W15QKN16R0105-0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1. Contract ID Code Page Of

2. Amendment/Modification No.

3. Effective Date

4. Requisition/Purchase Req No.

5. Project No. (If applicable)

6. Issued By Code 7. Administered By (If other than Item 6) Code

8. Name And Address Of Contractor (No., Street, City, County, State and Zip Code)

9A. Amendment Of Solicitation No.

9B. Dated (See Item 11)

10A. Modification Of Contract/Order No.

10B. Dated (See Item 13) Code Facility Code

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 amendments: (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.

12. Accounting And Appropriation Data (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS

It Modifies The Contract/Order No. As Described In Item 14.

A. This Change Order is Issued Pursuant To: 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 data, etc.) Set

Forth In Item 14, Pursuant To The 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 _______________ copies to the Issuing Office.

14. Description Of Amendment/Modification (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

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.

15A. Name And Title Of Signer (Type or print)

16A. Name And Title Of Contracting Officer (Type or print)

15B. Contractor/Offeror 15C. Date Signed 16B. United States Of America 16C. Date Signed

By (Signature of person authorized to sign) (Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

PREVIOUS EDITIONS UNUSABLE

30-105-02 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

SEE SCHEDULE

X

Firm Fixed Price

0001 2016JUL19

W15QKN

ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND - NJ

PICATINNY ARSENAL, NJ 07806-5000

JON GLASSIC

EMAIL: JON.GLASSIC.CIV@MAIL.MIL

W15QKN-16-R-0105

2016JUL13

X

X

/SIGNED/

2 signed

SEE SECOND PAGE FOR DESCRIPTION

1 17

CONTINUATION SHEET

Reference No. of Document Being Continued Page of

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION A - SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

Buyer Name: JON GLASSIC

Buyer Office Symbol/Telephone Number: ACC-NJ-SW/(973)724-3142

Type of Contract 1: Firm Fixed Price

Kind of Contract: Supply Contracts and Priced Orders

*** End of Narrative A0000 ***

Executive Summary_________________

This executive summary highlights some of the important features of this solicitation. If a conflict exists between this summary and the provisions of the solicitation, the provisions of the solicitation govern.

1. Introduction

The U.S. Army Contracting Command - New Jersey, Picatinny Arsenal, NJ, in support of the Program Manager Crew Served Weapons, has a requirement to procure Boresight Telescopes to be used on the M153 Common Remotely Operated Weapon Station (CROWS). The contractor shall manufacture boresight telescopes in accordance with AR-PD-157 and the effort described in the Statement of Work (SOW) in Section

C, and all Request for Proposal (RFP) requirements. The contractor shall provide for all necessary labor, material, supplies, services, facilities, and equipment to perform all of the requirements of the SOW and RFP.

2. Acquisition Strategy

This acquisition will be conducted as a one-hundred percent (100%) Small Business set-aside. The strategy is to compete the requirement among certified small business Offerors. The United States Government intends to award one (1) Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Indefinite

Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract to the Offeror whose proposal represents the best value to the Government. In making the award decision, Best Value Trade-off procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-1 will be utilized, with appropriate consideration given to four (4) evaluation factors: Technical, Price, Delivery Schedule, and Past Performance.

The contractor receiving the award will be guaranteed a minimum ordering obligation (minimum guarantee) of 35 telescopes plus the cost for First Article Test for the anticipated contract. A total maximum of 8,000 telescopes may be purchased for this acquisition. The resulting contract will be for five (5) years with five (5) one-year ordering periods and priced quantity ranges for each of the ordering periods.

The Government intends to issue Delivery Order 0001 for at least the contract minimum guarantee quantity plus First Article Test at the time of award of the basic contract. Additionally, the Government reserves the right to award quantities in Delivery Order 0001 that are above and beyond the contract minimum guarantee, at any range in Ordering Period 1 for this initial delivery order.

Please note the language outlined in Section H is applicable to subsequent delivery orders and does not apply to the award of the basic contract or Delivery Order 0001.

3. Performance Specification

The Government will provide Performance Specification AR-PD-157, and other applicable drawings as referenced in the Statement of Work

(Section C of this RFP) as attachments in Section J of this RFP.

4. Questions

All questions concerning this procurement, either technical or contractual must be submitted in writing to the Contracting Officer.

