tailor FAR Clause 52.212-4 per FAR 12.302 must be clearly identified by the Offeror in the Executive Summary.

However, the Government advises the Offeror that it is not required to consider nor accept any requests to tailor FAR 52.212-4. Any exception or deviation from any terms and conditions of the solicitation will be provided in Vol I, Cover Letter.

Questions

Offerors may submit questions requesting clarification of solicitation requirements by emailing:

The Contract Specialist at Trevor.Webb@dla.mil The Contracting Officer at Julie.Miller@dla.mil The Government:

• Requires that all questions be received within ten (10) business days from the date this solicitation is issued, which is 21MAR22

• Will not accept phone calls

• Will post answers to the questions received on the Sam.gov website (https://sam.gov/) and

Defense Logistics Agency Internet Bid Board Systems (DIBBS) website via amendment

• Recommends listing questions in a Microsoft (MS) Excel spreadsheet with document name, page number, paragraph or section number, context, and question or comment Sample:

Document Name Page # Paragraph, Section # or context Question/Comment RFP (1449) 7 Paragraph 6 or last paragraph:

Contract Maximum Dollar Value

Typo

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

The submission date for all volumes shall be no later than the date and time specified in the solicitation.

Electronic Submissions Only

The Offeror shall use Electronic means (Email) of sending the proposal. No mailed copies will be permitted. The Electronic documents should be clearly marked with the solicitation number and appropriate volume number.

Late Submissions

Proposals submitted after the closing date and time specified for receipt of offers are “late” and will not be considered for award.

The Government will process late submissions of proposals in accordance with FAR 52.212-1. If the electronic copy is received late, it is not eligible for consideration in accordance with FAR 52.212-1 and Alternate I. The Government will reject that proposal without evaluation.

Proposal Submission

Solicitation No: SP4702-22-R-0002 Opening/Closing Date and Time: 21MAR22- 01JUN22 Note: Proposals will be accepted any time before the closing date and time.

The Offeror shall submit one Electronic copy of the proposal as shown in paragraph 2.6.5 of Section L and must be emailed to Julie.Miller@dla.mil and Trevor.Webb@dla.mil and received no later than the solicitation close date.

CAUTION NOTICE – EMAIL DELAYS

Submission of proposals via electronic mail (email) is authorized. However, the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) has informed all Department of Defense (DoD) Activities that all email traffic from Non-DoD sources is experiencing delays upon entry to the Enterprise Email Security Gateway (EEMSG). Therefore, it should be anticipated that any proposal submitted via email in response to this solicitation will experience some level of delay. All potential Offerors are hereby cautioned that any proposal, modification, or revision that is received at the designated Government office AFTER the exact time specified for receipt of proposals is “late” and will not be considered. For purposes of this solicitation only, any proposal, modification, or revision that is submitted via email to the designated Government office AND received by DISA/EEMSG no later than the time specified by this solicitation will be considered to have been timely received at the designated Government office. It is highly encouraged that an email with no attachment is sent to those indicated above to alert them your proposal has been sent via email and to request confirmation of receipt.

Classified Data

All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED.

Document Requirement

All volumes of the proposal shall be delivered to the email addresses provided prior to the closing date and time stated in this solicitation. There shall be no reference to pricing in the Non-Price volumes (Volume I & II) or in the cover letter or executive summary.

The Offeror shall mark each page of the proposal with the legend “Source Selection Information – See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.” This includes the cover page and every page that may contain source selection information. Note that the Offeror has an independent requirement to mark anything deemed to be bid or proposal information, protected proprietary information, or other information that is to be protected from disclosure to ensure that the information is protected.

Proposal Content and Volumes

Cover Page Each volume shall contain the following items in addition to the non-price and price proposal data required by the solicitation.

Cover Page: The cover should indicate the following:

Proposal Title Proposal Volume Volume Number Offeror Name and Address Principal Point of Contact Name and Phone Number Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE)/ Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) formally Data Universal Numbering System

(DUNS)

Table of Contents: The table of contents shall provide sufficient detail as to allow the important elements to be easily located.

