W9113M-24-0061 0003.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 this amendment is to extend the proposal due date from 20 January to 29 January 2024, update Attachment 12 - Question & Answ ers, add verbiage related to DoD Safe site submission, updated PWS, and update language in section M. All changes in the amendment are highlighted.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

U 1 20

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 19-Jan-2024

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 W9113M24R0061

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

21-Dec-2023

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 X is extended, 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

19-Jan-2024

CODE

ARMY CONTRACTING COMMAND

REDSTONE (ACC-RSA) CCAM-CAA-A

BUILDING 5220 MARTIN ROAD

REDSTONE ARSENAL AL 35898

W9113M 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W9113M24R0061

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The required response date/time has changed from 20-Jan-2024 01:00 PM to 29-Jan-2024 01:00 PM.

The following have been modified:

CONTRACT TYPE

The anticipated contract will consist of a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) and Firm Fixed-Price (FFP) combined arrangement. A summary of the contract type by effort of this contract is provided below:

CLINs EFFORT TYPE 0001 Phase-In FFP 0002, 1001, 2001, Local Community Meteorological Support (LCMS)/Operations and Maintenance (O&M) of Meteorological Equipment and Instrumentation Labor

FFP

0003, 1002, 2002, LCMS/O&M Materials, Travel, ODC, and DBA COST

0004, 1003, 2003, Mission Support/Improvement and Modernization (I&M) Labor CPFF

0005, 1004, 2004, Mission Support/I&M Materials, Travel, ODC, and DBA COST

9997 Data/Reports NSP 9998 Manpower Reporting NSP 9999 GFP Reporting NSP

Mission Support and I&M Costs. While specific requirements cannot be detailed at this time, analysis of historical data results in an annual estimate as follows:

a. Base Period: The contractor shall price a total not to exceed (NTE) cost of $2,503,378 for the Base Period. This total cost includes all costs and fees. The contract shall divide this total amount appropriately amongst each Mission/I&M CLINs.

b. Option Year One (1): The contractor shall price a total NTE cost of $1,040,460.00 for Option Year One (1). This total cost includes all costs and fees. The contract shall divide this total amount appropriately amongst each Mission/I&M CLINs.

c. Option Year Two (2): The contractor shall price a total NTE cost of $1,164,909.00 for the Option Year Two (2).

This total cost includes all costs and fees. The contract shall divide this total amount appropriately amongst each Mission/I&M CLINs.

d. Option Year Three (3): The contractor shall price a total NTE cost of $1,323,494 for the Option Year Three (3).

This total cost includes all costs and fees. The contract shall divide this total amount appropriately amongst each Mission/I&M CLINs.

SECTION F - DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

DATA AND REPORTS

The contractor shall prepare and electronically deliver data and reports in accordance with the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), DD Form 1423-1, attached as exhibits to the contract.

When the Procuring Contracting Officer (PCO) (CCAM-CAB-C) is not already a cited distribution for a data submission, the contractor shall electronically furnish the PCO one (1) copy of the transmittal letter submitting the data requirements to the offices shown in Block 14 of the DD form 1423-1.

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

List of Addenda Title Attachment 01 Performance Work Statement (PWS) Revison 1 Attachment 02 Performance Requirement Standards (PRS) Attachment 03 Document Summary List (DSL) Attachment 04 Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) Instructions Attachment 04a Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL) Portfolio Attachment 05 Government-Furnished Property (GFP) Listing Attachment 06 Meteorological Facility and Equipment Manual (MFEM) Attachment 07 CDRL A003 Sample Format Attachment 08 Data Rights Attachment 09 Draft DD 254 Attachment 10 Labor Categories Attachment 11 Proposal Adequacy Checklist Attachment 12 Questions & Answers

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

PROPOSAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 INTRODUCTION:

The offeror shall provide a written proposal consisting of a technical, past performance and cost/price volume. The technical volume shall contain the offeror’s approach to perform the work and the basis of the proposed effort, the past performance volume should document how well the offeror performed relevant work on a previous or ongoing contract, and the cost proposal shall contain a spreadsheet of estimated cost of performing the work and any associated fees along with a cost narrative. The offeror shall ensure that there is consistency between the volumes.

The responsibility for providing a well-prepared and fully supported proposal lies solely with the offeror in order to preclude delays in negotiations and contract award. The basis and rationale for all proposed costs shall be provided so that the contracting officer has the information necessary to evaluate the reasonableness of the proposed price.

