W9098S19R00050001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of Amendment 0001 is to revise the Technical Subfactor 2: Quality Systems requirements for ANSI/ISO/ASQ 9001-2008 to 9001-2015.

All other terms remain unchanged.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 8

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 10-Jun-2019

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

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

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X W9098S19R0005

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

23-May-2019

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer 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 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

10-Jun-2019

CODE

ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL (ACC-RI)

JOINT MANUFACTURING & TECHNOLOGY CENTER

BLDG 211 RODMAN AVENUE

1 ROCK ISLAND ARSENAL

ROCK ISLAND IL 61299-5000

W9098S 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9098S19R0005

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Basis for Contract Award: The Government plans to award a single, five (5) year, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract utilizing Lowest Price Technical Acceptable (LPTA) source selection procedures in accordance with FAR 15.101-1. The evaluation factors include Technical (GO/NO-GO). Offerors who do not receive a GO rating for BOTH Technical Subfactors, and receive an overall GO rating for the Technical Factor, will not be further evaluated and will not be eligible for award. Only those proposals that receive an overall GO for Technical will be further evaluated on the Price factor. The Government will not rate or rank proposals, but will select the proposal that provides the best overall value to the Government based on the lowest total evaluated price of those proposals deemed technically acceptable.

The Government intends to evaluate proposals and award without discussions with Offerors (except clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)). Therefore, the Offerors initial response should contain the Offerors best terms for technical and price. However, there Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

2. Rejections of Unrealistic Proposals: Any proposal which is unrealistic will be judged either as exhibiting a lack of competence or failure to comprehend the Government’s requirements and may be so evaluated and rated, or rejected for such reasons. Furthermore, any proposal that is considered unreasonably high or low price, or contains significant inconsistencies between the Technical and Price, if unexplained, may be grounds for rejection of the proposal. The Government will evaluate each proposal strictly in accordance with its content and will not assume that performance will include areas not specified in the Offeror’s proposal.

3. Responsibility: The Government will determine responsibility by analyzing whether the apparent successful Offeror complies with the requirements of FAR 9.1. The Government reserves the right to reject proposals that are unreasonably low or high in price. Unsuccessful Offerors will be notified in accordance with FAR 15.503.

4. The Government will begin its evaluation by first determining the order of lowest priced proposals (lowest to highest). The Government will then limit the evaluation pool to the three (3) lowest priced proposals which then will be evaluated on their technical proposal. If, at a minimum, two of the three lowest priced proposals receive an Overall Technical GO rating, then the technical evaluation will be concluded, unless the Government feels it is in the best interest to evaluate further. If only one (1) proposal is determined to receive an Overall Technical GO rating, then the Government will continue (from the next lowest to highest priced proposal) the technical evaluations until a total of two proposals receive an Overall Technical GO rating.

5. EVALUATION FACTORS: Each Offeror will be evaluated against the evaluation criteria to determine whether the Offeror has the technical expertise, equipment, and personnel required to manufacture and deliver/manage the product in accordance with the delivery schedule as delineated in this RFP.

Volume I: Factor 1: Technical Subfactor 1: Delivery Plan/Manufacturing Capability Subfactor 2: Quality System:

Volume II: Factor 2: Price

The Government will evaluate the technical proposal to determine if the Offeror demonstrates a clear understanding and ability to comply with the requirements of this solicitation. The USG will also evaluate the Offerors ability to meet the requirements delivery schedule, based on production rates, and facilities.

The Technical evaluation process will consider the adequacy for each proposal to determine whether the Offeror has adequately and completely satisfied the requirements specified in the solicitation. The evaluation process will also consider the feasibility of the Offerors approach to successfully accomplish the solicitation and TDP requirements within the required schedule. The USG will assign a Technical rating of GO or NO-GO for all the non-cost factors.

The definition of the Technical GO and NO-GO ratings are listed below:

Volume I: Factor 1: Technical: The USG will assign a GO/NO-GO rating for all the Subfactors. An NO-GO rating in any Subfactor will result in an Overall rating of NO-GO.

Subfactor 1: Delivery Plan/Manufacturing Capability:

GO: The Offeror provides a detailed flow chart of its proposed manufacturing processes and fully demonstrates the Offerors capabilities to meet the TDP and RFP requirements. The Offeror fully demonstrates their production rate capabilities throughout their manufacturing processes and proposes adequate risk mitigation strategies. The Offerors IMS fully demonstrates the contractors’ ability to execute all the requirements of this RFP, to include delivery of FAT within 150 days of contract award and a full production delivery rate of 10 shelters per month 120 days after FAT approval and identifies any/all significant events, milestones, and interdependencies of program tasks and milestones to meet the RFP requirements.

