SPRTA120Q0270_______0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. CONTRACT ID CODE Page 1

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO.

SPRTA1-20-Q-0270-0001

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

11 FEB 2021

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

FD20302001002 01

5. PROJECT NO (If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY CODE

DLA AVIATION AT OKLAHOMA CITY, OK

DLR PROCUREMENT OPERATIONS (AO)

3001 STAFF DRIVE

TINKER AFB OK 73145-3070

BUYER: Antonino D. Lenora/DLA-AOAB antonino.lenora@us.af.mil Phone: (405) 739- 5408

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6) CODESPRTA1

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code)

CODE

X

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

SPRTA120Q0270

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

5-MAY-2020

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended. Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods. ( a ) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; ( b ) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or ( c ) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified. 19-FEB-2021 4:00 PM

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

FMS REQUIREMENT

SEE PAGE 2 FOR DESCRIPTION OF THE AMENDMENT

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

BY ________________________________________________________

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

15C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BY ____________________________________________________

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

16C. DATE SIGNED

FACILITY CODE

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE

30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PRESCRIBED BY GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

X

X X

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

SPRTA1-20-Q-0270-0001

Continuation of block 14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION

The purpose of this amendment is to update clauses 52.204‐24, 52.204‐25, and 52.204‐26 to the latest versions. Furthermore, clauses 252.204‐7019 and 252.204‐7020 are hereby incorporated into the RFQ. Due to this item being a critical safety item, additional evaluation factors are hereby added to this RFQ as shown below. All other terms and conditions not changed herein remain in full force and effect.

PART II - CONTRACT CLAUSES

SECTION I

CONTRACT CLAUSES

52.204-25 PROHIBITION ON CONTRACTING FOR CERTAIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND

VIDEO SURVEILLANCE SERVICES OR EQUIPMENT (AUG 2020)

(IAW 4.2105(b))

252.204-7020 NIST SP 800-171 DOD ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS (NOV 2020)

(IAW DFARS 204.7304(e))

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS OR RESPONDENTS

52.204-24 REPRESENTATION REGARDING CERTAIN TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND VIDEO

SURVEILLANCE SERVICES OR EQUIPMENT (OCT 2020)

(IAW FAR 4.2105(a))

The Offeror shall not complete the representation at paragraph (d)(1) of this provision if the Offeror has represented that it ‘‘does not provide covered telecommunications equipment or services as a part of its offered products or services to the Government in the performance of any contract, subcontract, or other contractual instrument’’ in paragraph (c)(1) in the provision at 52.204–26, Covered Telecommunications Equipment or Services—Representation, or in paragraph (v)(2)(i) of the provision at 52.212–3, Offeror Representations and Certifications–Commercial Items. The Offeror shall not complete the representation in paragraph (d)(2) of this provision if the Offeror has represented that it ‘‘does not use covered telecommunications equipment or services, or any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services’’ in paragraph (c)(2) of the provision at 52.204–26, or in paragraph (v)(2)(ii) of the provision at 52.212–3.

(a) Definitions. As used in this provision-

Backhaul, covered telecommunications equipment or services, critical technology, interconnection arrangements, reasonable inquiry, roaming, and substantial or essential component have the meanings provided in the clause 52.204-25, Prohibition on Contracting for Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment.

(b) Prohibition. (1) Section 889(a)(1)(A) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Pub. L. 115-232) prohibits the head of an executive agency on or after August 13, 2019, from procuring or obtaining, or extending or renewing a contract to procure or obtain, any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system. Nothing in the prohibition shall be construed to—

(i) Prohibit the head of an executive agency from procuring with an entity to provide a service that connects to the facilities of a third-party, such as backhaul, roaming, or interconnection arrangements; or

(ii) Cover telecommunications equipment that cannot route or redirect user data traffic or cannot permit visibility into any user data or packets that such equipment transmits or otherwise handles.

(2) Section 889(a)(1)(B) of the John S. McCain National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2019 (Pub. L.

115-232) prohibits the head of an executive agency on or after August 13, 2020, from entering into a contract or extending or renewing a contract with an entity that uses any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services as a substantial or essential component of any system, or as critical technology as part of any system. This prohibition applies to the use of covered telecommunications equipment or services, regardless of whether that use is in performance of work under a Federal contract. Nothing in the prohibition shall be construed to—

(i) Prohibit the head of an executive agency from procuring with an entity to provide a service that connects to the facilities of a third-party, such as backhaul, roaming, or interconnection arrangements; or

(ii) Cover telecommunications equipment that cannot route or redirect user data traffic or cannot permit visibility into any user data or packets that such equipment transmits or otherwise handles.