The offeror is advised that the contracting officer may find costs associated with revision/rework of inadequate cost proposals unreasonable, and will consider the nature and extent of any proposal inadequacies when assessing/negotiating profit/fee.

1.1 PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS:

a. The proposal shall be organized into three (3) separate Volumes. The Volumes are: Volume I (Management and Technical Approach), Volume II (Past Performance), and Volume III (Cost/Price). Proposals must comply with the page limitations and format specified for each volume. Page limitations and specific information required for each volume are as follows:

Volume Title Format Page Limits

I Management and Technical Approach

MS Word or Searchable PDF 50 Pages

II Past Performance MS Word See Para 1.4

III Cost/Price Cost/Price Schedule Template in MS Excel– in offeror’s own format one (1) protected and one

(1) unprotected copy;

and

Cost/Price Staffing Matrix, in offeror’s own format

No Limit

b. Page Limitation:

i. The volumes shall not exceed the page limits stated above. Page limit includes all appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings, etc. Resumes are not requested nor required. If included, they will be counted in the page limits stated above.

ii. Page Limit does not include: covers for volumes, tables of contents, glossary of abbreviations and acronyms, indices, title pages, cross reference indices, and section dividers/tables if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal. Pages marked “This page intentionally left blank” will not be counted. The Page limit also does not include teaming agreements and the notification and mitigation plans for any Organizational Conflicts of Interest (OCI). Pages will be counted if they contain any other information, i.e., diagrams, extraneous data, etc.

c. The offeror shall submit proposal information in the format as outlined in the below Table:

Number of Copies

Management and Technical volume – one (1) electronic copy via DoD SAFE Site Past Performance volume– one (1) electronic copy via DoD SAFE Site Cost/Price volume– one (1) electronic copy via DoD SAFE Site Each volume shall contain a table of contents Files submitted shall be readable using Microsoft® (MS) Word, Excel® or Adobe

Paper Size 8 ½” x 11” paper Fold-outs shall not exceed 11” x 17”

Print Type Font size used in the text portions of the proposal shall be no smaller than 10 point font.

Print type used in charts, graphics, figures and tables may be smaller than 10 point font, but must be clearly legible.

Page Margins Page margins shall be 1-inch on the top, bottom, left and right sides of the page, exclusive of headers and footers.

Page Numbering

All pages and exhibits (including forms, tables, graphs, etc.) shall be appropriately numbered.

1.2 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:

The offeror shall submit a fully substantiated proposal, in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR)

15.408 to the following points of contact via the below method of submission:

Attn: LeRoy Stokes (Procuring Contracting Officer) E-mail address: leroy.j.stokes.civ@army.mil

Attn: Charles Hunter III (Contract Specialist) E-mail address: charles.e.hunter.civ@army.mil *Electronic data submission is the Government’s preferred method of receipt.

Method of Submission:

a. Each proposal volume shall be submitted electronically to the DoD SAFE Site at https://safe.apps.mil/ as the official proposal submission. Once the files have been received, the contractor will receive a confirmation email from either the contracting officer or contract specialist that includes the number of files retrieved from the DoD SAFE Site.

b. NOTE: Non-DoD Personal Identity Verification (PIV) certificates or External Certificate Authority (ECA) are not currently supported on the DoD Safe site. Common Access Card users should select their SIGNATURE certificate issued through the DoD email Certificate Authority (CA) or select the AUTHENTICATION PIV certificate issued by the DoD Identifier (ID) Certificate Authority (CA) in order to connect. For contractors that do not have a CAC, you will be able to use DoD Safe Site as a “Guest”. Guests (i.e. PIV holders, users with .com and .edu emails) can send files, but only if solicited by CAC users. In order to submit a proposal, a “Guest” must send an email to the contracting officer and contract specialist BEFORE the due date of proposal and request a drop off link no later than three business days before the RFP closing date. The contractor will receive and email from NoReplyto@mail.mil with a link to upload the documentation. Once the files have been uploaded, the contractor will receive an automated generated email that states your documents have been received. Note that it is the responsibility of the offeror to ensure that it can use the DoD SAFE Site and that its proposal is submitted on time and with all information needed to be responsive to this solicitation; failure to do so will result in an offeror deemed non-responsive to this solicitation and ineligible for award.