Note: The Cover Page and Table of Contents are not included in page counts with respect to page limitations.

Cover Letter and Executive Summary The cover letter should be on company letterhead and must contain a statement committing the Offeror to the proposal and stating its validity for a period of at least 180 days. This letter should also include the name, title, phone number, and email address for the persons authorized to negotiate with the Government in connection with the solicitation. The letter must be signed by a responsible officer or partner/principal of the Offeror who is authorized to bind the firm contractually. The letter must also contain a statement that the proposal meets the specifications of each subsection of the solicitation.

An Executive Summary of the Offeror’s entire proposal is required. This summary will not be evaluated but will be used to gain an understanding of the overall proposal contents. It should identify and highlight significant features of the proposal and include the salient points contained in the various volumes and chapters. The Executive Summary shall not include any price-related information.

The following format should be followed in developing the summary:

1. General Information (see Note 1 below)

2. An overview of Technical Capability

3. Solicitation Deviations and Qualifications and Requests to Tailor FAR 52.212-4 (see Note 2)

Note 1: The General Information section of the Executive Summary should include the following information:

a) Company name and address,

b) Company Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN),

c) Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) formally DUNS number

d) CAGE code

e) The name, phone number, and e-mail address for the authorized company negotiator relative to the proposal.

Note 2: Solicitation deviations and qualifications are proposed exceptions to one or more of the requirements contained in the PWS or elsewhere in Request for Proposal. Solicitation deviations and qualifications may cause proposals to be considered unacceptable and rejected without further consideration. Therefore, Offerors must address each deviation or qualification in the Executive Summary and provide a detailed description of its request with the reasons for the request, such as any difficulty with the applicable requirement, in addition to the firm’s proposed approach. Separately, and in accordance with FAR 12.302, the Offer will identify all requests to tailor FAR Clause 52.212-4.

However, the Government advises the Offeror that it is not required to consider neither accept any requests to tailor FAR 52.212-4.

Solicitation Amendments (if Applicable) The proposal shall include a signed acknowledgment of the amendments, if any amendments are issued to the solicitation. This information should be included as an additional chapter. Refer to Volume Structure section.

Proposal Evaluation Factors Evaluation factors are listed as follows:

Evaluation Factors

Factor 1: Technical Evaluation Subfactor A: Technical Approach of the Solution and Key Personnel Qualification Subfactor B: Management Approach Subfactor C: Solution Demonstration

Factor 2: Past Performance

Factor 3: Cyber Security Factor 4: Price

Volume Structure Proposals submitted shall be contained in separate volumes in the required number of copies. Page limitations for each volume, if any, are also specified in the table below. Title and table of contents pages do not count toward page limits. If the offeror feels inclined to include a glossary and/or a compliance matrix to cross reference proposal sections to PWS requirements, these documents will not count toward page limits. Proposal pages beyond the specified maximum limit will not be reviewed as part of the evaluation. The contractor shall provide an independent response for each factor. Information provided in one factor response will not be considered in a differing factor response. Offers that do not follow the volume structure indicated below may not be evaluated or further considered for award.

List of volumes and factors are as follows:

Volume Chapter Page Limit Format Copies Required

Introduction to Vol I

Cover Letter and Executive Summary Exceptions and Deviations and Glossary and Index

PDF

1 Electronic copy

Introduction to Vol I

Solicitation and Amendments Acknowledgment (if applicable)

No limit

Vol I Non-Price Proposal Refer to Section 3.0

Factor 1: Technical Approach

Subfactors A, B, and C

Vol II Non-Price Proposal Details on Section 3.0

Factor 2: Past Performance

Vol III Price Proposal Details on Section 3.0

Factor 4: Price

Excel

& PDF

Note 1: The Offeror shall provide spreadsheet information on functional MS Excel spreadsheet(s) (e.g., total column utilizing an equation that sums appropriate lower-level items).