No direct discussion between the technical representative and a prospective Offeror will be conducted. Questions shall be sent to the following point(s) of contact:

Army Contracting Command- New Jersey

ACC-NJ-SW, Bldg. 9

ATTN: Daniel Potempa, Telephone: (973) 724-4870

Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000

E-mail: daniel.l.potempa2.civ@mail.mil

Army Contracting Command- New Jersey

ACC-NJ-SW, Bldg. 9

ATTN: Jon M. Glassic, Telephone: (973) 724-3142

Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000

2 17

W15QKN-16-R-0105 0001

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

E-mail: jon.m.glassic.civ@mail.mil

*** END OF NARRATIVE A0001 ***

Solicitation W15QKN-16-R-0105

Amendment 0001

The purpose of Amendment 0001 to Solicitation W15QKN-16-R-0105 is the following:

1. Add clause 52.219-14 (Limitations on Subcontracting) to the Solicitation.

2. Update the Past Performance Confidence Rating table found in Paragraph M.4.3.4.6. The table has been reordered and the definitions updated.

3. Correct typographical error of "kit" to "telescope" in Pargagraph L.2.3.1 (c), paragraph L.4 and Executive Summary paragraph 2.

4. Correct reference to (Appendix D) in Paragraph L.4.5.2 (5) to reflect Attachment 0002.

5. Correct reference to paragraph D.3 in Pargaraph L.2.3.1 (b). This should reference L.3.

6. All other terms and conditions of this Solicitation remain unchanged and in full effect.

*** END OF NARRATIVE A0002 ***

3 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

Status Regulatory Cite Title Date Status Regulatory Cite Title Date _______ _______________ ______________________________________________________________________ ____________ _______ _______________ ______________________________________________________________________ ____________

I-1 ADDED 52.219-14 LIMITATIONS ON SUBCONTRACTING NOV/2011

4 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

L. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION

L.1 Introduction: This section contains general proposal submissions instructions as well as specific proposal requirements for the

Boresight telescope.

L.1.1 General. The proposal shall be presented in sufficient detail to allow Government evaluation of response to the requirements of the Request for Proposal (RFP). The Government will not assume the Offeror possesses any capability, understanding, or commitment not specified in the proposal.

L.2 PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

L.2.1 GENERAL:

L.2.1.1 Offerors shall provide information by addressing each Factor/Subfactor in the format and sequence identified in the solicitation. The Offerors must provide information in sufficient detail to allow the Government to make a best value assessment of the

Offerors capability to support the proposed response to the evaluation criteria. Proposals that do not contain the information requested in the solicitation risk being determined unacceptable by the Government. The Government will not assume the Offeror possesses any capability, understanding, or commitment not specified in the proposal.

L.2.1.2 The proposal must not merely repeat the solicitation requirements, but rather must provide convincing documentary evidence in support of conclusive statements of how contract requirements will be met.

L.2.1.3 The Government intends to award without discussions (see FAR 52.215-1). Proposals that do not contain the information requested in the solicitation risk being determined Unacceptable by the Government. The Government will not assume the Offeror possesses any capability, understanding, or commitment not specified in the proposal.

L.2.1.4 Alternate Proposals: Alternate proposals will not be accepted.

L.2.1.5 Proposals shall be valid through 120 days after receipt of proposal.

L.2.2 All questions concerning this procurement, either technical or contractual must be submitted in writing to the Contracting

Officer. No direct discussion between the technical representative and a prospective Offeror shall be conducted. Questions, proposals, and bid samples shall be submitted to the following point of contact:

Army Contracting Command New Jersey

ACC-NJ- SW, Bldg. 9, Mail Stop: 10B

ATTN: Jon Glassic Telephone: (973)724-3142

Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000

E-mail: jon.m.glassic.civ@mail.mil

Please note that electronic e-mail proposal submissions will not be accepted.

L.2.3 The proposal shall consist of the following:

L.2.3.1 Each proposal shall be submitted in the English language and consist of and include all of the following:

a. One (1) signed and completed paper copy of the attached Standard Form 33 (SF 33) and continuation sheets (Sections A through M) signed by a person authorized to enter into the proposed contract on behalf of the Offeror. Acknowledgment of all amendments to the solicitation and all continuation sheets are to be filled in as directed, i.e., proposed prices in the CLINs/Pricing Matrices in Section

B, any fill-ins required, such as Contract Data Requirements List: DD Form 1423 with Blocks 17 and 18 completed if required, and

Certifications and Representations in Section K. Offerors are directed to thoroughly read the solicitation and fill in the required information in the appropriate solicitation clauses. For any fill-ins that are not applicable, the Offeror must acknowledge by indicating N/A. The proposal must also include computation for the use of Government Property, if applicable.

b. Original (1), five (5) paper copies, and five (5) electronic DVD/CD (CD also means DVD) copies of the proposal volumes, as reflected in L.3., shall be compiled using the Microsoft Office for Windows suite of applications, submitted on a single-write CD-ROM to prevent accidental erasure of the data therein, and formatted for an MS Windows compatible computer. The Price Factor shall be contained on a separate CD from non-price Factors. Price breakdown, when applicable, will include MS Excel spreadsheets with formulae intact. Process flows may be delivered in hard copy if not compatible with the above software. CD copy must mirror the submitted hard copies. If the CD