1.3 MANAGEMENT AND TECHNICAL VOLUME INFORMATION: The Offeror’s Technical volume shall provide a sound and feasible technical approach that addresses all of the applicable requirements of the solicitation and its associated attachments. This volume consists of two factors, Factor (1) Management Approach and Factor (2) Technical Approach. No price/cost information shall be included in the Management and technical volume.

1.4 PAST PERFORMANCE VOLUME. The Offeror’s Past Performance Volume shall contain the following and be within the specified page constraints.

Item Page Limit Exclusions From Page Limitation Table of Contents Glossary

No Page Limit None

Summary Page Describe the role of the Offeror and each subcontractors, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner.

Five (5) pages None

Consent/Client Authorization Letters No page limit None Organizational Structure Change History Three(3) pages Pre-published items such as brochures, flyers, reference articles, etc. are excluded Relevancy Documentation Five (5) pages each None

a. Past Performance information described herein is required on the Offeror and all subcontractors, teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners proposed to perform 10% or greater of the proposed effort based on the total proposed price. The Offeror shall submit, along with the information required in this paragraph, a consent letter, executed by each subcontractors, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the Offeror so the Offeror can respond to such information. For each identified effort for a commercial customer, the Offeror shall also submit a client authorization letter, authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror's performance.

b. The Offeror shall include documentation regarding their relevant past performance as it directly relates to the work being procured under this solicitation. The Offeror SHALL NOT go back any farther than six (6) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. The past performance data shall document a successful history of past contract performance.

c. Submission Requirements. The Offeror shall submit a Past Performance Volume containing the following:

1.4.1 Table of Contents

1.4..2 Summary Page. describing the role of the Offeror and each subcontractors, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner.

1.4.3 Consent Letters. executed by each subcontractors, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing the release of past performance information so the Offeror can respond to such information.

1.4.4 Client Authorization Letters. for each identified effort for a commercial customer authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror’s performance.

1.4.5 Organization Structure Change History. Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant present or past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition. To facilitate this relevancy determination, include in this proposal volume a "roadmap" describing all such changes in the organization of your company. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts you identify for past performance evaluation/performance confidence assessment. Since the Government intends to consider present and past performance information provided by other sources as well as that provided by the Offeror(s), your "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts you identify and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

1.4.6 Relevancy Documentation. The Offeror shall outline their past performance with contracts, as a prime or major subcontractors, which is the same or similar in nature of work, size, scope and complexity to the services being procured under this Solicitation. The submittal shall include rationale supporting your assertion of relevance and how it was determined that the work performed previously was the same or similar in nature, size, scope and complexity to the work specified by this solicitation. Offerors are required to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, and to what aspects of the proposed effort they relate. The Offeror shall submit no more than five (5) relevant contracts in total, for the prime and all subcontractors as well as all members of a joint venture, identifying active or completed contracts, either Government or commercial.

1.5 COST/PRICE VOLUME INFORMATION:

(a) Other than Certified Cost or Pricing Data is required and shall include a cost element breakdown for the grand total, grand total by Offeror Fiscal Year (CFY), each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) in total, and each CLIN by CFY (if cost is spread over more than one year). The proposal shall define the timeframe of the CFY (for example, 01 January – 31 December). The summaries shall be in an operational Microsoft Excel format with formulas, non-password protected.

The prime contractor shall provide a Cost Narrative Volume to include:

1) The Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) Code.

2) Unique Entity ID (UEID)

3) Prime contractor (including inter-organizational transfers) and each applicable subcontractors proposal validity for a minimum of one year and, preferably, to contract award.

4) Information reasonably required to explain the estimating process (including the judgmental factors applied and the mathematical or other methods used in the estimate, including those used in projecting from known data, and the nature and amount of any contingencies included in the price). Provide justification for use of proposed Cost Estimating Relationships (CER) vs. discrete estimates. If a CER is used, provide estimating methodology and detailed substantiation of how the CER is derived (e.g., engineering experience, actuals, and source data). Please provide the prime contractor’s CER catalogue.