NO-GO: The Offeror does not provide a detailed flow chart demonstrating their proposed manufacturing processes and/or does not fully demonstrate the Offerors capabilities to meet the TDP and RFP requirements. The Offeror does not demonstrate their production rate capabilities throughout their manufacturing processes and/or does not address adequate risk mitigation strategies to keep up with the demands of this RFP. The Offerors IMS does not demonstrated the contractors’ ability to execute all the requirements of this RFP, to include delivery of FAT within 150 days of contract award and/or a full production delivery rate of 10 shelters per month 120 days after FAT approval, and/or fails to identify any/all significant events, milestones, and interdependencies of program tasks and milestones to meet the RFP requirements.

Subfactor 2: Quality Systems:

GO: The Offeror fully demonstrates that the Offerors proposed Quality Management System complies to ISO 9001-2015, or if other than ISO 9001-2015 is proposed, the Offeror adequately describes in detail the degree to which the alternate system is compliant to ISO 9001-2015. The Offeror fully demonstrates their procedures for identifying, controlling, correcting, and resolution of deficiencies identified in components, assemblies, and the end item for both in-house and subcontractor facilities (if applicable). The Offerors fully describes their approach for conducting failure analysis and includes methodologies for root cause analysis and corrective actions. The Offeror demonstrates an effective process control system which mitigates/prevents non-conformances and control variation in process affecting characteristics of the MWMSS Shelter and addresses methods for identifying and assessing process risks. The Offerors proposed supplier management program adequately demonstrates their ability to evaluate, certify/quality, manage, audit, and flow-down requirements to control suppliers’ quality, products and processes to meet the TDP and the RFP requirements.

NO-GO: The Offeror does not demonstrate a Quality Management system that complies to ISO 9001-2015. The Offeror does not demonstrate procedures for identifying, controlling, correcting, and resolution of deficiencies identified in components, assemblies, and the end item for both in-house and subcontractor facilities (if applicable). The Offerors does not describe an adequate approach for conducting failure analysis and/or fails to include methodologies for root cause analysis and corrective actions. The Offeror does not demonstrate an effective process control system which mitigates/prevents non-conformances and/or controls variation in process affecting characteristics of the MWMSS Shelter. The Offerors does not address methods for identifying and assessing process risks. The Offeror does not propose a supplier management program which demonstrates their ability to evaluate, certify/quality, manage, audit, and flow-down requirements to control suppliers’ quality, products and processes to meet the TDP and the RFP requirements.

Volume II: Factor 2: Price: Those proposals that receive an overall GO rating for Volume I: Factor 1:

Technical (to include its Subfactors) will be evaluated on the prices proposed.

(a) Offerors must submit a firm fixed price for all ordering periods on the attached Price Matrix (Attachment 0001) to be considered for award.

(b) The USG will calculate a Weighted Evaluation Price for each Ordering Period by multiplying the proposed unit prices for each quantity range by the respective weight times the upper limit of the quantity range, and summing the totals. The quantity ranges on the Price Matrix (Attachment 0001) are provided solely for the purpose of establishing reasonable ranges of quantities against which to provide pricing in the event delivery orders are executed. In order to be acceptable, a proposal must include firm fixed unit pricing for all ordering periods and quantity ranges listed on the Price Matrix.

Evaluation of each ordering period does not obligate the USG to utilize all ordering periods, nor does it guarantee future orders at the same percentage as outlined in the Price Matrix (Attachment 0001).

(c) On the first tab, the Evaluated Price (FOB RIA-JMTC) is the sum of the Government FAT price plus the Weighted Evaluation Price for each Ordering Period. On the second tab, the Evaluated Price (FOB TAD) is the sum of the Weighted Evaluation Price for each Ordering Period. The Total Evaluated Price is the sum of the Evaluated Price (FOB RIA-JMTC) plus the Evaluated Price (FOB TAD).

(d) Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal represents the lowest Total Evaluated Price outlined in the yellow cell. Therefore, the contractor’s initial offer should contain the contractor’s best price and terms.

(e) The Total Evaluated Price will be evaluated utilizing Price Analysis to determine price reasonableness IAW FAR 15.404-1(b). In the event price cannot be determined fair and reasonable through price analysis, the USG will reserve the right to request cost and pricing data.

(f) Unbalanced Pricing: Proposals will be reviewed to identify any Unbalanced Pricing. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), Unbalanced Pricing, a proposal may be rejected if the Contracting Officer determines the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the USG.

(g) The USG intends to make a single award to the lowest price, technically acceptable proposal based on an integrated analysis of each Offeror’s Technical and Price proposal.

(h) Offerors shall make their proposals pricing valid for 6 months from receipt of date of proposal.

