TEAMS-Next Safety Sec L 29 May 20 FINAL.pdf

Approved for Public Release 20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

HQ0858-20-R-0003

TEAMS-Next

Safety

Section L

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

29 May 2020

Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

2.0 SOURCE SELECTION METHODOLOGY

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT

4.0 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

5.0 CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION (VOLUME I)

6.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (VOLUME II)

7.0 FACTOR 1: MISSION CAPABILITY (VOLUME III)

8.0 FACTOR 2: IMCP (VOLUME IV)

9.0 FACTOR 3: OCI MANAGEMENT PLAN (VOLUME V)

10.0 FACTOR 5: COST AND PRICE (VOLUME VII)

11.0 LIST OF SECTION L ATTACHMENTS

Section L: Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors

This attachment will be removed upon award of the contract.

1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1.1 The proposal instructions in this section are designed to assist Offerors in preparing a complete response that reflects a full understanding of the approach proposed to accomplish all contractual requirements. Section M details how proposals will be evaluated.

1.2 Offerors are expected to comply with all requirements of the Request for Proposal (RFP).

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

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

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

The PCO for this acquisition is as follows:

April Paul

MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY (MDA)

CONTRACTS DIRECTORATE - MDA/CSK

5222 Martin Road Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-0001

(256) 450-1914 Email: april.paul@mda.mil

The secondary point of contact is as follows:

http://www.dcsa.mil/mc/ctp.fc/ mailto:april.paul@mda.mil

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

LaCondria Washington

MISSILE DEFENSE AGENCY (MDA)

CONTRACTS DIRECTORATE - MDA/CSK

5222 Martin Road Redstone Arsenal, AL 35898-0001

(256) 450-1532 Email: lacondria.washington@mda.mil

The proposal must be received prior to 8:00 pm central time on Wednesday, July 1, 2020.

Late submissions will not be accepted. The proposal shall be sent to the PCO email address shown above. A copy must also be sent to TEAMS-Next_Safety@mda.mil.

Address any questions or concerns you may have to the PCO. Offerors may submit written questions requesting clarification of RFP requirements via electronic mail to the following address: TEAMS-Next_Safety@mda.mil. Subject line shall state "HQ0858-20-R-0003 RFP Questions." It is requested that all questions be received within 10 days after receipt of RFP to allow the Government adequate time to prepare and issue responses to all Offerors prior to the date and time set for receipt of proposals. The Government will continue to accept questions up to the closing time of the solicitation; however, time may not permit responses to questions received after the aforementioned timeframe. Only written questions will receive a response.

Information provided with each question shall include the document name, document date, specific page, paragraph, clause or other definitive citation requiring clarification. The Government will answer questions (providing both the question and the answer) either via email or via a beta.sam.gov posting that will be made available to all interested parties. No questions with restrictive markings will be answered. Company-specific information will be omitted from all questions and answers.

1.5 The Government may release submitted proposal data to non-Government advisors for review, analysis, and evaluation. The Government may also employ administrative and engineering support services contractors in the handling of solicitation documentation for purposes of security and document control. All such personnel will be required to execute a statement to preserve and protect from disclosure any source selection and contractor proprietary information disclosed to them during the course of these evaluations.

It is anticipated that the following firm(s) will be involved in the source selection process:

Manage the Isolated Local Area Network (ISOLAN) during source selection:

LinTech Global, Inc.

31600 W 13 Mile Rd, Ste 122 Farmington Hills, MI 48334-1407 Attn: Michael Linn

(248) 553-8033 mlin@lintechglobal.com

Manage FEDSELECT© source selection evaluation database:

mailto:lacondria.washington@mda.mil mailto:mlin@lintechglobal.com

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

CACI, Inc. - Federal 7725 West Reno Ave.