5 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

copy and hard copy differ, the CD copy supplied for each Factor will be used for the evaluation. Each CD must be clearly marked with the Offerors Name and the Solicitation Number. Alternatively, files may be provided in Portable Document Format (.pdf).

c. Representations through System for Award Management. The purpose of electronic Representations and Certifications is to provide all

Offerors with a portal in which to submit Reps/Certs in a publicly accessible format, nullifying the requirement to submit identical information in response to each and every Federal contract solicitation. As a requirement under the boresight telescope solicitation, all Offerors must submit Reps/Certs data into the System for Award Management (S.A.M.) at https://www.sam.gov/ and provide one (1) hard copy and one (1) electronic copy (on CD) submitted as an .XPS file. Any Offeror that has previously submitted Reps/Certs data into SAM is reminded to update the data prior to submitting with the proposal.

L.3 FORMAT FOR PROPOSALS

L.3.1 The Offerors proposal shall be submitted in severable volumes based on the Factors as set forth below and all information specific to each Factor shall be confined to that volume. Each proposal must include all volumes and shall be submitted by the closing date and time of the solicitation. Failure to provide any volume may result in the proposal being given an Unacceptable rating.

Information provided shall be specific to each Factor.

Page limitation for each Volume is as follows:

Phase I: Bid Samples (There are no page limits for Bid Samples)

Table of Requirements to be filled in from AR-PD-157

The three (3) bid samples will be sent separately to the following:

Army Contracting Command New Jersey

ACC-NJ-SW, Bldg 9, Mail Stop:10B

ATTN: Jon Glassic Telephone (973)724-3142

Picatinny Arsenal, NJ 07806-5000

Phase II:

Volume I: Technical Factor

(1) Proposed Technical Solution (Maximum of 50 pages)

(2) Quality System Plan (Maximum of 30 pages)

Volume II: Price Factor (No Maximum)

Volume III: Delivery Schedule Factor (Maximum of 30 pages)

Volume IV: Past Performance Factor (Maximum of 30 pages)

Volume V: Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations (No Page Limit)

L.3.2 Each volume shall be clearly identified and shall begin at the top of a page. All pages of each volume shall be appropriately numbered and identified by the complete company name, date and solicitation number in the header and/or footer. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Contents feature in MS Word. MS Word (.doc) files shall use the following page setup parameters:

Margins Top, Bottom, Left, Right - 1

Gutter 0

From Edge Header, Footer 0.5

Page Size, Width 8.5

Page Size, Height 11

L.3.3 Length:

L.3.3.1 Each volume shall be as brief as possible, consistent with complete submission. The page count will be made by counting the pages from left to right, consecutively. Pages that exceed the page limitation will be returned to the Offeror and will not be evaluated. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. Annexes, documentation and attachments that are submitted by the Offeror, which are not required as part of the RFP, will count against the page limitations. If pages are printed on both sides, each side will count as a separate page. The following will not count against page limitations: volume title pages, table of contents

6 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

pages, cross-referencing pages, indices, acronym lists and page dividers (used to separate proposal sections). Pages should not exceed 8-

1/2 inches in width by 11 inches in length; foldout pages depicting such items as sketches, factory floor layouts, etc. may be used, with each fold counted as one additional page. The font used shall not be less than 10 point.

L.3.3.2 Deviation from Requested Format. Request for deviations from the requested format shall be submitted to the Procuring

Contracting Officer (PCO) no later than fifteen (15) days after release of the solicitation. Offerors shall provide an explanation, in a clearly relatable format such as a matrix, of any differences between the manner in which the proposal was requested and the manner in which it is proposed to be submitted.

L.3.3.3 The Offeror is responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of the proposal.

Offerors shall provide a proposal that, at a minimum, addresses those evaluation Factors and Subfactors required in Section M of the

RFP.

L.3.3.4 File Packaging - All of the proposal files shall be compressed (zipped) into one file using WinZip version 6.2 or later, or as separate uploads in their native format, i.e. doc, xls, ppt, etc. Please note Self extracting .exe files will not be accepted.

L.4 SPECIFIC PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

Offerors are responsible for including sufficient details (i.e. drawings, test data) to permit a complete and accurate evaluation strictly from a technical standpoint. The Technical Volume(s) shall have a separate index, which contains narrative titles that are cross-referenced to both the applicable Statement of Work (SOW) paragraph and page number. This index shall not count against the Page limitation for the Technical Volume. The narrative discussions shall also be related to the applicable SOW paragraph by placing the appropriate SOW number at the beginning of the discussion text. The proposal shall be detailed and clearly stated to allow an assessment by the Government without the need for additional clarifications. The Offeror shall provide detailed narrative discussions that address both the SOW and the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs) of the solicitation. All information and data provided shall be specific to the Boresight Telescope, components and assemblies, except for the area of Past Performance. In the response to the

Request for Proposal, the Offeror must address the following Factors and Subfactors:

L.4.1 Phase I: Bid Samples

Bid Sample - The Offeror shall provide three (3) bid samples, which shall be evaluated for compliance with the requirements from AR-PD-

157 specified on section M.4.2.1. All three (3) bid samples must meet, within a 5% tolerance or better, all of the elements in AR-PD-157 specified in section M.4.2.1 in order to get an Acceptable rating. The offeror shall provide a completed Table of Requirements to be filled in from AR-PD-157 (This table covers all of AR-PD-157 and not just the specifications for Phase I). This table will be used in

Phases I and II.