(c) Procedures. The Offeror shall review the list of excluded parties in the System for Award Management (SAM) (https://www.sam.gov) for entities excluded from receiving federal awards for “covered telecommunications equipment or services.”

(d) Representations. The Offeror represents that—

(1) It [ ] will, [ ] will not provide covered telecommunications equipment or services to the Government in the performance of any contract, subcontract or other contractual instrument resulting from this solicitation. The Offeror shall provide the additional disclosure information required at paragraph (e)(1) of this section if the Offeror responds “will” in paragraph (d)(1) of this section; and

(2) After conducting a reasonable inquiry, for purposes of this representation, the Offeror represents that—

It [ ] does, [ ] does not use covered telecommunications equipment or services, or use any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services. The Offeror shall provide the additional disclosure information required at paragraph (e)(2) of this section if the Offeror responds “does” in paragraph (d)(2) of this section.

(e) Disclosures. (1) Disclosure for the representation in paragraph (d)(1) of this provision. If the Offeror has responded “will” in the representation in paragraph (d)(1) of this provision, the Offeror shall provide the following information as part of the offer:

(i) For covered equipment—

(A) The entity that produced the covered telecommunications equipment (include entity name, unique entity identifier, CAGE code, and whether the entity was the original equipment manufacturer (OEM) or a distributor, if known);

(B) A description of all covered telecommunications equipment offered (include brand; model number, such as OEM number, manufacturer part number, or wholesaler number; and item description, as applicable); and

(C) Explanation of the proposed use of covered telecommunications equipment and any factors relevant to determining if such use would be permissible under the prohibition in paragraph (b)(1) of this provision.

(ii) For covered services—

(A) If the service is related to item maintenance: A description of all covered telecommunications services offered (include on the item being maintained: Brand; model number, such as OEM number, manufacturer part number, or wholesaler number; and item description, as applicable); or

(B) If not associated with maintenance, the Product Service Code (PSC) of the service being provided; and explanation of the proposed use of covered telecommunications services and any factors relevant to determining if such use would be permissible under the prohibition in paragraph (b)(1) of this provision.

(2) Disclosure for the representation in paragraph (d)(2) of this provision. If the Offeror has responded “does” in the representation in paragraph (d)(2) of this provision, the Offeror shall provide the following information as part of the offer:

(i) For covered equipment—

(A) The entity that produced the covered telecommunications equipment (include entity name, unique entity identifier, CAGE code, and whether the entity was the OEM or a distributor, if known);

(B) A description of all covered telecommunications equipment offered (include brand; model number, such as OEM number, manufacturer part number, or wholesaler number; and item description, as applicable); and

(C) Explanation of the proposed use of covered telecommunications equipment and any factors relevant to determining if such use would be permissible under the prohibition in paragraph (b)(2) of this provision.

(ii) For covered services—

(A) If the service is related to item maintenance: A description of all covered telecommunications services offered (include on the item being maintained: Brand; model number, such as OEM number, manufacturer part number, or wholesaler number; and item description, as applicable); or

(B) If not associated with maintenance, the PSC of the service being provided; and explanation of the proposed use of covered telecommunications services and any factors relevant to determining if such use would be permissible under the prohibition in paragraph (b)(2) of this provision.

(End of provision)

52.204-26 COVERED TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT OR SERVICES -

REPRESENTATION (OCT 2020)

(IAW FAR 4.2105(c))

(a) Definitions. As used in this provision, “covered telecommunications equipment or services” and ‘‘reasonable inquiry’’ have the meaning provided in the clause 52.204‐25, Prohibition on Contracting for Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment.

(b) Procedures. The Offeror shall review the list of excluded parties in the System for Award Management (SAM) (https://www.sam.gov) for entities excluded from receiving federal awards for “covered telecommunications equipment or services”.

(c) Representations.

(1) The Offeror represents that it [ ] does, [ ] does not provide covered telecommunications equipment or services as a part of its offered products or services to the Government in the performance of any contract, subcontract, or other contractual instrument.

(2) After conducting a reasonable inquiry for purposes of this representation, the offeror represents that it [ ] does, [ ] does not use covered telecommunications equipment or services, or any equipment, system, or service that uses covered telecommunications equipment or services.