(End of Evaluation Criteria)

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

1. General Instructions: These instructions are a guide for preparing your proposal. These instructions generally describe the type and extent of information you should provide and emphasize in your proposal. Offerors are expected to review the complete RFP for further insight into the significant topic areas that a proposal must address.

You should include in the proposal sufficient information to enable the evaluators to determine your understanding of the requirements in each of the evaluated areas. It is the Government’s intent to award a single, Firm Fixed-Price (FFP), five (5) year, Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract with five 1-year ordering periods. A Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) process in accordance with (IAW) FAR 15.101-2 is being utilized to select the successful Offeror and no trade-offs will be made. The Government intends to evaluate proposals and issue an award without discussions with Offerors (except for clarifications as described in FAR 15.306(a)).

Therefore, the Offerors initial response should contain the Offerors best terms for technical and price. However, the Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if determined necessary by the Contracting Officer.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AND FORMAT: Each Offeror shall submit only one proposal that addresses all the Governments requirements outlined in this RFP. The proposal shall consist of one (1) set of two (2) separate volumes. These volumes should not be cross-referenced. Each volume shall have an introduction and table of contents. Volume I, Technical Proposal, shall consist of two Subfactors: Delivery Plan/MFG Capability and Quality Systems. Volume II, Price. The above two Subfactors will be evaluated on a GO/NO-GO basis; and only those Offerors proposals who receive a GO on all Subfactors under the evaluation of the Technical Proposal will receive an overall GO rating for Technical and will be further evaluated on Price. Volume II, the price proposal shall consist of the Offerors best pricing.

Proposals must not merely repeat the solicitation requirements, but rather must provide convincing documentary evidence of how contract requirements will be met.

The proposal shall consist of the following:

a) One executed signed copy of the solicitation and all amendments.

b) Volume I: Factor 1: Technical Proposal for RFP W9098S19R0005

Page Limitation for Volume I: Technical proposals shall not exceed 50 pages, not including foldouts, section dividers, exhibits, tables, charts, and graphics. Pages containing text, charts, tables, reports, and other graphics should be reduced only to the extent legibility is not lost. If a proposal exceed 50 pages, excess information will not be included in the Government evaluation for Volume I. All text documents shall be formatted at a minimum of 12 point font and one (1) inch margins. The Offerors shall number each page in order to eliminate any confusion. In the event the Offeror creates an ambiguity in their numbering of pages, the Government may exercise its own discretion in counting pages.

C Volume II: Factor 2: Price

Offerors must submit their proposal electronically prior to the closing date and time listed on page one of this RFP.

Proposals may be submitted either via email to the Contract Specialist –Sabrina Lowe, email:

Sabrina.l.lowe.civ@mail.mil or via www.FBO.gov. Proposals shall be submitted in Microsoft Office 2007 (or higher) (Word and/or Excel) or PDF format only. Other formats such as (but not limited to) third party cloud files, hard copies and CDs, or Drop Boxes) will not be accepted.

All proposals received after the date and time set for submission to ACC-RI will be considered a late submission and may not be considered IAW FAR 52.212-1(f)(2).

3. PROPOSAL PREPARATION: The Offerors proposal shall be prepared and authorized by a person(s) regularly employed by the Offeror. The proposal should state the name of each person contributing to the authorship of the proposal, the person(s) position title, phone number, and an email address of the person who should be contacted if an award is to be made. The proposal should be prepared in a clear, legible, practical manner. In addition, the proposal shall be written in English and should be specific and complete as described in these instructions.

The following factors will be evaluated on a GO/NO-GO basis. In order for proposals to be evaluated as a GO for the Technical Factor, each Subfactor identified must receive a GO rating. Only those proposals which receive a GO rating on BOTH technical Subfactors will receive an overall GO rating for the technical factor. Only those proposals that receive an overall GO rating for the Technical Factor, will be evaluated on Price.

The proposal shall be submitted as set forth below:

Volume I: Factor 1: Technical

Subfactor1: Delivery Plan/Manufacturing Capability Subfactor 2: Quality Systems Volume II: Factor 2: Price

Each proposal shall contain the Offerors best terms for award of a contract under this RFP. Proposals shall be specific, complete and address each of the designated factors and Subfactors listed within this RFP. Failure to provide the required information/documentation in response to these instructions may result in your proposal being rejected.

4. Volume I: Factor 1: Technical: Offerors are required to submit a detailed, written proposal in accordance with the following technical subfactors (1) Delivery Plan/Manufacturing Capability and (2) Quality Systems as follows:

Subfactor 1 – Delivery Plan/Manufacturing Capability:

(a) Manufacturing Capabilities - The Offeror shall provide a detailed description and operational flow chart of its proposed manufacturing processes, which shall demonstrate the Offerors understanding and capabilities to meet the TDP and RFP requirements.