Note 2: The Offeror shall provide adequate documentation to enable a thorough evaluation of the proposal.

Note 3: Content of Volume I Non-Price Proposal shall not exceed 80 pages. The page limit indicated for Volume I does not include Key Personnel resumes.

Note 4: Content of Volume II Non-Price Proposal shall not exceed 40 pages.

Note 5: Content of Volume III Price Proposal shall not exceed 20 pages.

Proposals shall use Times New Roman 12-point normal font (no reduction permitted), single-spaced with 1-inch margins all around, and formatted for standard 8.5 x 11-inch paper. All pages shall be numbered with section and page numbers. Foldout pages shall not exceed a quantity of five (5) and be no larger than 11 x 17 inches and shall count as one page. Drawings may be provided separately and may be any size but shall be folded to approximately 8.5 x 11-inch standard size and shall count as one page. Graphs shall be presented in no smaller than Times New Roman font 10-point font and shall contain a grid, which allows values to be read directly from the graph to the same accuracy that a 10 x 10 to the ½-inch grid provides. Graphic resolution, including such data as tables or charts, shall be consistent with the purpose of the data presented.

EVALUATION FACTOR SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Evaluation factors are described in Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award, in the solicitation.

Offerors’ proposals shall include all information necessary for evaluation as described in Evaluation Factors for Award. In addition, specific submission requirements for certain items are described below.

The Offeror shall use the requirements outlined in the PWS and all other Government provided documentation to respond to Factors 1, 2, and 3.

Factor 1: Technical Approach

Subfactor A: Technical Approach of the Solution and Key Personnel Qualifications The Offeror’s proposed approach shall address how the Offeror will successfully fulfill all requirements defined in the solicitation and shall demonstrate a clear understanding of the FDS AV requirements, specifically but not limited to, those outlined in the PWS. The evaluation of the technical approach will ensure that the proposal identifies how risks to schedule and/or performance will be mitigated.

The success and operational capability for the FDS AV solution will depend on the Offeror’s technical capability to establish a system engineering approach that will ensure compliance with the PWS, and all other technical and functional requirements proposed for the effort. The Offeror shall provide an approach to address the following requirements:

• Quality Control Plan (para 6.11.10 of the PWS): Describe methods and procedures for adhering to a Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP); plans and procedures to meet and comply with the quality standards established in Part 8 of the PWS; the Offeror’s self-inspection plan; internal staffing plan;

procedures to maintain quality, timeliness, and responsiveness of deliverables and customer satisfaction for the entire effort

• Software Development/Configuration Approach: Identifies a clear and effective process for properly documenting, configuring, and managing all software development and configuration

• Software Sustainment Approach: The Government will review and evaluate the Offeror's proposed management approach, including plans for program; quality; security; risk; and personnel management that will be used to ensure the successful sustainment of the resultant contract.

• Sustainment Plan: Address periodic maintenance, repair, replacement, and overhaul of existing systems, hardware, and software inclusive of Information Assurance Vulnerability Alerts (IAVA) Patching.

Identify position-qualified personnel (as described in the PWS para. 1.5.5), test equipment, etc. needed to quickly diagnose and effect repairs.

3.1.1.1 Offerors shall submit a copy of any software licenses to be reviewed as part of the technical evaluation process.

3.1.1.2 The Offeror shall address in its proposed approach all requirements as listed in the PWS to include Key Personnel. For those resources listed as Key Personnel, the proposal shall specifically address the following: Program Manager, Senior Software Engineer, Software Engineer, Cloud Architect II, Operations Manager, and Cyber Security Specialist. The resumes and certifications of Key Personnel proposed will be evaluated for a clear demonstration that the proposed resources meet or exceed the education, certifications, and experience requirements outlined in the PWS.