252.204-7019 NOTICE OF NIST SP 800-171 DOD ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS

(NOV 2020)

(IAW DFARS 204.7304(d))

(a) Definitions.

“Basic Assessment”, “Medium Assessment”, and “High Assessment” have the meaning given in the clause 252.204-7020, NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessments.

“Covered contractor information system” has the meaning given in the clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting, of this solicitation.

(b) Requirement. In order to be considered for award, if the Offeror is required to implement NIST SP 800-171, the Offeror shall have a current assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years old unless a lesser time is specified in the solicitation) (see 252.204-7020) for each covered contractor information system that is relevant to the offer, contract, task order, or delivery order. The Basic, Medium, and High NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessments are described in the NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment Methodology located at https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/strategically_assessing_contractor_implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/pdi/cyber/strategically_assessing_contractor_implementation_of_NIST_SP_800-171.html.

(c) Procedures.

(1) The Offeror shall verify that summary level scores of a current NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years old unless a lesser time is specified in the solicitation) are posted in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) (https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/) for all covered contractor information systems relevant to the offer.

(2) If the Offeror does not have summary level scores of a current NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment (i.e., not more than 3 years old unless a lesser time is specified in the solicitation) posted in SPRS, the Offeror may conduct and submit a Basic Assessment to webptsmh@navy.mil for posting to SPRS in the format identified in paragraph (d) of this provision.

(d) Summary level scores. Summary level scores for all assessments will be posted 30 days post-assessment in SPRS to provide DoD Components visibility into the summary level scores of strategic assessments.

(1) Basic Assessments. An Offeror may follow the procedures in paragraph (c)(2) of this provision for posting Basic Assessments to SPRS.

(i) The email shall include the following information:

(A) Cybersecurity standard assessed (e.g., NIST SP 800-171 Rev 1).

(B) Organization conducting the assessment (e.g., Contractor self-assessment).

(C) For each system security plan (security requirement 3.12.4) supporting the performance of a DoD contract—

(1) All industry Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code(s) associated with the information system(s) addressed by the system security plan; and

(2) A brief description of the system security plan architecture, if more than one plan exists.

(D) Date the assessment was completed.

(E) Summary level score (e.g., 95 out of 110, NOT the individual value for each requirement).

(F) Date that all requirements are expected to be implemented (i.e., a score of 110 is expected to be achieved) based on information gathered from associated plan(s) of action developed in accordance with NIST SP 800-171.

(ii) If multiple system security plans are addressed in the email described at paragraph (d)(1)(i) of this section, the Offeror shall use the following format for the report:

System Security Plan CAGE Codes supported by this plan

Brief description of the plan architecture

Date of assessment

Total Score

Date score of 110 will achieved

(2) Medium and High Assessments. DoD will post the following Medium and/or High Assessment summary level scores to SPRS for each system assessed:

(i) The standard assessed (e.g., NIST SP 800-171 Rev 1).

(ii) Organization conducting the assessment, e.g., DCMA, or a specific organization (identified by Department of Defense Activity Address Code (DoDAAC)).

(iii) All industry CAGE code(s) associated with the information system(s) addressed by the system security plan.

(iv) A brief description of the system security plan architecture, if more than one system security plan exists.

(v) Date and level of the assessment, i.e., medium or high.

(vi) Summary level score (e.g., 105 out of 110, not the individual value assigned for each requirement).

(vii) Date that all requirements are expected to be implemented (i.e., a score of 110 is expected to be achieved) based on information gathered from associated plan(s) of action developed in accordance with NIST SP 800-171.

(3) Accessibility.

(i) Assessment summary level scores posted in SPRS are available to DoD personnel, and are protected, in accordance with the standards set forth in DoD Instruction 5000.79, Defense-wide Sharing and Use of Supplier and Product Performance Information (PI).

(ii) Authorized representatives of the Offeror for which the assessment was conducted may access SPRS to view their own summary level scores, in accordance with the SPRS Software User’s Guide for Awardees/Contractors available at https://www.sprs.csd.disa.mil/pdf/SPRS_Awardee.pdf.

(iii) A High NIST SP 800-171 DoD Assessment may result in documentation in addition to that listed in this section. DoD will retain and protect any such documentation as “Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI)” and intended for internal DoD use only. The information will be protected against unauthorized use and release, including through the exercise of applicable exemptions under the Freedom of Information Act (e.g., Exemption 4 covers trade secrets and commercial or financial information obtained from a contractor that is privileged or confidential).