Oklahoma City, OK 73127 Attn: Regan Anderson (405)367-2486 regan.anderson@caci.com

Provide Source Selection Advisory Assistance:

Kepler Research 13663 Office Place Suite 202 Woodbridge, VA 22192 Attn: Margie Heminger

(703) 465-4035 margie@keplerresearch.com

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

Objections to disclosure of proposals, or specific portions, to the non-Government advisors listed above must be provided in writing to the PCO within five (5) business days of solicitation issuance. If no objections are submitted, the Offeror(s) must enter into a non-disclosure agreement with the non-government advisor(s), or with the company employing the non-government advisor(s) before the non-government advisor(s) are given access to the Offeror(s) proprietary or source selection information. The fully executed NDAs must be submitted NLT 10 days prior to the proposal submission. The NDAs shall be sent to April.Paul@mda.mil and TEAMS-Next_Safety@mda.mil.

WRITTEN OBJECTIONS MUST INCLUDE A DETAILED STATEMENT OF THE BASIS

FOR THE OFFEROR’S OBJECTION AND IDENTIFY SPECIFIC PORTIONS OF THE

PROPOSAL THE OFFEROR OBJECTS TO DISCLOSE TO NON-GOVERNMENT

CONTRACTORS ADVISORS.

1.6 Notice Regarding OCI – Determination to Participate in This Acquisition

a) The acquisition of advisory and assistance services under this solicitation may create actual or potential conflicts of interest for Offerors and prospective teammates or subcontractors. In assessing and addressing conflicts of interest, MDA will follow the guidance in FAR subpart 9.5. The Offeror is responsible for ensuring that both it and its proposed teammates and/or subcontractors are not restricted from participating in this acquisition due to an OCI caused by any MDA-funded contract or subcontract; Missile mailto:regan.anderson@caci.com mailto:April.Paul@mda.mil mailto:TEAMS-Next_Safety@mda.mil

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

Defense System (MDS)-related contract or subcontract; or, other significant, non-MDS related business relationships with firms doing business with or in support of MDA.

b) Given the broad reach of the contracting discipline in terms of access to contractor proprietary information, as well as sensitive acquisition strategy information, MDA requires a robust contract that is free of any OCI, such that the Safety contractor can support the entire MDA enterprise without restriction. Accordingly, the Safety contract will be restricted through the entire Safety contract period of performance as set forth in contract clause H-09 - ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST. Applicable restrictions and duration of restrictions are indicated in paragraph f of the clause.

c) Procedures to follow with proposal submission:

1) Each Offeror must submit, for itself, partners, and subcontractors, an "OCI Disclosure

Form", Attachment L3 and applicable supporting documents. The submission shall identify all of the team's MDA-funded contracts or subcontracts; BMDS-related contracts or subcontracts; and any significant, non-MDS related business relationships with firms doing business with or in support of MDA. For each identified contract, the Offeror shall disclose the contract number; name, and telephone number of the PCO; a description of the work performed or being performed; and such additional information as the PCO may request to assist in the identification of actual or potential OCIs.

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

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

4) Should the Offeror elect to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan, it must address all conflicts in adequate detail for the PCO to determine whether an OCI exists or has been mitigated. To facilitate resolution of OCIs during evaluations, Offerors are encouraged to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan with the proposals. The OCI Mitigation Plan shall specifically address the OCI disclosures required in this section

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20) and explain how the prime is in full compliance with H-09 Organizational Conflict of Interest (Apr 2020). The OCI Mitigation Plan will be reviewed in conjunction with the PCO’s Responsibility Determination prior to award.

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

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

2.0 SOURCE SELECTION METHODOLOGY

2.1 Competitive, Best Value Source Selection

The Government intends to award a total small business set-aside, cost reimbursement contract under FAR Part 15. The contract will consist of CPFF LOE Labor CLINs, Cost ODC and Travel CLINs, and an option CPFF LOE CLIN; and will have a base period of three years with two, one-year options. Offerors shall note that the contract resulting from this solicitation will be awarded on the basis of the best value decision made under this solicitation.

2.2 MDA Intent to Award without Discussions - Offeror’s Best Terms

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award a contract without discussions with Offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the Offeror’s initial proposal shall contain the Offeror’s best terms for non-cost and cost factors. When the Government pursues award without discussions, the Offerors may be given the opportunity IAW FAR 15.306 to clarify certain aspects of their proposals (e.g., adverse past performance information to which the Offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond) or to resolve minor or clerical errors. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the PCO determines them to be necessary.