L.4.2 Phase II: Volume I FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL

L.4.2.1. Subfactor 1: Proposed Technical Solution Plan - Each offeror shall submit a written Proposed Technical Solution, which shall explain and describe in detail the offerors approach to meet the requirements of AR-PD-157 not evaluated in Phase I. The bid samples, however, may be used to evaluate or verify any claims made in Phase II.

If the offeror proposes an existing telescope design to be modified to meet all the requirements of AR-PD-157, the offeror shall also submit a Modification Plan. This plan shall describe in detail the offerors approach to modify its current hardware to meet AR-PD-157 including design verification testing and excluding the requirements in section M.4.2.1 which must have already been met to pass Phase

I. Modification Plans (if needed) shall include at a minimum: technical approach, resources, personnel, timeline for modification and timeline for design verification testing.

L.4.2.2 Subfactor 2: Quality System Plan - The Quality Program Plan shall describe and explain in detail how the offeror plans to meet the quality requirements of the SOW and AR-PD-157. The inspection sections of the Quality plan shall delineate the scope of the incoming inspections, in-process inspection and controls, and final inspections as well as the facilities and equipment used for each.

L.4.3 Phase II: Volume II FACTOR 2: PRICE

L.4.3.1 The Offerors shall submit pricing in Section B for all priced CLINs, including all quantity ranges, when applicable. The proposed price for production CLINS shall be inclusive of all fabricating, testing, inspection, packaging and delivery of the solicited item. Each Offeror must propose a firm-fixed-price for First Article Test CLINS for all ordering periods. Failure to provide a price for FAT may result in the offer not being considered for award. The Offeror is not to propose separate prices for LAT testing. LAT testing will be included and made part of the unit price of the Boresight Telescope production lots.

L.4.3.2 In accordance with FAR 45.202(a), the Government shall consider any potentially unfair competitive advantage that may result

7 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

from an offeror using Government property. To eliminate the competitive advantage, a rental equivalent evaluation factor shall be added to each offer which is predicated on the use of Government property. Offerors shall refer to Local Clause 52.245-4003 Use and Rental of Government Property in Section L for submission instructions.

The following quantities shall be used to calculate the amount of rent that would otherwise be charged in accordance with FAR 52.245-9 , Use and Charges:

| CLIN | Item Description | Quantity |

| 0002 |Boresight Telescope Production | 1,600 |

| 0004 |Boresight Telescope Production | 1,600 |

| 0006 |Boresight Telescope Production | 1,600 |

| 0008 |Boresight Telescope Production | 1,600 |

| 0010 |Boresight Telescope Production | 1,600 |

L.4.3.3 Any HUBZone Small Business Concern shall provide proof of HUBZone certification with its proposal submission.

L.4.3.4 Unbalanced Pricing. If the Offerors unit prices appear unbalanced when comparing them from ordering period to ordering period, the Offeror shall provide documentation, including calculations and supporting rationale, explaining the apparent unbalanced pricing.

L.4.4 Phase II: Volume III FACTOR 3: DELIVERY SCHEDULE

The Offeror shall provide the following: (a) amount of time required to submit First Article Test (FAT) samples after issuance of contract; (b) monthly production rate for the initial minimum ordering obligation of 35 boresight telescopes beginning after FAT acceptance; and (c) monthly production rate for the maximum quantity of 8,000 boresight telescopes beginning after FAT acceptance.

Offeror shall describe the production facilities to be used, and explain their utilization approach, to achieve these production rates.

L.4.5 Phase II: Volume IV FACTOR 4: PAST PERFORMANCE

L.4.5.1 Offerors shall identify pertinent past history, which indicates that similar efforts of equal or greater complexity have been performed using the Offerors existing plant capability and demonstrate satisfaction of customer requirements.