SECTION L

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS (ITO)

PAST PERFORMANCE and PRICE TRADEOFF

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.1 General Guidance

This section of the ITO provides general guidance for preparing proposals as well as specific instructions on the format and content of the proposal. The offeror’s proposal must include all data and information requested by the ITO and must be submitted in accordance with these instructions. The offeror shall be compliant with the requirements as stated in the solicitation and the attachments of the solicitation.

1.2 Proposal Content

The proposal shall be clear, concise, and shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of stated claims. The proposal should not simply rephrase or restate the Government’s requirements, but rather shall provide convincing rationale to address how the offeror intends to meet these requirements. Offerors shall assume that the Government has no prior knowledge of their facilities and experience, and will base its evaluation on the information presented in the offeror’s proposal. Elaborate brochures or documentation, binding, detailed artwork, or other embellishments are unnecessary and are not desired.

1.3 Proposal Acceptance Period

The proposal acceptance period is specified in the solicitation. The offer shall make a clear statement in the proposal documentation volume that the proposal is valid until this date.

1.4 Retention of Proposals

In accordance with FAR Subpart 4.8 (Government Contract Files), the Government will retain one copy of all unsuccessful proposals. Unless the offer requests otherwise, the Government will destroy extra copies of such unsuccessful proposals.

2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

2.1 Point of Contact

Address any questions or concerns you may have to the Point of Contract (POC) or the Contracting Officer (KO) identified on the front page of the solicitation. Written requests for clarification may be sent to the POC or KO at the address located on the front page of the solicitation.

2.2 Debriefings

The KO will promptly notify offerors of any decision to exclude them from the competitive range, whereupon they may request and receive a debriefing in accordance with FAR 15.505. Offerors excluded from the competitive range may request a pre-award debriefing or they may choose to wait until after the source selection decision to request a post-award debriefing. However, offerors excluded from the competitive range are entitled to no more than one debriefing for each proposal. The KO will notify unsuccessful offerors in accordance with FAR 15.503. Upon such notification, unsuccessful offerors may request and receive a debriefing. Offerors desiring a debriefing must make their request in accordance with the requirements of FAR 15.505 or 15.506, as applicable.

2.3 Discrepancies

If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contain an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the KO in writing with supporting rationale as well as the remedies the offeror is asking the KO to consider as related to the omission or error. The offeror is reminded that the Government reserves the right to award this effort based on the initial proposal, as received, without discussions.

2.4 Electronic Reference Documents

All referenced documents for this solicitation are available on the Beta Sam Website under Contract Opportunities (formerly FedBizOpps) at https://beta.sam.gov/, unless indicated otherwise. Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to the website for this solicitation.

2.5 Amendments to Solicitation

If this RFP is amended, all terms and conditions that are not amended remain unchanged and in full force and effect.

Offerors shall acknowledge receipt of any amendment and provide confirmation upon submission of the offeror’s proposal.

2.6 Proposal Submission

Proposals may be e-mailed or sent by mail to the KO and received by the closing date. Proposals sent by mail shall be submitted in sealed envelopes or packages addressed to the KO at the address shown on the front page of solicitation.

3.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AND DOCUMENTATION

The purpose of this section is to provide information to the Government for preparing the contract document and supporting file. The offeror’s proposal shall include a signed copy of the solicitation, Sections A through K, and all other information described in this section and shown in the table below.

ITO

Paragraph Number Volume Title

3.1 Model Contract/Solicitation

3.4 Past Performance Information (Up to 3 contracts)

3.4.2 Significant Subcontractor Consent Letters

3.4.2 Client Authorization Letter

3.5.1 Authorized Offeror Personnel

3.5.2 Government Offices

3.5.3 Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations

3.6 Exceptions to Terms and Conditions (if applicable)

An offer may be made in accordance with a current Department of Defense (DoD) Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA), if lieu of the signed Model Contract. However, eligibility for award will be dependent upon the KO’s ability to make a determination that the terms and conditions are either identical to those of the solicitation or differ in a way that has no impact on the evaluation factors listed. The offeror is responsible for identifying the differences or exceptions between the BOA and the RFP as detailed in paragraph (2) Exceptions to Terms and Conditions below. If the Contracting Officer cannot make the determination above, the BOA offer may not be eligible for award.