2.3 Competitive Range

If discussions are to be conducted, the PCO will establish a competitive range (as set forth in FAR 15.306(c)) based on the ratings of each proposal against all evaluation criteria. If the PCO determines that an Offeror’s proposal shall not be included in the competitive range, the proposal

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20) will be eliminated from consideration for award and written notice of the decision will be provided to the unsuccessful Offeror in accordance with FAR 15.503.

Discussions (if required) may be conducted either orally or in writing. The scope and extent of the discussions are a matter of PCO judgment as set forth in FAR 15.306. Responses from Offerors may be required within two business days.

If the PCO determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the PCO may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

2.4 Final Proposal Revisions (FPR)

Although the Government intends to award without discussions, should discussions with Offeror(s) be deemed necessary, upon completion of those discussions, the PCO will request that the Offeror(s) provide a FPR.

The Offeror is advised that any changes to the proposal in the FPR shall be fully addressed, explained, and reflected in the proposed price. Failure to comply with this requirement can adversely influence the evaluation of the proposal. The PCO will establish a common due date, time, and instructions for submission of the FPR.

If FPRs are requested, any revisions or non-compliance with contract terms and conditions submitted in the FPR may not be subject to further discussion or negotiation and may render the offer unacceptable to the Government. This provision is not intended to restrict the Offeror’s opportunity to revise figures (e.g., prices, discounts, or percentage rates) but is intended to preclude any misunderstandings by the Government (that could result if new or revised terms and conditions submitted in the FPR have not been fully disclosed, discussed, and understood during discussions or negotiations). Thus, such new or revised terms and conditions are not solicited and, if submitted in the FPR, may render the offer unacceptable to the Government.

Offerors are reminded that there is a continuing obligation to notify MDA of any changes to key personnel proposed in the FPR occurring after submission of the FPR but before announcement of an award decision.

2.5 Pre and Post Award Debriefing

Pre and Post award debriefings will be conducted IAW FAR 15.505, 15.506, and Class Deviation 2018-O0011 Enhanced Postaward Debriefing Rights in the case of a postaward debriefing.

2.6 Errors or Omissions

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

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

2.7 Mistakes

Mistakes in an Offeror’s proposal discovered after award shall be handled IAW FAR 14.407-4 as referenced in FAR 15.508.

2.8 Evaluation Notices (ENs)

Should the Government need to conduct written exchanges with Offerors, they will be in the form of an evaluation notice (EN). Page format and limitations will be placed on responses to ENs in the event they are issued. The specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the Offerors. The ENs may be sent electronically (i.e., via e-mail) at the discretion of the PCO. Offerors must submit their responses by the time and date specified in the letter.

2.9 Request for Proposal (RFP) Revisions or Amendments

The Government reserves the right to revise or amend any portion of this solicitation. Such revisions or amendments will be available at https://beta.sam.gov/ using Standard Form (SF) 33.

Potential Offerors are encouraged to subscribe for real-time e-mail notifications when information has been posted to beta.sam.gov. For amendments requiring material changes, the proposal due date may be extended at the discretion of the PCO to enable an Offeror to revise its proposal. In such cases, the amendment will include an announcement of the new proposal due date and time. The Offeror shall provide written acknowledgement of any solicitation amendments issued by the Government.

2.10 Offeror’s Library

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

Company Name:

Company/Division Address:

CAGE Code:

DUNS Number:

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

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

https://beta.sam.gov/ http://www.sam.gov/

All information provided by electronic means will be unclassified/For Official Use Only

(FOUO).

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT

3.1 Proposal Acceptability

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

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

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

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

The Offeror’s proposal shall include all of the information requested and shall comply fully with these Section L instructions. Failure to do so may cause the Offeror’s proposal to be eliminated from consideration for award. Offerors are reminded to properly mark their proposal documents which contain proprietary or restricted information.

3.3 Offerors are advised that, should it be awarded a contract, the Government may incorporate into the final contract enhancing features included in the successful Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government. With the exception of the Cost and Price Volume, no cost or pricing information shall appear in any other volume. The Government advises Offerors that taking exception to, or deviating from, any term or condition of the RFP may make an offer unacceptable and the Offeror ineligible for award.