5) In order to ensure initial submission of a fully compliant and adequate proposal, and subsequently avoid any delays associated with proposal inadequacies and excessive proposal preparation costs, the “Proposal Adequacy Checklist” identified in Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) 252.215- 7009 Proposal Adequacy Checklist shall be completed and provided with the proposal See Attachmment 11. If there are major non-compliances with the checklist, the proposal will be considered inadequate and returned. As a result, an adequate proposal will be required within 30 days. Minor non-compliances will require immediate correction in order to proceed with proposal evaluation and negotiations. Completion of the checklist does not relieve the offeror from the responsibility to comply with all applicable regulations and any special requirements of the solicitation. The offeror shall flow down this provision to subcontractors and affiliates required to submit cost or pricing data in support of this Request for Proposal (RFP). If the offeror is unsure as to whether a checklist item is required in support of the proposal, or how to adequately comply with a checklist item, the offeror shall contact the contracting officer as soon as possible after receipt of the RFP, but in any case prior to proposal submittal, to resolve the questions.

1.6 HOURS:

(a) The prime contractor shall provide a breakdown of direct labor hours by direct labor category, CLIN, Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) and year. Also, provide any further breakdown information deemed useful for understanding and evaluating the proposed direct labor hours, labor category titles and descriptions. In the Basis of Estimate (BOE) for the direct labor hours, the offeror shall provide a complete description of the work to be accomplished, a calculation of the proposed hours, the period of performance in which the hours will be expended, and the basis for the calculations.

A BOE shall be provided that thoroughly documents all estimates. A BOE description shall be provided for each activity at the lowest level in the estimate. The detailed narrative description of the BOE shall be organized by WBS and include the following: how the proposed costs were derived; key assumptions and supporting rationales; source of existing verifiable data and judgment factors in projecting from known data to the estimate; estimating methods, parametric estimates, models, etc.; and other assumptions and related information to provide clarity and understanding of the offeror’s BOEs to demonstrate reasonableness.

For example: If the calculations are based on historical data, provide the data and a description of the context of the data to the current effort (i.e. similar quantities, production environment, etc.). Provide relevant concurrent support services that will be occurring at the same time as the proposed effort. This shall include any and all programs that share resources such as, but not limited to, test equipment, Government Furnished Property (GFP), touch and/or support personnel, etc. Ensure the written rationale clearly explains the historical data utilized, as well as rationale for exclusion and/or adjustment of any data.

(b) For any proposed factored hours, the prime contractor shall provide the basis of the derivation of the factor and the calculations for its use.

(c) For direct touch labor hours, the prime contractor shall provide the standard hours and a description of the task included in the standard along with historical actual hours incurred. This shall include quantitative data to justify any performance factors or learning curve factors used to adjust the standard hours used to calculate direct labor hours.

(d) For labor hours considered to be support or level-of-effort, the prime contractor shall provide a detailed description of the support activities and how it will be used to support all CLINs. The prime contractor shall also show how the contractual requirement is being addressed.

(e) The offeror shall provide a summary of all process improvements and cost reduction initiatives implemented and/or proposed that have resulted in a reduction of direct or indirect labor hours and the associated anticipated labor hours or cost savings.

(f) The offeror shall provide a listing of any known obsolescence or diminishing manufacturing sources issues that may impact this acquisition.

1.7 DIRECT AND INDIRECT RATES AND FACTORS:

(a) The prime contractor shall provide the basis for all proposed rates and/or factors included in the proposal(s).

Copies of any applicable Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRAs) shall be provided. RFPs which include Contract Labor Category Descriptions and Qualifications shall be supported with a crosswalk of the corporate labor categories and rates being utilized in the current proposal along with a comparison of the corporate category and contract category qualifications and experience (if applicable).

(b) Proposal Cost of Money (COM), if proposed, must be submitted by asset type. Accordingly, the data required by Cost Accounting Standards Board Cost of Money Factors (CASB-CMF) must be delineated for each of the three previously stated asset types consistent with DD Form 1861, Contract Facilities Capital COM (FCCOM). The proposal must provide the percentage distribution of facilities capital employed by asset type (land, building, and equipment).

1.8 ESCALATION:

The prime contractor shall identify the escalation factors used for each CFY, how they are applied, the source of the proposed escalation rates, and the supporting documentation as to why the proposed escalation rates are reasonable.

1.9 FACTORS:

If a complexity (or any other cost estimating) factor is used to adjust the estimated cost of materials to be procured above the USG-provided ceiling, the offeror shall include detailed justification explaining the need and basis for a complexity (or any other cost estimating) factor adjustment.

1.10 DIRECT MATERIAL/SUBCONTRACTS:

The term “Subcontracts” encompasses all supplier provided material or services in accordance with FAR 44.101.