3.1 Solicitation/Model Contract

Sections A-K includes:

Section A – Solicitation/Contract Form Completion of blocks 12, 13, 14, 15, and 27, with name, title, and date included in block 27 of the SF 1447 is required. Signature by the offeror on the SF 1447 constitutes an offer which the Government may accept.

Section B – Supplies or Services and Costs/Prices All pricing information shall be addressed in Section B – The Schedule of the solicitation. Information shall be limited to Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), Sub-CLIN or ELIN level pricing, including unit and extended pricing as specified in Section B.

Section E – Inspection and Acceptance Completion of Inspection and Acceptance clause shall be completed.

Section F – Deliveries or Performance Complete F.O.B. Origin Clause IAW FAR 47.305(b).

Section G – Contract Administration Data Complete Activity Address Clause and if applicable, annotate remittance address within proposal.

Section H – Special Contract Requirements Not applicable.

Section I – Contract Clauses Complete clauses as applicable to your proposal.

Section K – Representation, Certifications, and Other Statement of Offerors Offerors are required to complete electronic annual representations and certifications in SAM accessed via https://www.sam.gov as a part of required registration.

3.2 Technical (Evaluation Faction 1) Information

A separate technical proposal volume is not required; however the proposal must comply with all aspects of the technical requirements as established by the National Stock Number, Part Number, and accompanying technical data attachments in order to be eligible for award and be considered technically acceptable in accordance with Section M.

3.3 Price (Evaluation Factor 2) Information

All pricing information shall be addressed in Section B – The Schedule of the solicitation. Information shall be limited to Contract Line Item Number (CLIN), Sub-CLIN or ELIN level pricing, including unit and extended pricing as specified in Section B.

In accordance with FAR 15.403-3(a), information other than certified cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. FAR 15.403-3(a)(1) provides for obtaining information other than certified cost or pricing data if needed to determine price reasonableness. Therefore, the FAR does not preclude the requirement for obtaining other than certified cost or pricing data under certain circumstances and the Government reserves the right to obtain data as appropriate. Should the contracting officer determine proposed prices to appear unreasonable or the possibility that an Offeror does not fully understand the requirement, the Offerors may be required to support price reasonableness via other than certified cost or pricing data. If, after receipt of proposals, the contracting officer determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions in FAR 15.403-1 apply, the offeror shall be required to submit certified cost or pricing data.

3.4 Past Performance (Evaluation Factor 3) Information

3.4.1 General Information

The offeror is not required to provide past performance information, however they may submit it with their proposal in a format that is readable and that communicates in a clear and concise manner. If the offeror submits past performance information, the submittal should contain information on the offeror and/or all significant subcontractors. A significant subcontractor is defined as a contractor who is proposed to perform over 60% of the total effort.

The Government may use past performance information provided by each offeror and information obtained from other sources in the evaluation of past and present performance. Other sources include the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS). Past performance may also be obtained through the contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), similarly systems of other Government departments and agencies (MOCAS, etc), Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) channels, interviews with program managers and contracting officers, and other sources known to the Government, including commercial sources.

3.4.2 Relevant and Recent Contracts

Each offeror may submit information on past and present performance that they consider most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort. Offerors may also include information on recent contracts performed by each of their significant subcontractors that they consider most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort. For description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining relevance, see Section M (or addendum to FAR 52.212-2 if commercial). Information on past and present performance should be limited to contracts within the past seven (7) years.

If the offeror submits past performance reference for a significant subcontractor, the offeror must submit a consent letter (Attachment 1) executed by each significant subcontractor, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information. For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the offeror must also submit a client authorization letter (Attachment 2) authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the offeror’s performance.

3.4.3 Specific Content

Offerors may explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past efforts to identify and manage program risk. Merely having problems does not automatically equate to a little or no confidence rating, since the problems encountered may have been on a more complex program, or an offeror may have subsequently demonstrated the ability to overcome the problems encountered. The offeror may submit documentation that clearly demonstrates their management actions employed in overcoming problems and the effects of those actions, in terms of improvements achieved or problems rectified. This may allow the offeror to be considered a higher confidence candidate.

3.4.4 Format and Length of Documentation

Documentation is limited to addressing up to 5 contracts. Each contract that is addressed is also limited to a one (1) page narrative concerning subject contract.