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

3.4 The Offeror shall make a clear statement in the Executive Summary that the proposal is valid at least 270 days from the proposal due date.

NOTE: IF THE PROPOSAL IS NOT RECEIVED BY THE DUE DATE AND TIME

SPECIFIED, THE OFFEROR’S PROPOSAL IS CONSIDERED LATE IN ACCORDANCE

WITH FAR 52.215-1.

4.0 PROPOSAL ORGANIZATION

4.1 In presenting material in the proposal, the Offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to present enough information to allow the various technical and management approaches, as well as cost and price, to be meaningfully evaluated without discussions. The Offeror must include any data necessary to illustrate the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems.

Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

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

4.3 Each proposal volume shall be unclassified. Each volume shall be written in Standard English and be complete in and of itself.

The Offeror shall provide a Proposal Cross Reference Matrix as set forth in Table L-2. This proposal matrix is only a tool to assist in the proposal evaluation process.

4.4 Table L-1 shall serve as the Offeror’s guide for proposal organization and content by volume.

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

Table L-1: Proposal Organization and Content

Volume Title # of Hard

Copies

# of Electronic

Copies

Max # of Pages

Volume I – Contract Documentation 0 2 unlimited Tab 1: Master Table of Contents Tab 2: Model Contract Tab 3: Solicitation Exceptions Matrix Tab 4: Ground Rules and Assumptions Tab 5: OCI Disclosure Forms and Attachments Tab 6: OCI Mitigation Plan (if required)* Tab 7: Mission Essential Services Plan 4

Volume II – Executive Summary 0 2 Tab 1: Executive Summary Content 10 Tab 2: Proposal Cross Reference Matrix unlimited Tab 3: Limitations on Subcontracting 5

Volume III – Factor 1: Mission Capability 0 2

Tab 1: MCS1 Safety Risk Acceptance Package Development and Coordination

Tab 2: MCS2 Safety Requirements Tailoring Process Support

Tab 3: MCS3 Program Safety Documentation Review 10 Tab 4: MCS4 Test Event Safety Oversight 15 Tab 5: MCS5 Occupational Safety & Health Program 5 Tab 6: MCS6 Human Capital Management 20

Volume IV – Factor 2: Information Management and Control Plan (IMCP) 0 2

Tab 1: IMCP (plan) 5 Tab 2: Appendix A unlimited

Volume V – Factor 3: OCI Management Plan 0 2 15

Volume VI – Factor 4: Cost and Price 0 2 unlimited Tab 1: Cost/Price Narrative unlimited Tab 2: Excel Price Workbook (EPW) unlimited

* - If the Offeror elects to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan, it shall be provided as Tab 6 to Volume I (see paragraph 1.6(c)(4)). If required, the OCI Mitigation Plan will be included as a Section J attachment at award.

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

a) Volume Cover Pages

b) Table of Contents

c) List of Tables and Figures

d) Glossaries and Acronym List

e) Tabs and Dividers

f) Blank pages

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

Other than the electronic media solicited, audio and video recordings, or any other electronic media (i.e., CD & tape) will not be accepted.

4.6 Legible tables, charts, graphs, diagrams, schematics and figures shall be used wherever practical to depict organizations, systems and layout, implementation schedules, and plans. For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the font shall be no smaller than 8 point.

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

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

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

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

4.11 Each volume shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-referencing to other volumes of the proposal with the one exception being MCS6 Element #2 which requires review of the Cost Volume. Each response to each subfactor shall be self-contained.

4.12 All prime and team member information must be incorporated into one coherent submittal. Be sure to identify appropriate markings such as the legend at FAR 52.215-1(e), Restriction on disclosure and use of data.

4.13 Reserved

4.14 Reserved

4.15 Reserved

4.16 One set of complete electronic volumes shall be submitted in Microsoft Office 2016 or earlier compatible version. The second set of complete electronic volumes shall be submitted in Adobe Acrobat DC, with the exception being Volume VI Tab 2 Excel Price Workbook. Offerors are permitted to submit documents such as signed letters (i.e., OCI, Consent and Client Authorization Letters) and embedded graphics (if applicable) in .pdf format. Pricing spreadsheets (Excel Price Workbook (EPW)) shall be submitted using MS Excel 2016 or earlier compatible version. The EPW must contain all formulas used in developing the proposal and all cells in the EPW must be “unlocked” and without password protection. If files contain links, the links must be intact and maintained through all revisions. Electronic copies shall not be password protected. Electronic file directory titles and organization shall reflect the titles and organization of these instructions. Each directory shall contain a Microsoft Word file with the Master Table of Contents for that directory. Offerors shall ensure electronic files are virus free.