(b) Production Rate Capabilities – The Offerors shall provide a detailed description of their production rate capabilities of the manufacturing process. Describe proposed risk mitigation strategies for these processes to ensure the process has capacity to keep up with the demand placed upon those processes.

(c) Program schedule / Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) –The Offeror shall provide a detailed Program Schedule/IMS for contract execution, including required data item submissions (CDRLs), FAT, Pre-production, production, and associated required activities and demonstrates the Offerors ability to deliver a First Article Test (FAT) unit 150 days after contract award date and a full production delivery rate of 10 shelters per month beginning 120 days after FAT approval. The schedule shall identify significant events, milestones, and the interdependencies of program tasks and milestones that demonstrate the Offerors ability to meet the solicitation required delivery schedule.

Subfactor 2 – Quality Systems:

The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of its proposed approach for the performance of quality assurance for the MWMSS shelter to meet the TDP, ANSI/ISO/ASQ Q9001-2015, FAT requirements, Quality Management Systems, and solicitation requirements. The Offerors quality system sub-factor proposal shall include:

(a) Quality Management System Compliance: The Offeror shall provide objective evidence that the Offerors quality management system complies with ISO 9001-2015. If the use of an alternate program/system is proposed, the proposal must describe the degree to which the alternate system is equivalent to the ISO 9001-2015 requirements.

(b) The Offeror shall describe procedures for identification, control, correction, and resolution of deficiencies identified in components, assemblies, and the end item for both in-house, and subcontractor facilities (if applicable). The description shall address the Offerors approach to conducting failure analysis including methodologies for root cause analysis and corrective action.

(c) The Offerors shall provide a detailed description of proposed process control systems to mitigate/prevent non-conformances and control variation in processes affecting characteristics for the MWMSS shelters. The Offeror shall describe the use of methods to identify and assess process risks.

(d) The Offeror shall provide a detailed description of the proposed supplier management program that demonstrates the ability to evaluate, certify/qualify, manage, audit, and flow-down requirements to control suppliers quality, product and processes to meet the TDP and RFP requirements.

5. Volume II: Factor 2: Price:

Offerors shall complete the Price Matrix (Attachment 0001) dated 20 May 2019. Pricing provided at the CLIN level is not acceptable.

Each cell that requires the Offeror’s input on the Price Matrix has been highlighted in blue. The Offeror shall enter a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) for the Government First Article Test (FAT) in Ordering Period 1 on the first tab, as well as a FFP for each of the quantity ranges in each of the five (5) ordering periods for both tabs of the Price Matrix. The first tab represents deliveries to Rock Island Arsenal (RIA) Joint Manufacturing and Technology Center (JMTC) in IL; the second tab represents deliveries to Tobyhanna Army Depot (TAD) in PA. Exact delivery addresses are outlined in red font on each respective tab. Failure to complete both tabs of the Price Matrix in its entirety may deem an Offeror as non-responsive.

Proposed unit prices must be submitted on an FOB Destination basis (i.e., the first tab is delivered FOB RIA, IL and the second tab is delivered FOB TAD, PA). The quantity ranges on the Price Matrix sheet are provided solely for the purpose of establishing reasonable ranges of quantities against which to provide prices in the event delivery orders are executed. In order to be acceptable, an offer must include firm fixed unit prices for all ordering periods and quantity ranges listed on the Price Matrix sheet. Any order placed against the resulting contract will be at the unit price offered by the contractor for the applicable quantity range and ordering period.

No other information is to be added to the Price Matrix, nor shall Offerors make any changes to the Price Matrix. All proposed unit prices are limited to two decimal places and shall be stated in current U.S. dollars.

All unit prices proposed will be binding. The Government reserves the right to require the submission of any data (i.e. certified cost or pricing data or data other than certified cost or pricing data) necessary to validate the reasonableness of an offer.

Award will be made to the Offeror whose quote represents the lowest total evaluated price for CLIN0001.

Therefore, the contractor’s initial quote should contain the contractor’s best terms.

Proposals shall be valid for six (6) months from receipt date of their proposal.

(End of Instructions)

52.212-2 EVALUATION--COMMERCIAL ITEMS (OCT 2014)

(a) The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered. The following factors shall be used to evaluate offers:

See Sections; “Instructions to Offerors” and “Evaluation Criteria”

(b) Options. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total price for all options to the total price for the basic requirement. The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced. Evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

(c) A written notice of award or acceptance of an offer, mailed or otherwise furnished to the successful offeror within the time for acceptance specified in the offer, shall result in a binding contract without further action by either party. Before the offer's specified expiration time, the Government may accept an offer (or part of an offer), whether or not there are negotiations after its receipt, unless a written notice of withdrawal is received before award.

(End of provision)

(End of Summary of Changes)