The definition of subcontractors for this effort means any companies (including inter-organizational transfers, inter-company transfers, subsidiaries, or any other affiliates of the prime contractor) supplying materials and/or services for use in this contract.

(a) IAW FAR 15.404-3 (c), the offeror shall (at a minimum) submit, or cause to be submitted by the applicable subcontractor(s), certified cost or pricing data to the Government as part of its own cost or pricing data. The detailed subcontract cost proposals shall include all the information stated in this RFP for the prime contractor for sufficient information to enable the Government to perform its own technical and cost evaluations. Applicable subcontracts are the lower of either—

(1) $13.5 million or more; or

(2) Both more than the pertinent certified cost or pricing data threshold of $2 million and more than

10 percent of the prime contractor’s proposed price.

The prime contractor is responsible for the submission of the subcontractor’s cost or pricing data to the Government.

Even in instances where the applicable subcontractors does not provide detailed data to the prime contractor due to concerns of proprietary data, it is still the responsibility of the prime contractor to ensure the unsanitized cost or pricing data is provided directly to the contracting officer no later than the date of the prime contractor’s proposal submission.

(b) For subcontracts over $2 million, include a completed cost or price analysis in accordance with FAR 15.404- 3(b)(1) and include the results of these analyses in the price proposal in accordance with FAR 15.404-3(b)(2).

Ensure that the completed cost analysis for each applicable subcontract includes documented rationale supporting the prime contractor’s position for profit/fee for each subcontractors exceeding $2 million including, but not limited to, a discussion of the degree of risk in fulfilling the subcontract requirements.

(c) Provide a list of all subcontracts over $2 million via a separate Microsoft Excel file that identifies the subcontractors, the subcontractor’s address and CAGE code, a description and itemized listing of the supplies/services provided by each of the subcontractors, the total proposed value of each subcontract, the status and planned submittal date of the prime contractor’s cost or price analysis (if not already included with the prime contractor’s proposal submission), and the planned subcontract negotiation schedule with anticipated award date.

The Government reserves the right to request copies of executed subcontracts, as well as documentation from the prime contractor that addresses and supports the final negotiated prices.

(d) Include a Microsoft Excel version of the prime contractor’s Consolidated Bills of Material (CBOMs) that include the Supplier Name, Supplier CAGE code, material element code, pricing basis, CLIN, Lot, Part Number, Quantity, Unit Price and Extended Price. Include a cross-reference for each item in the CBOM to the applicable supporting documentation (vender quotes, invoice prices, etc.). The BOE shall further include supporting documentation (e.g. vender quotes, historical invoices, catalog pricing, etc.) for any proposed material item with a unit cost exceeding $10,000, or for a total material cost estimate exceeding $100,000. Price analyses shall be conducted on all subcontractors proposals.

(e) Prime contractors shall ensure that suppliers that are the lower of either (1) $13.5 million or (2) Both more than the pertinent certified cost or pricing data threshold of $2 million and more than 10 percent of the prime contractor’s proposed price provide the following to the Government:

(1) A complete proposal with cost or pricing data as stated above for the prime contractor.

(2) A cost model in Excel format (with formulas enabled) that can be manipulated. The cost model should provide a detailed break-out of all costs/ rates/ hours. Pivot tables are prohibited.

(f) Provide any technical evaluations performed on the above subcontractors proposal(s) exceeding $2 million.

(g) Allow Government personnel to monitor the prime’s fact-finding discussions with any of the applicable subcontractors under certain specific conditions/guidelines.

(h) When the proposed subcontract amount is based on historical data which has been adjusted (for example, for differences in quantity), the data supporting the CBOM shall clearly identify the adjustments made to the historical data and the reason for each adjustment.

(i) If a complexity (or any other cost estimating) factor is used to adjust the estimated cost of materials to be procured above the USG-provided ceiling, the offeror shall include detailed justification explaining the need and basis for a complexity (or any other cost estimating) factor adjustment.

(j) A CBOM for all subcontractors material proposed shall be supported by cost or pricing data documentation to substantiate the amounts proposed, such as, quotations (firm or negotiable and so identified), purchase history (basis of the purchase history), Long-term Pricing Agreements (LTPA), etc.