The information presented in the Offeror’s proposal together with information from any other available sources will provide the primary input for evaluation of this factor. The Government reserves the right to verify Key Personnel performance on other contracts identified by the Offeror in the proposal. The Government reserves the right to use other available information to evaluate Key Personnel. The Government may query contract references and other end user representatives regarding Key Personnel experience and quality of experience and performance. The Offeror must provide, along with resumes and certifications, Letters of Intent (LOI)/Letters of Commitment (LOC) confirming Key Personnel selection and availability immediately on contract award. The Offeror must ensure that all Key Personnel are eligible to obtain a Common Access Card (CAC). CAC procedures are found in the PWS.

This includes those individuals currently holding dual citizenship.

Subfactor B: Management Approach The Offeror shall address in its proposed Program Management Approach and Capabilities the Offeror’s plans for the effective and efficient management of contract activities to successfully fulfill the requirements of the PWS. The Government will review and evaluate how well the Offeror’s proposed Program Management Approach, including plans for program, quality, security, risk, and personnel management will ensure successful execution for the resultant contract. The Government will review and evaluate the Offeror’s approach to determine how well it provides: A plan for managing the FDS AV effort from a program perspective, including both information technology management and program support activities to include communication and interaction with the FDS Program Management Office (PMO), relevant stakeholders, the DLA Contracting Services Office-Columbus (DCSO-C) Contracting Officer, contract administration and functional requirements staffs. A Risk Management Plan that identifies how the Offeror will proactively track, identify, and mitigate risks throughout the life of the proposed effort and how risks will be communicated to appropriate FDS AV program personnel through Proposed Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) to determine:

o Inclusion of significant milestones, design, development, testing, deployment, and installation related activities o Inclusion of activities related to cybersecurity compliance for certification and accreditation in the production environment o Provision of a comprehensive, implementable timeline that aligns with the approach in the technical proposal

• Plan for personnel management including program specific training; continuity and succession management of proposed personnel labor mix; the organizational structure and the use of proposed team members and subcontractors in support of this effort

• Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) for assigning resources to the proposed effort. The WBS shall describe how the labor categories and hours proposed for each task are sufficient to meet the PWS requirements

• Plan to support and manage Department of Defense (DoD) cyber security requirements on an ongoing basis; physical security and personnel security including a clear description of the Offeror’s security program and structure; how cyber, physical and personnel security fits into the overall management plan and structure; responsibilities of personnel; and how the security plan and personnel will operate/interact with the Government security team

• Communication plan that outlines the method of providing communication to DLA program staff, management, customers, and users; addresses the Offeror’s understanding of the importance of communications; and how changes will be communicated

Subfactor C: Solution Demonstration Instructions:

The Offeror shall create a solution demonstration of the solution that validates that the set of software, hardware and operating environment work together to provide the capability. The set of software, hardware and operating environment that comprises the solution set shall remain at the Lorton demonstration location for a period not to exceed three (3) calendar weeks from the date of demonstration for Government review and testing.

Demonstration Location:

The demonstration will take place at the Fuel Management Defense (FMD) lab located at 10400 Furnace Road, Suite G, Lorton, Virginia 22079 as scheduled by the Contracting Officer.

Demonstration Environment:

Offerors shall provide all hardware, software, and Internet access to support the demonstration Demonstration Requirements:

For each scenario Offerors shall provide the following:

1. Use the FDS-AV solicitation documentation to extract the functional and technical requirements necessary to adequately configure the demonstration based on the limited scenarios documented in section M at the appropriate level of detail to meet the below requirements. Scenarios listed in section M are those that DLA has deemed core functionalities that must exist in the base product at time of award.

2. Provide a written record of the section of the FDS Instruction documentation that was used to derive the complete functional and technical requirements.

3. Provide a detailed written specification stating all instances of information being exchanged within the program internally and externally.

4. Where the offerors solution cannot demonstrate at the designated demonstration time, the offeror must provide a written technical approach for how their system will be modified to accomplish the scenario, and the time frame it will take for development and production ready implementation.