Offerors who do not provide a “complete” electronic EPW (Attachment L1 – Excel Pricing Workbook) and/or Pricing Volume Narrative (Section L-11.6) (after discussions, if discussions are held) will be removed from consideration for award. A “complete” EPW is defined as an EPW that contains, at a minimum, completion of all the fields in the EPW format provided with the RFP.

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

4.18 All proposals shall be submitted to the following email addresses:

April.Paul@mda.mil TEAMS-Next_Safety@mda.mil

4.19 The Government may need to conduct exchanges with Offerors which will be in the form of an EN. Page format and specified page limits for EN responses will be identified in the letters forwarding the ENs to the Offerors. ENs may be sent electronically (i.e., via email) at the discretion of the Government. The EN will request an email response, and Offerors must submit their responses by the time and date specified in the letter.

mailto:April.Paul@mda.mil mailto:TEAMS-Next_Safety@mda.mil

5.0 CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION (VOLUME I)

5.1 The Offeror shall include a master table of contents of the entire proposal (include in Contract Documentation volume only). See Section 4.9 and Table L-1: Proposal Organization and Content.

5.2 Model Contract (SF33)

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

• Section A (SF33, Blocks 13 through 18)

• Section B Offerors will populate the estimated cost and fixed fee values for CPFF-LOE CLINs and Government-provided cost values for Cost-Only CLINs.

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

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

5.4 Ground Rules and Assumptions

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

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

5.5 OCI Disclosures

The Offeror must submit an OCI Disclosure Form for each instance of MDA related work (e.g.

subcontract, prime contract, etc.), whether contracted by MDA or another Government Agency as detailed in paragraph 1.6(c)(1).

5.6 OCI Mitigation Plan

If the Offeror elects to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan, it shall be included in Volume I at Tab 6.

See paragraphs 1.6(c)(2) through 1.6(c)(4) for additional considerations. The PCO may request mitigation plans as required depending on the content provided in the OCI disclosure forms.

5.7 Mission Essential Services Plan

In accordance with DFARS 252.237-7024, Notice of Continuation of Essential Contractor Services, Offeror shall provide the plan required as specified in the provision. The plan shall be included in Volume I at Tab 7. The plan shall be incorporated at contract award.

6.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (VOLUME II)

6.1 The Executive Summary shall include company information and a summary of the Offeror’s proposal. Any summary material presented here shall not be considered as meeting the solicitation requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal.

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

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

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

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

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

TABLE L-2: Proposal Cross Reference Matrix Format SOW Paragraph Section L Section M Offeror’s Proposal Paragraph Reference

XX.X L-XX.X M-XX.X XX.X

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

Calculation of the amount that can be subcontracted (Limitations on Subcontracting): A small business shall not pay more than 50 percent of the amount paid to it by the government to firms that are not similarly situated.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

7.0 FACTOR 1: MISSION CAPABILITY (VOLUME III)

7.1 The Offeror’s Mission Capability volume will consist of the following subfactors:

Mission Capability Subfactor 1 (MCS1): Safety Risk Acceptance Package Development and Coordination Mission Capability Subfactor 2 (MCS2): Safety Requirements Tailoring Process Support Mission Capability Subfactor 3 (MCS3): Program Safety Documentation Review Mission Capability Subfactor 4 (MCS4): Test Event Safety Oversight

Mission Capability Subfactor 5 (MCS5): Occupational Safety & Health Program Mission Capability Subfactor 6 (MCS6): Human Capital Management

7.2 Subfactor MCS1: Safety Risk Acceptance Package Development and Coordination

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its capability based on its approach to, and understanding of, the following MCS1 Elements, to include requisite experiences to accomplish the mission tasks:

MCS1 Element #1: Evaluating MDA system developer safety documentation and identifying serious or high safety risks that require formal government acceptance (DoD MIL STD 882C or E); evaluating interoperability of communication of multiple missile defense systems to identify safety risks caused by the interaction of multiple systems; and ensuring all credible safety hazards and risks throughout the program lifecycle are correctly identified and assessed, and that proposed mitigations are sufficient to reduce risks to a level acceptable to the government.