(k) If any of the subcontracts are based on existing Purchase Orders or LTPAs, the prime contractor shall provide:

(1) A copy of the agreement/order;

(2) When required by FAR 15.404-3(c), subcontractors cost or pricing data to the Government as part of its own cost or pricing data;

(3) Prime-completed adequate cost or price analysis (as applicable IAW FAR 15.404-1);

(4) Documentation demonstrating the continuing reasonableness of the LTPA prices included in the proposal;

(5) Negotiation memorandum documenting negotiations;

(6) Other required supporting documentation to include; (A) Evidence to determine that the purchase contract is Firm Fixed Price and approved; (B) Evidence to determine that proposed unit prices are firm and not ceiling, to be determined, or not to exceed, type unit prices;(C) Evidence to determine validity dates (period of performance) of strategic agreements; and (D) Evidence of certified cost or pricing data from supplier for future years not covered by LTPA.

(l) All offeror RFPs to subcontractors over the threshold for certified cost or pricing data shall include requests for:

(1) Historical actual costs incurred to-date for a minimum of five previous contracts/lots for each end-item supplied;

(2) Estimate to completion at cost (with identification of any management reserve costs) by each contract/lot for each end-item supplied;

(3) Percent complete by each contract/lot for each end-item supplied; and

(m) If any of the subcontracts are awarded based on competition, the prime contractor shall provide:

1) Documentation in accordance with FAR 15.403-1(c)(1), FAR15.404-1, and FAR 15.408 Table 15-2 II.

A. (1) showing the degree of competition and the basis for establishing the source and reasonableness of price

2) Request for Quote submitted to suppliers to verify that the prime contractor solicited competitive pricing vs. cost or pricing data;

3) Bid analysis and statement of facts to support prime contractor’s selection of supplier and price analysis that demonstrates the proposed unit prices are reasonable. Statement of facts to support the offeror’s selection of a high bid supplier.

4) Incorporate Better Buying Power 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0 Initiatives as outlined in DFARS policy 215.371-1 through 215.371-3. In cases where “1-bid” proposals are received, cost or pricing data will be required as appropriate; and solicitations receiving only “1-bid”, and which were open to industry for less than 30 days, are to be re-advertised for a minimum period of an additional 30 days.

5) Other required supporting documentation - Recent purchase history for all proposed items priced based on competitive quotes.

(n) If any of the subcontracts are commercial items in accordance with FAR 15.403-1(c)(3) and FAR 2.101 (for definition of commercial item), the prime contractor shall provide:

1) Prime contractor justification and supporting documentation for the Commercial Item Determination (CID) of the subcontractors commerciality assertion;

2) Sales data for three (3) prior non-Government sales agreements to support CIDs to include price analysis (FAR 15.404-1(b)) or market analysis used to determine price reasonableness;

3) Sales data, market analysis, other documentation used to determine significant commercial (non- Government contract) sales; and

4) Other required supporting documentation to include:

i. Commercial supplier web sites, catalogue, quotes from which unit prices were determined;

ii. Recent (past two years) purchase history for all items priced based on commercial quotes;

iii. Identify commercial suppliers (with discount percentages) that offer a discount for preferred customers and/or on Government contracts;

iv. Identify commercial suppliers with whom the prime contractor anticipates negotiating commercial unit prices;

v. Negotiation history with commercial suppliers by supplier, and in summary.

(o) Any subcontractors that refuses to provide the requested data, should be required to explain the reason for the refusal in writing to the prime contractor. The prime contractor should immediately notify the contracting officer in writing of any refusal by a subcontractors to provide the requested data. The contracting officer’s point of contact (POC) is shown below.

Office Symbol: CCAM-CAB-C Attn: LeRoy Stokes (Procuring Contracting Officer) E-mail address: leroy.j.stokes.civ@army.mil

Attn: Charles Hunter III (Contract Specialist) E-mail address: charles.e.hunter.civ@army.mil *Electronic data submission is the Government’s preferred method of receipt.

1.11 TRAVEL:

For all proposed travel, the offeror shall provide at a minimum: (1) the origin and destination of each trip; (2) the number of trips per destination; (3) the number of travelers per trip; (4) the proposed timeframe for the travel; (5) all applicable rates (airfare, per diem, car rental, miscellaneous, mileage, escalation and any other rates used in the travel calculations) and data to support the rates; (6) the reason for the trip; and (7) an explanation of how the proposed travel supports this specific effort. Additionally, the offeror must ensure that all travel is carried out IAW the current Joint Travel Regulation (JTR).