3.4.5 Protection of Information

Past performance information and the past performance sources are confidential and are not to be released to anyone outside the government source selection team. Offerors are cautioned that contacting or seeking our source(s) of adverse information is strictly prohibited. Any attempts to contact individuals concerning the past performance information will be perceived negatively and could impact your performance ratings. Any questions regarding source selection information and Evaluation Notices (ENs) should be addressed directly to the contracting officer only and not to any other individuals. Prime contractors are responsible for ensuring that all their subcontractors and teaming partners are aware of this information and are in compliance.

3.5 Other Information Required

3.5.1 Authorized Offeror Personnel

Provide the name, title and telephone number of the company/division point of contact regarding decisions made with respect to your proposal and who can obligate your company contractually. Also, identify those individuals authorized to negotiate with the Government.

3.5.2 Government Offices

Provide the mailing address, telephone and fax numbers and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office, DCAA, and Government Paying Office. Also, provide the name and telephone and fax number for the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO).

3.5.3 Company/Division Address, Identifying Codes, and Applicable Designations

Provide company/division's street address, county and facility code; CAGE code; DUNS code; TIN; size of business (large or small); and labor surplus area designation. This same information must be provided if the work for this contract will be performed at any other location(s). List all locations where work is to be performed and indicate whether such facility is a division, affiliate, or subcontractor, and the percentage of work to be performed at each location.

3.6 Exceptions to Terms and Conditions

Exceptions taken to terms and conditions of this prospective contract, to any of its formal attachments or to other parts of the solicitation shall be identified. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which 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. This information shall be provided in the format shown below. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the offeror being removed from consideration for award.

ATTACHMENT 1

SIGNIFICANT SUBCONTRACTOR/TEAMING PARTNER CONSENT FORM FOR THE RELEASE OR PAST AND

PRESENT PERFORMANCE INFORMATION TO THE PRIME CONTRACTOR

Past performance information concerning subcontractors and teaming partners cannot be disclosed to a private party without the subcontractor’s or teaming partner’s consent. Because a prime contractor is a private party, the Government will need that consent before disclosing subcontractor/teaming partner past and present performance information to the prime during exchanges. In an effort to assist the Government’s Past Performance Evaluation in assessing your past performance relevancy and confidence, we request the following consent form be completed by significant subcontractors/teaming partners identified in your proposal. The completed consent forms should be submitted with your proposal.

SAMPLE CONSENT LETTER

Dear (Contracting Officer)

We are currently participating as a (subcontractor/teaming partner) with (prime contractor or name of entity providing proposal) in responding to the Defense Logistics Agency request for Proposal (solicitation number) for the (program title or description of effort).

We understand that the Government is placing increased emphasis on past performance in order to obtain best value in source selections. In order to facilitate the performance confidence assessment process we are signing this consent form to allow you to discuss our past and present performance information with the prime contractor during the source selection process.

(Signature and Title of individual who has the authority to sign for and legally bind the company)

Company Name:

Address:

ATTACHMENT 2

SAMPLE CLIENT AUTHORIZATION LETTER

(for commercial contracts)

Note: This should be placed on company letterhead

Client Authorization Letter

Dear (Commercial Client/Customer)

We are currently responding to the Defense Logistics Agency Request for Proposal (RFP) (RFP No.) for the (program title or description of effort).

The Government is placing increased emphasis on past performance in order to obtain best value in source selections.

They are requesting that clients of companies who submit proposals in response to their RFP for the program/effort identified above be identified and that their participation in the validation process be requested. Therefore, in the event you are contacted for information on work we have performed; you are hereby authorized to respond to those inquiries.

We have identified Mr./Ms. (Name) of your organization as the point of contact based on their knowledge concerning our work. Your cooperation is appreciated. Any questions may be directed to (Name, title, phone number and fax number for the POC)

PART IV - REPRESENTATIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

SECTION M

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

PAST PERFORMANCE and PRICE TRADEOFF

1.0 Source Selection

1.1 Basis for Contract Award

This acquisition will utilize the Tradeoff source selection procedures to make an integrated assessment for a best value award decision. Tradeoffs may be made only between price and past performance. Award will be made to the offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15, as supplemented, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation's requirements (to include all stated terms, conditions, representation, certifications, its attachments, and all other information required by Section L of this solicitation) and judged, based on the evaluation factors to represent the best value to the Government. The Government seeks to award to the qualified (See FAR 52.209-1 of this solicitation) offeror who gives the Government the greatest confidence that they will best meet the requirement affordably. This may result in an award to a higher rated, higher priced offeror, where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors and the Source Selection Authority (SSA) reasonably determines that the past performance of a higher price offeror outweighs the cost difference. While the Government SSA will strive for maximum objectivity, the source selection process, by its nature, is subjective and, therefore, professional judgment is implicit throughout the entire process.