L.4.5.2 Offerors shall submit a list of all recent Government contracts (prime and major subcontracts; major subcontractors are defined as members of an Offerors overall team who are expected to perform twenty five (25) percent or more of the proposed effort.) in performance or awarded to the Offeror and any of its major subcontractors within the past three (3) years, or awarded earlier than three

(3) years ago, but for which deliveries/performance occurred or were scheduled to occur within the past three (3) years, which are relevant to the effort required by the solicitation. Data concerning the prime Offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. Offerors are reminded that both independent data and data provided by the Offerors in their proposals may be used to evaluate the Offerors past performance. The Government plans to rely on existing documentation from

Federal databases to the maximum extent practicable. Sources of existing information available to the Government include, but are not limited to, Past Performance Information and Retrieval System (PPIRS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System

(FAPIIS), and Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS). The Government may use past performance information obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror. The Government reserves the right to use or not use past performance information submitted by the Offeror based on whether or not adequate recorded past performance information is available in its Federal databases. Since the

Government may not necessarily interview any or all of the sources provided by the Offerors, it is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided. The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information remains with the

Offerors. Proposals that do not contain the information requested by this paragraph may result in rejection or receipt of a high performance risk evaluation by the Government. This volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Section 1 Contract Descriptions. This section shall include the following information in the following format:

(a) Contractor/Subcontractor place of performance, Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code and Data Universal Numbering System

(DUNS) Number. If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and Point of Contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, e-mail address, and telephone and fax numbers). PLEASE NOTE:

While an Offeror may submit past performance information on relevant efforts where they performed as a major subcontractor, the

Government does not have privity with subcontracts and therefore, may not be able to obtain qualitative information.

8 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

(b) Government contracting activity, and current address, Procuring Contracting Officer's name, e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(c) Governments technical representative/COR, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(d) Government contract administration activity and the Administrative Contracting Officer's name, and current e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(e) Government contract administration activity's Pre-Award Monitor's name and current e-mail address, telephone and fax numbers.

(f) Contract Number and, in the case of Indefinite Delivery type contracts, GSA contracts, and Blanket Purchase Agreements, also include Delivery Order Numbers.

(g) Contract Type (specific type such as Fixed Price (FP), Cost Reimbursement (CR), Time & Materials (T&M), etc.) In the case of

Indefinite Delivery contracts, indicate specific type (Requirements, Definite Quantity, and Indefinite Quantity) and secondary contract type (FP, CR, T&M, etc)).

(h) Awarded price/cost.

(i) Final or projected final price/cost.

(j) Original delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

(k) Final or projected final, delivery schedule, including dates of start and completion of work.

(2) Section 2 - Performance. Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Section 1 describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the requirements of the solicitation.

(a) For any contracts that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The Offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. All Requests for Deviation and Requests for

Waiver shall be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions. The Offerors shall also provide a copy of any Cure Notices or

Show Cause Letters received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action implemented by the Offeror or proposed subcontractor. The Offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

(b) For all contracts, the Offeror shall provide data on all manufacturing warranty returns. Data shall delineate total number of warranty returns, number of Could Not Duplicate (CND), number of failures attributable to GFE component failures, and number and nature of failures attributable to the Offerors delivered product.

(3) Section 3 Subcontracts. Offerors shall provide an outline of how the effort required by the solicitation will be assigned for performance within the Offerors corporate entity and among the proposed subcontractors. The information provided for the prime Offeror and each proposed major subcontractor must include the entire company name, company address, CAGE Code, DUNS Number and type of work to be performed by citing the applicable Government SOW subparagraph number.

(4) Section 4 New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its officers and employees.

However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the Offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above.

(5) Past Performance Questionnaire. For all contracts identified in Section 1, Past Performance Questionnaires must be completed and submitted (Attachment 0002). The Offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past/current contract. The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the Contracting Officer within thirty (30) calendar days of the release of the RFP, to daniel.l.potempa2.civ@mail.mil. The Offeror shall also e-mail to the Contracting

Officer a list of all the POCs who were sent a questionnaire. The Government must receive this list within thirty (30) calendar days after release of the RFP. The POC List shall be submitted in Word for Windows Table Format to include the following fields:

Solicitation Number; Company Name; Contract Number; Government Agency; POC Last Name, First Name; POC Title; POC Telephone Number; POC E-

Mail Address; Date E-Mailed to POC (month/day).

L.4.6 Phase II: Volume V SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

L.4.6.1 Each Offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures) the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the solicitation. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 33 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission.

9 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

Section A through M Fill-ins as required

Section A Standard Form 33 (SF 33), Solicitation, Offer and Award

Section B Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs

Section G Contract Administration Data

Section J Contract Data Requirements List (DD1423) with blocks 17 & 18 completed

Section K Completed Representations, Certifications and Other Statements of Offeror

*** END OF NARRATIVE L0001 ***

10 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

M.1 BASIS FOR AWARD

Overview

PHASE I:

- Bid Sample (Acceptable/Unacceptable)

PHASE II:

-Factor 1 - Technical

-Factor 2 - Price Factor

-Factor 3 - Delivery Schedule

-Factor 4 - Past Performance

M.1.1 The Government intends to make a single award as a result of the RFP. The Government will select for award the proposal that is most advantageous and represent the best value to the Government. The Source Selection Authority (SSA) will weigh the relative benefits of each proposal and award will be made based on an integrated assessment of the results of the evaluation. In making this assessment, the SSA will give due consideration to the two (2) evaluation phases, their Factors and Subfactors, and their relative order of importance.