5. Wherever part(s) of the scenario lack a clearly visible user interface component, Offerors shall ensure that adequate visualization techniques are used to demonstrate the underlying proposed technical approach

6. All scenarios will be demonstrated in a methodically accurate approach that facilitates other scenarios to be accomplished without returning to a previous scenario.

7. Where a solution relies upon a function or action being accomplished in a separate scenario (preconditions) that was not demonstrated, provide written documentation of how the preconditions have been met to enable the scenario’s proper functioning and a written explanation of why the precondition was not demonstrated.

8. During the demonstration, identify all system boundaries, information exchanges and user-to-system interactions.

9. Identify and provide a written record of all external systems or other internal application functionality that the system requires to demonstrate a scenario. The documentation must detail the connection and reason for the reliance as well as provide details of how any system was simulated if simulations where used.

10. The Offeror’s demonstration must be performed utilizing a Production Representative environment with all applicable Operating System and Application Security Technical Implementation Guides (STIGs) applied.

11. The Offeror must present during the demonstration evidence of system configuration verifying the security posture of the representative environment. This may be accomplished in the form of system scan results or STIG checklist.,

12. The Offeror must also provide a High-Level Operational Concept Graphic (OV-1) detailing the architecture for the solution being proposed. The OV-1 must indicate a clear understanding of Government Cloud requirements.

Factor 2: Past Performance

The evaluation of an Offeror’s Past Performance will be based on both the overall confidence assessment derived from an evaluation of an Offeror’s submitted previous contracts, and an examination of other information obtained from Government and other systems including, but not limited to:

Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting (CPAR), Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) and Contract Business Analysis Repository (CBAR). The confidence assessment is created by evaluating the Recency, Relevancy, and Quality of the submitted contracts. By considering each Offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance, combined with how well the Offeror performed on the contracts, will demonstrate the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation’s requirements.

Recency is an evaluation of the Offeror’s past performance. Recency is expressed as a time during which past performance reference are considered relevant. Past Performance that is or was completed in the last three (3) years prior to the solicitation issue date considered recent. Experience that is less recent will not be evaluated as highly as recent experience.

Relevancy is an evaluation of how relevant an accomplished effort is to the effort to be acquired. The Government will evaluate relevancy of the Offeror’s prior projects to the current PWS requirements. In establishing what is relevant for the acquisition, consideration will be given to those aspects of an Offeror’s provided contract history that will give the greatest ability to measure whether the Offeror will satisfy the current procurement. More relevant past performance will be a stronger predictor of future success, and have more influence on the performance confidence assessment, than less relevant past performance. Common aspects of relevancy include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, use of key personnel (for services) and extent of subcontracting/teaming. Highly relevant past performance requires that most of the prior contracts provided are essentially the same scope, magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Quality is an evaluation of the overall quality of the Offeror’s past performance. The determination of how well the Offeror performed on prior contracts will be decided by examining such indicators as: the organization’s history of successful completion of projects; history of producing high-quality reports and deliverables; commitment to customer satisfaction; and history of staying on schedule and within budget. Evaluation of this aspect will be based on information provided in Past Performance Questionnaires and the Offeror’s proposal. This may include the Government independently verifying provided information with an Offeror’s prior customers, or through past performance databases including, but not limited to, the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) through the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS). Additionally, the Government may use information from publicly available sources including, but not limited to, internet searches, and Dun & Bradstreet Reports. If the Government’s information conflicts with assertions made in the Offeror’s proposal, the Offeror will be asked to clarify any discrepant information.

The evaluation of Recency, Relevancy, and Quality will result in an overall Performance Confidence Assessment, from which the Government will assign a Performance Confidence Assessment rating.

The Offeror shall list at least two but not more than five contracts awarded or completed over the past ten (10) years for work similar in size, scope and complexity provided to specifically list work that demonstrates experience with the requirements outlined in the PWS. If an Offeror provides more than five contracts, only the first five contracts in the order they are listed in the proposal will be considered.