1.2 Number of Contracts to be Awarded

The Government intends to award one contract for this acquisition resulting from this solicitation. However, the Government reserves the right not to award a contract at all, depending on the quality of the proposals and prices submitted and the availability of funds.

1.3 Rejection of Unrealistic Offers

The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated to be unrealistic in terms of program commitments, including contract terms and conditions, or unrealistically high or low in cost/price when compared to Government estimates, such that the proposal is deemed to reflect an inherent lack of competence or failure to comprehend the complexity and risks of the program.

1.4 Correction Potential of Proposals

The Government will consider, throughout the evaluation, the "correction potential" of any deficiency or proposal inadequacy. The judgment of such "correction potential" is within the sole discretion of the Government. If an aspect of an offeror's proposal not meeting the Government's requirements is not considered correctable, the offeror may be eliminated from the competitive range.

1.5 Discussions

It is the Governments intent to award without discussions; therefore, it is imperative that offerors submit their best terms initially. However, if during the evaluation period, it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government to hold discussions, offeror responses to Evaluation Notices (ENs), and the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) will be considered in making the source selection decision.

1.6 Competitive Range Determination

If discussions are conducted, the Government shall establish a competitive range comprised of the most highly rated proposals, in accordance with FAR 15.306(c). The competitive range determination can be based on any evaluation factor, or a combination of the three factors. A competitive range determination may eliminate Offerors based on their initial proposal evaluation results, after discussions (if necessary), prior to issuance of the Final Proposal Revision (FPR) request, or for efficiency. If Offerors are excluded from the competitive range they may request a debriefing IAW

FAR 15.505.

1.7 Pre-Award Survey

The Government may conduct a pre-award survey (PAS) as part of this source selection. Results of the PAS (if conducted) will be evaluated to determine each offeror's capability to meet the requirements of the solicitation.

1.8 Solicitation Requirements (Terms and Conditions)

Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, and representations and certifications, in addition to those identified as factors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award. Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. The Government reserves the right to determine any such exceptions unacceptable, and the proposal, therefore, ineligible for award.

2.0 EVALUATION FACTORS

2.1 Evaluation Factors

Award will be made to the offeror proposing the combination most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below.

Factor 1: Technical Factor 2: Price Factor 3: Past Performance

2.2 Relative Importance of Factors

For this solicitation, technical acceptability is a prerequisite to the best value analysis and potential trade-off between Past Performance and Price. The Order of Importance is used to explain how the other factors will be traded off on technically acceptable proposals.

For all technically acceptable proposals, Factor 2 (Past Performance) will be evaluated on a basis approximately equal to Factor 3 (Price). Tradeoffs may only be made between past performance and price among those offerors who have been determined technically acceptable.

2.3 Evaluation Methodology of Factors

All proposals will first be evaluated for technical acceptability as described in paragraph 2.3.1 below. Second, price will be evaluated as described in paragraph 2.3.2 below. Concurrent with the price evaluation, past performance will be evaluated in accordance with paragraph 2.3.3 on each proposal deemed technically acceptable. A decision will then be made as to which proposal provides the best value to the Government.

2.3.1 Technical Factor

There is no requirement that a technical proposal be submitted. Each offer will be determined technically acceptable if deemed compliant with specified requirements and is listed as an approved, qualified source or gains qualification prior to award. Failure to meet the specified requirements as included in Section L may render the offer technically unacceptable. Only those proposals determined to be technically acceptable, either initially, or as a result of discussions, will be considered for award. Each offeror will receive one of the technical ratings described below:

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation.

2.3.2 Price Factor

The proposed price will be evaluated for completeness, reasonableness, unbalanced pricing, and Total Evaluated Price. Offerors whose price is determined to be incomplete, unreasonable, or unbalanced will not be considered for award.

2.3.2.1 Completeness

Proposals will be reviewed for completeness and compliance. Incomplete proposals will be considered unawardable.

2.3.2.2 Price Reasonableness

The proposed prices will be evaluated for reasonableness. Analysis of price proposals will be performed using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404 in order to determine price reasonableness. Reasonableness must represent a price to the Government a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. Normally, price reasonableness is established through adequate price competition, but may also be determined through price analysis techniques as described in FAR 15.404.