Three (3) Bid Samples, price evaluation spreadsheet, and all written proposals addressing each evaluation factor including Technical, Delivery Schedule and Past Performance shall be delivered by the closing date of the solicitation. The evaluation will be conducted in two phases.

Phase I will consist of evaluation of the bid samples as either a Acceptable or Unacceptable, based on the compliance with requirements of AR-PD-157 set forth in section M.4.2.1 of this document. Offerors who do not receive an Acceptable rating in Phase I will not proceed to Phase II for further evaluation, and will not be eligible for award. The Offeror(s) that receive an Acceptable for Phase I will have their proposal evaluated against the evaluation criteria in Phase II.

Phase II will consist of evaluation of all responsible contractors Technical Proposals (which include Section C Requirements), Price, Delivery Schedule and Past Performance factors in their Proposal Submission.

Relative Order of Importance of the Factors and Subfactors in Phase II:

The Technical Factor is more important than the Price Factor, the Price Factor is significantly more important than Delivery Schedule

Factor and the Delivery Schedule Factor is more important than the Past Performance Factor. When all evaluation Factors other than

Price are combined, they are significantly more important than Price. As non-price factor ratings tend to equalize, price will become more important. Price will be evaluated, but will not be rated with a color or adjectival rating.

The Government reserves the right to make an award to other than the lowest priced Offeror, or to other than the Offeror with the highest technical rating if the SSA determines that to do so would result in the best value to the Government. Offerors that receive a final rating of Red/Unacceptable at any Factor/Subfactor level are ineligible for award.

M.1.2 The Government intends to award a contract without discussions (except for clarification as described in FAR 15.306(a)), as permitted by FAR 15.306(a)(3) and FAR 52.215-1. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions to permit Offerors to revise their proposals.

M.1.3 Minimum Acceptability: If an Offeror takes exception to any of the terms and conditions of the solicitation, the offer may not be considered for contract award. All Offerors are urged to ensure that their initial proposals are submitted with the most favorable terms in order to reflect their best potential.

M.2 FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS TO BE EVALUATED:

M.2.1 Phase I: Bid Sample. This is a Pass/Fail phase.

Phase I - Acceptable/Unacceptable Ratings

| PHASE 1 BID SAMPLE ACCEPTABLE / UNACCEPTABLE RATINGS |

11 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

| Rating | Description |

| Acceptable | Bid sample meets the requirements from AR-PD-157 in section M.4.2.1 of this document, |

| | within a 5% tolerance or better. |

| Unacceptable | Bid sample does not meet the requirements from AR-PD-157 in section M.4.2.1 of this document, |

| | within a 5% tolerance or better. |

M.2.2 Phase II: The Government will weigh the relative benefits of each proposal and the SSA will assess the results of the following

Factors, listed below in descending order of importance:

M.2.2.1 Factor 1: Technical -The Technical Factor includes (2) two subfactors:

M.2.2.1.1 Subfactor 1: Proposed Technical Solution/Modification Plan

M.2.2.1.2 Subfactor 2: Quality System Plan

M.2.2.1.3 The Proposed Technical Solution/Modification Plan Subfactor is significantly more important than the Quality System Plan

Subfactor.

M.2.2.2 Factor 2: The Price Factor does not have any Subfactors.

M.2.2.3 Factor 3: The Delivery Shcedule Factor does not have any Subfactors.

M.2.2.4 Factor 4: The Past Performance Factor does not have any Subfactors.

M.3 The evaluators will use the following terms in support of the rating of all non-cost/price evaluation Factors in Phase II, except

Past Performance. The Adverse Past Performance term is to be used under the Past Performance Factor only:

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

b. Significant Weakness - A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

c. Weakness - A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

d. Strength - An aspect of an Offerors proposal that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

e. Significant Strength - An aspect of an Offeror's proposal that has appreciable merit or appreciably exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be appreciably advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

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

g. Adverse Past Performance Past Performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating from sources where the information is from other than formal rating systems such as PPIRS or FAPIIS.