MCS1 Element #2: Developing formal safety risk acceptance memoranda and briefing packages to convey critical information to designated MDA safety risk acceptance authority; process for preparing professional quality safety risk assessments; and coordinating approval from the appropriate risk acceptance authority and other key stakeholders such as Range/host installation Safety organizations.

7.3 Subfactor MCS2: Safety Requirements Tailoring Process Support

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its capability based on its approach to, and understanding of, the following MCS2 Elements, to include requisite experiences to accomplish the mission tasks:

MCS2 Element #1: Evaluating system-developer-proposed tailoring of Range Safety requirements with consideration given to meeting the intent of the requirement without undue cost and/or schedule burden.

MCS2 Element #2: Evaluating Engineering Change Notices for identification of potential safety problems caused by the proposed change.

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

7.4 Subfactor MCS3: Program Safety Documentation Review

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its capability based on its approach to, and understanding of, the following MCS3 Elements, to include requisite experiences to accomplish the mission tasks:

MCS3 Element #1: Evaluating MDA system developer documentation to ensure all applicable safety policies and regulations have been properly addressed.

MCS3 Element #2: Evaluating safety documentation provided by program offices to ensure safety risk assessments are complete and accurate before submitting to leadership for safety risk acceptance to ensure all applicable safety policies and regulations have been properly addressed, and documentation is complete and accurate.

7.5 Subfactor MCS4: Test Event Safety Oversight

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its capability based on its approach to, and understanding of, the following MCS4 Elements, to include requisite experiences to accomplish the mission tasks:

MCS4 Element #1: Reviewing test procedures and identifying non-compliances with applicable safety policies and regulations; reviewing and providing comments and/or recommendation for government approval of hazardous and safety critical procedures.

MCS4 Element #2: Providing safety oversight of hazardous and safety critical integration and test operations in the field.

MCS4 Element #3: Ensuring all applicable safety policies and hazard mitigations are properly implemented and that waivers/deviations are reviewed and approved by the appropriate authority.

7.6 Subfactor MCS5: Occupational Safety & Health Program

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its capability based on its approach to, and understanding of, the following MCS5 Element, to include requisite experiences to accomplish the mission tasks:

MCS5 Element #1: Developing, implementing and executing effective MDA safety and occupational health (SOH) programs to include support for agency policies and procedures.

7.7 Subfactor MCS6: Human Capital Management

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

The Offeror will be required to perform all SOW requirements. However, for proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose its Human Capital Management capability based on its approach to, and understanding of, the following MCS6 Elements:

MCS6 Element #1: Recruit Qualified Personnel. Demonstrating the process for timely recruiting and on-boarding of personnel that meet the qualifications set forth in the SOW labor competencies (SOW 4.3.1.7). Addressing processes and timelines for backfilling billets and approach to quickly increase staffing to support potential new mission areas.

MCS6 Element #2: Retain Qualified Personnel. In concert with the compensation plan portion of the Cost/Price Volume, addressing compensation plan/benefits and other associated incentives to retain qualified personnel.

MCS6 Element #3: Problem Resolution Strategy. Problem resolution strategy addressing customer complaints in the following areas:

a) Unsatisfactory job performance at the employee level (e.g. lack of technical ability)

b) Unsatisfactory systemic performance (e.g. pervasive and continued unsatisfactory performance across an entire function)

c) Personnel misconduct issues (e.g. timecard fraud, computer misuse, behavior/conduct)

MCS6 Element #4: Key Staff Position defined as Contract Program Manager (CPM). Provide resume that meets all the qualifications at time of proposal submission from SOW 4.3.1.7 for the CPM. This individual must also have a current Top Secret security clearance. The Offeror shall provide a bilaterally-signed employment agreement (employment contingent on contract award) for the key staff position. The bilaterally-signed employment agreement must stipulate employment beginning on or before the first day of contract period of performance for this effort.