1.12 OTHER DIRECT COSTS (ODC):

The offeror shall provide a full explanation and substantiation of any proposed ODC to include the reason for the proposed cost, the calculation of the proposed cost, and supporting information for prices proposed.

2.0 DATA RIGHTS (Attachment 08):

In accordance with DFARS 252.227-7017, the prime contractor shall provide any data rights assertions, including subcontractors, as part of the proposal package for items with less than Unlimited Data Rights to the U.S.

Government.

3.0 GOVERNMENT FURNISHED PROPERTY (GFP):

The prime contractor shall submit the Government Furnished Property (GFP) List in accordance with DFARS (PGI) 245.201-71 entitled “Government Furnished Property attachments to Solicitations and Awards” in this electronic format. This GFP format, data scheme, the PDFS can be viewed and downloaded from the DPAP website at the following:

Requisitioned Government-furnished property (RGFP): This format is a listing of Government Property to be authorized for offeror requisition from DoD supply sources in accordance with the clause at FAR 52.251-1. The fillable PDF format for this attachment is available at the DoD Procurement Toolbox.

http://dodprocurementtoolbox.org/site/detail/id/26. In accordance with PGI 204.7105(b)(5), enter a numerical sequence number for the attachment.

Scheduled Government-furnished property (SGFP): This format is a listing of the Government property to be provided, including when major end items are being provided under a modification or upgrade contract; or when repairable are being provided under a repair, modification, or overhaul contract. The fillable PDF format for this attachment is available at the DoD Procurement Toolbox http://dodprocurementtoolbox.org/site/detail/id/26. In accordance with PGI 204.7105(b)(5), enter a numerical sequence number for the attachment.

4.0 FEE/PROFIT:

The Prime contractor shall identify the proposed profit percentage and base and provide rationale for the profit percentage being proposed.

5.0 QUESTIONS:

Submit questions via email by 08 January 2024, 11:00AM (CST), to Charles E. Hunter, Contract Specialist, charles.e.hunter.civ@army.mil ; LeRoy Stokes, Contracting Officer, leroy.j.stokes.civ@army.mil

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

SECTION M

Evaluation Factors for Award

M-1 BASIS FOR AWARD

a. This best value trade off source selection will be conducted in accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Part 15, as supplemented. The solicitation will be issued on an 8(a) set-aside competitive basis and will result in the award of a single contract. The Government will select for award the single Offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with the Federal Acquisition Regulation, whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements and represents the best overall value to the Government. Best overall value gives appropriate consideration given to the four (4) evaluation factors: Management, Technical, Past Performance, and Cost/Price.

The management and technical factor are more important than the past performance factor, which is more important than the cost/price factor. When combined the non-price factors are more important than cost/price. To arrive at a source selection decision, the Source Selection Authority (SSA) will consider the SSEB reports but will arrive at an independent decision and provide a rational basis for the award. The Government reserves the right not to award any contract depending on the quality of the proposals submitted and the availability of funds.

b. Pursuant to FAR 52.215-1, Instructions to Offerors – Competitive Acquisition, 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 should contain the offeror’s best terms from a cost/price and technical standpoint. The Government reserves the right to conduct discussions if the Contracting Officer later determines them to be necessary. If the Contracting Officer 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 Contracting Officer 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.

c. In order to be considered eligible for award, an offeror must be rated at least “Acceptable” in the Management and Technical Approach and present a Cost/Price that is evaluated to be reasonable, realistic, affordable and which reflects no more than a moderate level of non-quantifiable risk. All offers with separately priced line items will be analyzed to determine if the prices are unbalanced. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g)(3), if the contracting officer determines there to be a lack of balance which poses an unacceptable risk to the government, an offer may be rejected. Furthermore, prime offerors must possess an adequate accounting system in order to be considered eligible for award, and contracts will be awarded only to an offeror who is deemed responsible in accordance with FAR 9.104, as supplemented. (Note: While a proposed subcontractor’s lack of an adequate accounting system will not render a prime offeror ineligible for award, it may be determined a proposal risk that could impact source selection.).

d. The Government will select for award the eligible and responsible offeror whose proposal conforms to the solicitation requirements and is determined to represent best-value to the Government in accordance with the evaluation criteria stated elsewhere in this solicitation.