M.4 EVALUATION APPROACH

M.4.1 EVALUATION APPROACH

Careful, full, and impartial consideration will be given to all proposals received pursuant to the RFP. A team of Government personnel will evaluate each proposal relative to the Factors and Subfactors in each phase. The result will be a determination of the overall merits of each proposal in terms of its potential to best satisfy the needs of the Government. In making the integrated assessment of the results of the evaluation of all Factors, the Government will give due consideration to the relative order of importance of such Factors and their merit ratings in relationship to price. The Government weighs any increase in merit rating against any additional cost to determine if the parity of the relationship warrants the paying of additional cost for additional merit. The two-phase evaluation approach allows potential offerors with an existing telescope design to compete for this requirement provided their existing design submitted as bid sample meets the Phase I evaluation criteria. These offerors may then address in

12 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

their Phase II written proposal their approach to modify their existing design to meet the remainder of the evaluation and AR-PD-157 requirements.

M.4.2 Phase I Acceptable/Not Acceptable Bid Sample Evaluation

M.4.2.1 Bid Samples - The three (3) bid samples will be evaluated for compliance only with the following requirements from AR-PD-157.

All three (3) bid samples must meet, within a 5% tolerance, all of the elements below in order for the proposal to receive an Acceptable rating. If the bid sample receives a Unacceptable rating for any of the elements below, the proposal will be considered unacceptable and no further evaluation will be performed. The Government will evaluate the offerors completed Table of Requirements from AR-PD-157.

M.4.2.1.1 Field of view (FOV). The FOV shall be greater than or equal to 4 degrees with a 5 % tolerance. Paragraph 3.4.2 of AR-PD-157.

M.4.2.1.2 Resolution. The resolution through the eyepiece at the center of the field of view shall be better than or equal to 12 seconds of arc (T), 6 seconds of arc (O). Paragraph 3.4.3 of AR-PD-157.

M.4.2.1.3 Magnification. The magnification shall be 5X minimum. Paragraph 3.4.5 of AR-PD-157.

M.4.2.1.4 Boresight Telescope Interface Requirement. The Boresight Telescope shall adapt to all stem adapters listed below. The stem on the boresight telescope shall penetrate a minimum of 3 3/8 inches and a maximum of 3 3/4 inches when seated in any of the stem adapters and shall be visible in the remove-slot. The Boresight Telescope shall properly seat in each of the stem adapters. When placed in the 3 oclock or 9 oclock position, the Boresight Telescope shall not slip or fall down towards the 6 oclock position. The system, meaning the boresight telescope attached to any one of the stem adapters, shall be able to maintain collimation to the requirements listed in 3.5.6 when attached.

Applicable stem adapters drawings are as follows:

13022750

13023642

13022751

13022752

Paragraph 3.5.1 of AR-PD-157.

M.4.2.1.5 Reticle Collimation. The reticle shall be adjustable to the axis of the boresight telescope stem/stem adapter interface for each stem adapter identified in 3.5.1, to within 20 seconds of arc. Paragraph 3.5.6 of AR-PD-157.

M.4.2.1.6 Weight. The telescope shall have a maximum weight of 0.408 kg (0.9 lb). Paragraph 3.5.13 of AR-PD-157.

M.4.2.1.7 Size. The telescope shall fit into an envelope size of 13 L X 6 W X 3D. Paragraph 3.5.14 of AR-PD-157.

M.4.2.2 Any offeror that does not receive an Acceptable in Phase I will not move on to Phase II and will not be eligible for award.

While in Phase II, however, the bid samples may be used to evaluate any claims made in the Phase II Technical Proposal based on the physical characteristics of the bid samples as received.

| PHASE 1 BID SAMPLE ACCEPTABLE / UNACCEPTABLE RATINGS |

| Rating | Description |

| Acceptable | Bid sample meets the requirements from AR-PD-157 in section M.4.2.1 of this document, |

| | within a 5% tolerance or better. |

| Unacceptable | Bid sample does not meet the requirements from AR-PD-157 in section M.4.2.1 of this document, |

| | within a 5% tolerance or better. |

M.4.3 Phase II Evaluation

M.4.3.1 Technical. The Technical Factor and Subfactors will receive a color/adjectival rating in accordance with the chart below.

Evaluation will consider the following:

| Color | Rating | Description |

| Blue | Outstanding | Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains |

13 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

| | | multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. |

| Purple | Good | Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least |

| | | one strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate. |

| Green | Acceptable | Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the require- |

| | | ments, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate. |

| Yellow | Marginal | Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or |

| | | risk of unsuccessful performance is high. |

| Red | Unacceptable | Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation, and thus, contains one or more |

| | | deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable. Proposal is unawardable. |

Within the Technical Factor, each Subfactor will be rated separately using the color code/adjectival ratings. Each Subfactor will be assessed for significant strengths, strengths, significant weaknesses, weaknesses, deficiencies, risks, and uncertainties. Each

Subfactor will be assigned an adjectival rating based upon these collective findings. The compilation of these Subfactor adjectival ratings will form the basis of the Factor rating.

Offerors that receive a final rating of Red/Unacceptable at any Factor/Subfactor level are ineligible for award.