Note, prior to contract award, Offeror will be required to verify to the Government the availability of proposed key persons at beginning of contract period of performance; this is a condition for award.

8.0 FACTOR 2: IMCP (VOLUME IV)

As required in SOW para 6.0 (CDRL A006), the Safety contractor will be required to submit an Information Management and Control Plan-Services (IMCP) that clearly describes its policies and procedures for the dissemination and accountability of Controlled Unclassified Information

(CUI).

Appendix A referenced in “Table L-1: Proposal Organization and Content” herein is a high-level summary of the Contractor’s SSP and POAM for their applicable network.

For proposal evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose an IMCP that demonstrates an approach to, and understanding of, the policies/procedures identified below:

a) Procedures for determining the need to transmit CUI.

20-MDA-10497 (29 May 20)

b) Internal mechanisms to determine the amount of CUI deemed necessary to transmit.

c) Accountability procedures used to safeguard CUI.

d) Procedures for monitoring subcontractor compliance with DFARS 252.204-7012.

e) Procedures for reporting a cyber-incident as defined in DFARS 252.204-7012.

f) All National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) 800-171 r1 14 families of controls for its own applicable network in its System Security Plans and POAM.

g) Controls identified in the POAM are resolved within one year after contract award, or a reasonable period of time agreed to by the Contracting Officer.

h) Controls in place to enforce flow down of DFARS 252.204-7012 and prime contractor

IMCP procedures to all applicable subcontractors and vendors.

9.0 FACTOR 3: OCI MANAGEMENT PLAN (VOLUME V)

The Offeror shall clearly describe its approach to the management of OCI in a comprehensive OCI Management Plan. The plan will be incorporated into the contract after award and shall be updated as required during the term of the contract. The plan shall describe the approach to OCI management in the following areas:

a) A description of the organizational unit and position(s) responsible for implementing the Contractor’s OCI Management approach to include responsibility for overall management, oversight, and enforcement.

b) The plan to maintain and self-certify an OCI-free environment during performance of the contract by ensuring that the Prime contractor and subcontractors at all tiers do not support any MDA-funded contract requirements (whether via MDA contracts, or other Government agency contracts which support MDA).

c) The procedures for detecting, eliminating, and reporting OCIs at any tier, including procedures the Prime contractor will utilize to ensure its subcontractors at all tiers proactively identify and report conflicts.

d) The procedures for protecting agency information that could lead to an unfair competitive advantage if disclosed; specifically, collecting disclosure agreements covering all individuals, subcontractors, and other entities with access to agency-sensitive information, and physical safeguards.

e) Promulgation of enforcement mechanisms, procedures and training to all employees of the Prime contractor and subcontractors at all tiers, with emphasis on consequences for failing to comply with an OCI-free policy.

f) Processes for identifying and eliminating potential conflicts associated with the employment of recently separated federal Government employees (military or civilian) that may have had unequal, non-public access to TEAMS or TEAMS-Next information.

Do not include any information related to specific pre-award OCIs or OCI mitigation, as such information shall be addressed separately in Volume I, Contract Documentation, Tab 5.

If an Offeror fails to demonstrate an effective approach in the above areas, it will be assigned an “Unacceptable” rating for OCI Management Plan. Offerors that receive an “Unacceptable” rating for OCI Management Plan are not eligible for award.

10.0 FACTOR 5: COST AND PRICE (VOLUME VII)

The Cost and Price Volume instructions are to help the Offerors in the preparation of the Cost and Price Volume. A well written Cost and Price Volume will completely and accurately provide all pricing information organized in a way that facilitates the Government evaluation.

This is important to the Offeror because a quality Cost and Price Volume simplifies the evaluation and communicates to the Government the realism and reasonableness of the proposed prices. The Offeror bears full responsibility for any adverse impact resulting from a failure to follow these Cost and Price Volume instructions. The Government encourages timely questions from Offerors and Major Subcontractors concerning these instructions.

For proposal purposes, the estimated start date is December 13, 2020 with a…