Any contracts provided over five will not be considered, the information will be deleted by the Contracting Officer, and it will not be provided to the Past Performance Evaluation Team. The Offeror shall include the name, address, point of contact, current telephone number, email address, dollar value, period of performance, and a brief description of work. The Offeror shall discuss the similarities and differences between the proposed effort and contract being referenced. The proposal shall include, at a minimum, a narrative that describes the following for each contract cited:

1) Scale of prior work performed for relevance to this effort.

2) Complexity of prior work performed for relevance to this effort.

3) Specify contracts for Government or private sector.

4) Describe any significant problems or issues that occurred during performance of the contract and how issues were resolved.

The Offeror shall ensure that information presented is accurate and current (i.e., current phone numbers, titles, etc.). The Government will not attempt to track down reference data in cases where inaccurate data is presented.

The Offeror shall provide information that demonstrates the relevancy of these experiences to the requirements of this solicitation, as well as to their proposed approach.

Past Performance Questionnaire:

A Past Performance Questionnaire is provided in the Attachments section of the solicitation. To document past performance, Offerors shall send copies to previous customers based on the list of contracts submitted for the Past Performance Assessment. The questionnaire shall be completed by the Offeror’s customers and emailed directly by those customers to the following address:

Contracting Officer: Julie Miller EMAIL: Julie.Miller@dla.mil

Note: If the Offeror does not have any past performance, the Offeror shall provide an affirmative statement stating no past performance.

The Government reserves the right to use other information, as part of the Past Performance Evaluation, obtained from the following Government systems but not limited to: Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting (CPAR), Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) and Contract Business Analysis Repository (CBAR). The Government reserves the right to perform a financial review of the Offeror.

Cyber Security Specialist (CSS) Key Personnel: The Cyber Security Specialist shall manage all day-to-day cybersecurity operations including administrative functions, assessing risks, and identifying unstated assumptions. The Cyber Security Specialist shall possess minimum of Bachelor’s Degree from an accredited college or university in computer science, computer engineering, advanced analytics, applied mathematics, physics, or related field. The Government’s preference would be a degree in computer science, computer engineering, advanced analytics, applied mathematics, or physics. Requires minimum of 8 years of relevant experience. Minimum certification required is Certified Information System Security Professional (CISSP).

The Government will review and evaluate the Offeror’s proposed personnel for the proposed CSS II.

The Offeror’s proposed CSS must:

• Demonstrate the ability to meet the PWS section 1.5.8 Personnel Security Requirements and Citizenship for all personnel proposed for the contract

• Demonstrate knowledge and experience in performing the cyber security functions described in the PWS para 2.7.10

• Demonstrate security planning for the applicable system by providing information for Cyber Security requirements listed in the PWS para 2.7.10. The explanation should include experience and knowledge of the supporting documentation such as Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) Secure Technical Implementation Guides, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication 800-30, NIST Special Publication 800- 37, NIST Special Publication 800-39, NIST Special Publication 800-53, NIST Special Publication 800-82 Revision 2, DoD Instruction 8500.01 and 8510.01.

Factor 4: Price

A Fixed Price Proposal shall be submitted in accordance with instructions set forth in this solicitation.

Evaluation of an Offeror’s proposal shall be based on the information presented in the proposal and information available to the Contracting Office from sources deemed appropriate. Sources typically considered include Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) office, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), other contracts with the same firms for similar items or services, known commercial sources such as Global Insight Inc. (formally Data Resources, Inc.), Standard and Poor, other sources.

Price Reasonableness Proposals will be evaluated for price reasonableness. If price reasonableness cannot be determined, additional pricing information will be requested by the Government in accordance with DFARS 215.403-5. Price evaluation will be based on the total price for all CLINs. If necessary, an informal breakdown will be required at the CLIN level to include, but not limited to, material, labor, overhead, general and administrative expenses, miscellaneous subcontracting, travel/per diem, contract data and any miscellaneous cost items.

3.1.2 Subfactor B: Management Approach