M.4.3.1.1 SUBFACTOR 1: Proposed Technical Solution/Modification Plan

The Government will evaluate the Offerors Proposed Technical Solution to meet the requirements of AR-PD-157 not evaluated in Phase I.

The bid samples, however, may be used to evaluate or verify any claims made in Phase II. This subfactor will be assigned an overall rating based on whether the offerors proposal provides a well thought out and detailed technical approach for meeting all of the requirements of AR-PD-157; provides clear and convincing evidence of adequate resources and personnel to deliver on the requirements;

provides a timeline that is detailed, well planned, and realistic to deliver the requirements without excessive risk.

If the offeror proposes an existing telescope design to be modified to meet all the requirements of AR-PD-157, the Government will evaluate the Offerors Modification Plan. This plan shall describe in detail the offerors approach to modify its current hardware to meet AR-PD-157 including design verification testing and excluding the requirements in section M.4.2.1 which must have already been met to pass Phase I. The governments evaluation will apply the above cited Technical Solution criteria to the Modification Plan. The

Government will also evaluate the technical soundness and feasibility of the proposed modifications so that the final product meets the requirements.

M.4.3.1.2 SUBFACTOR 2: Quality System Plan

The Government will evaluate the Offerors Quality System Plan and the details on how the offeror plans to meet the requirements of the

SOW and AR-PD-157. Proposed Quality System Plan will be assigned an overall rating to signify how well they propose to meet the requirements of the SOW and AR-PD-157. The inspection sections of the Quality plan shall delineate the scope of the incoming inspections, in-process inspection and controls, and final inspections as well as the facilities and equipment used for each.

M.4.3.2 FACTOR 2: PRICE

M.4.3.2.1 Prices proposed in Section B of the solicitation will be utilized to compute a total evaluated price. A price reasonableness determination will be made on the total evaluated price which will be used in the performance of a tradeoff analysis. If the Government determines that adequate price competition was not obtained and/or if the total evaluated price cannot be deemed fair and reasonable, the Government reserves the right to request cost or pricing data and to evaluate such data utilizing the proposal analysis techniques delineated in the FAR 15.404-1 as deemed appropriate.

M.4.3.2.2 If an Offeror proposes the use of Government property in its possession, the total evaluated price will be adjusted to include a rental equivalent factor for each item of such property calculated in accordance with FAR 52.245-9. This adjustment will apply for the use of Government property by the Offeror as well as any subcontractor thereto. The value of the proposed Government property will be evaluated for cost realism.

M.4.3.2.3 The total evaluated price will be computed by summing the weighted evaluated prices computed from the unit prices proposed in

Section B of the solicitation, and the value of Government property in the Offerors (and any subcontractors) possession adjusted for cost realism, when applicable.

The weighted evaluated prices will be calculated as follows:

a. Items with a Single Numeric Quantity: The evaluated quantity for items with a single numeric quantity will be the stated quantity.

14 17

Name of Offeror or Contractor:

PIIN/SIIN MOD/AMD

The evaluated quantity will be multiplied by the proposed unit price to derive the evaluated amount. The evaluated amount will be multiplied by the weighted percent in order to derive the weighted evaluated price. The weighted evaluated price will be rounded to the nearest hundredth (two decimal places).

b. Items with Multiple Quantity Ranges: A weighted evaluated price will be calculated for each quantity range. The evaluated quantity for each quantity range will be the maximum quantity in the respective quantity range. The evaluated quantity in each range will be multiplied by the proposed unit price for that quantity range to derive the evaluated amount for each quantity range. The evaluated amount for each quantity range will be multiplied by the assigned weighted percentage to derive the weighted evaluated price for each quantity range. The weighted evaluated price will be rounded to the nearest hundredth (two decimal places).

M.4.3.2.4 Unbalanced Pricing. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), a proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

M.4.3.3 FACTOR 3: DELIVERY SCHEDULE EVALUATION

M.4.3.3.1 The Government will evaluate the offerors capability to meet the delivery schedule requirements in the solicitation. The minimum required monthly production rate is 30 telescopes after FAT acceptance.

Offerors will be required to propose and will be evaluated on the following: (a) amount of time required to complete First Article Test

(FAT) after issuance of contract; (b) monthly production rate for the minimum ordering obligation of 35 boresight telescopes beginning after FAT acceptance; and (c) monthly production rate for the maximum quantity of 8,000 boresight telescopes beginning after FAT acceptance. Offeror shall describe the production facilities to be used, and explain their utilization approach, to achieve these production rates.

The Delivery Schedule Factor will receive a color/adjectival rating in accordance with the chart below. Evaluation will consider the following:

| Color | Rating | Description |

| Blue | Outstanding | Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains |

| | | multiple strengths, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low. |

| Purple | Good | Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of…