2.3.2.3 Unbalanced Pricing: Offerors’ proposals will be reviewed for unbalanced pricing. The Government will evaluate any supporting information provided by the Offeror explaining variances that appear unbalanced. Evaluated offers that are determined to be unbalanced may be deemed ineligible for award by the Contracting Officer if a determination is made that lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total price, the price of one or more line items is significantly over or understated as demonstrated by application of price analysis techniques, such that: (a) there is reasonable doubt the offer would result in the lowest overall cost to the Government, even though it is the lowest priced Offeror; or (b) the offer is so grossly unbalanced; its acceptance would be tantamount to allowing an advanced payment.

2.3.2.4 Total Evaluated Price (TEP): The Offeror’s TEP will be determined by multiplying the proposed unit price by the Best Estimated Quantity (BEQ) of each contract line item (CLIN), then adding all CLINs together; however, the actual quantity awarded may differ based on the Government required quantity at award. (At award, the quantity type may be changed from BEQ to Fixed Quantity). Any price related factors (i.e. transportations costs, first article testing) will be added to the amount for its respective CLIN.

2.3.2.5 Data Other than Certified Cost or Pricing Data: If requested by the Contracting Officer, data other than certified cost or pricing data shall be evaluated to support a determination of reasonable and balanced pricing. This information will only be requested if all other sources have been insufficient to support a determination of reasonable and/or balanced pricing. However, if the contracting officer does not receive proposals from two or more responsible offerors, competing independently, the sole offeror shall be required to submit certified cost or pricing data if the proposed dollar amount exceeds the Truth in Negotiations Act (TINA) threshold IAW FAR 15.403-4 or data other than certified cost or pricing data in sufficient detail to support a determination of reasonable and balanced pricing as determined by the contracting officer if the proposed dollar amount does not exceed the TINA threshold IAW FAR 15.403-4.

2.3.3 Past Performance Factor

The Government will evaluate the offeror's past performance by reviewing the offeror’s record of supplying products that comply with contract requirements, including cost and schedule. Under the Past Performance factor, a Performance Confidence Assessment Rating represents the evaluation of an offeror's present and past work record to assess the Government’s confidence in the offeror's probability of successfully performing as proposed.

2.3.3.1 Evaluation Process

The Past Performance Evaluation is accomplished by reviewing aspects of an offeror's (1) relevant past performance and (2) recent past performance, focusing on and targeting performance, which is relevant to the technical requirement.

In determining relevance, consideration will be given to the likeliness and similarity of the effort to include contract scope, contract type, and contract schedule. This information may include data on parts manufactured by other divisions, critical subcontractors, or teaming contractors, if such resources significantly influence the proposed requirement. The Government may consider relevant work as those performed for agencies of the federal, state, or local governments and commercial customers. Where relevant performance record indicates performance problems, the Government will consider the number and severity of the problems and the appropriateness and effectiveness of any corrective actions taken (not just planned or promised). The Government may review more recent contracts or performance evaluations to ensure corrective actions have been implemented and to evaluate their effectiveness. To be recent, contract delivery must have occurred within the past seven (7) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

Offerors with adverse past performance information to which they have not previously had an opportunity to respond will be given the opportunity to provide clarifications concerning the adverse information.

Past performance information will be determined primarily based on the offeror’s “Supplier Risk Score” in the Supplier Performance Risk System (SPRS) at the time of the close of the solicitation period. Past performance may also be obtained through information provided by the offerors, the contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), similarly systems of other Government departments and agencies (MOCAS, etc), questionnaires tailored to the circumstances of this acquisition, Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) channels, interviews with program managers and contracting officers, and other sources known to the Government, including commercial sources. Offerors are to note that, in conducting this assessment, the Government reserves the right to use both data provided by the offeror and data obtained from other sources.

2.3.3.2 Past Performance Ratings

Each offeror will receive an integrated Performance Confidence Assessment rating, which is the rating for the Past Performance factor. Although the past performance evaluation focuses on performance that is recent and relevant to the technical requirement, the resulting Performance Confidence Assessment is made at the factor level and represents an overall evaluation of contractor performance. The Past Performance factor will receive one of the following performance confidence assessment ratings in accordance with the Department of Defense (DoD) Source Selection Procedures.

Note: With regards to the best value award decision, all offerors receiving the same past performance rating will be considered equal for the Past Performance Factor.

More recent and relevant performance will have a greater impact on the Performance Confidence Assessment than less recent or relevant effort.