M-2 EVALUATION OF PROPOSALS

The Government will assess the offeror’s ability to support the technical requirements of the PWS as discussed below; the evaluation will be based upon the assessed significant strengths, significant weaknesses, strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies of the proposal per the definitions in section below. The Management and Technical Factors shall be rated in accordance with the rating scheme provided in the table below. The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, significant strengths, and deficiencies in determining the Management and Technical Factor rating.

a. Offerors are cautioned to ensure that their proposals are complete, address all requirements of Section L, are reflective of the evaluation criteria set forth in Section M, and are submitted on the most favorable terms to reflect their best potential. Anything less may be the basis for non-selection for award. Proposals must be realistic in terms of all evaluation criteria. Offers which are unrealistic, including unrealistically low or unreasonably high cost proposals, may be judged to reflect a lack of understanding of the solicitation requirements. Inconsistencies between an offeror’s Management and Technical Approach, and Cost/Price proposals may result in a reduced rating, or even total exclusion from contract award consideration. The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure problems it finds in the proposal. Proposals that do not contain the required information are subject to rejection by the Government. All complete proposals will receive careful and impartial consideration.

b. The Government reserves the right to verify the credibility of offeror’s proposed information. Unsubstantiated information may result in a reduced rating or proposal rejection.

M-3 EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

All proposals shall be evaluated by the Source Selection Team.

a. Trade off to Best Value Evaluation Approach

All proposals will be evaluated in accordance with the best value evaluation factors of Management, Technical, Past Performance, and Cost/Price.

In terms of the relative importance of the factors, the management and technical factor are more important than the past performance factor, which is more important than the cost factor. When combined the non-price factors are more important than cost/price.

The Government will use the specific criteria set forth below in the evaluation and selection of offerors for award.

Each proposal will be evaluated on merit, overall value to the Government and the ability to meet the objectives of the acquisition on the criteria listed herein. The evaluation of the Management and Technical factors will employ combined adjectival/risk rating schemes to assess the merit of the proposals with respect to the evaluation factors.

Risk will be assessed and integrated with each non-cost factor evaluation; therefore a separate “risk” evaluation will not be assigned. Numerical weightings (i.e., assigning points or percentages to evaluation factors) will not be used.

The management and technical factors will be evaluated using the DoD five-level combined adjectival/risk rating approach (Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal and Unacceptable). The combined adjectival/risk rating considers risk in conjunction with the strengths, significant strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses and deficiencies in determining ratings. An offeror must be rated at least Acceptable in the Management and Technical approach and present a Cost/Price that is evaluated to be reasonable and realistic in order to be considered for contract award.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method

RATING DESCRIPTION

Outstanding

Proposal demonstrates an exceptional approach and understanding of the requirements and contains multiple strengths and/or at least one significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Good

Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements and contains at least one strength or significant strength, and risk of unsuccessful performance is low to moderate.

Acceptable

Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Marginal

Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements of the solicitation and, thus, contains one or more deficiencies and is unawardable, and/or risk of performance is unacceptably high.

Note: Table from DoD Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement Procedures, Guidance and Information Subpart 215.3 - Source Selection, dated August 20, 2022.

As used in the rating scheme noted above and in the evaluation of proposals, Deficiency, Significant Weakness, Weakness, Significant Strength and Strength are defined below.

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. (See FAR 15.001).

Significant Strength. An aspect of an offerors’ proposal with applicable or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to be considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Strength. An aspect of an offerors’ proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.

Significant Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. (See FAR 15.001).

Weakness. A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance. (See

FAR 15.001).

Uncertainty. Any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal for which the intent of the offer 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).

The Past Performance Factor will assess the relative risks associated with an Offeror’s likelihood of success in performing the solicitation’s requirements as indicated by that Offeror’s record of past performance. Performance risk is assessed at the factor level after evaluating aspects of the Offeror’s recent past performance and focusing on performance that is relevant to the services being procured under this solicitation.

Past Performance Relevancy Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Performance Confidence Assessments Rating Method Adjectival Rating Description

Substantial Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a high expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Satisfactory Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

Neutral Confidence No recent/relevant performance record is available or the offeror’s performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned. The offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on the factor of past performance.

Limited Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a low expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort.

No Confidence Based on the offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has no expectation that the offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

The Cost/Price Factor will be evaluated for reasonableness, realism, and affordability; however, no adjective ratings will be used for evaluating cost, since cost is not rated. Cost/Price proposal will not be rated but will be assessed for reasonableness, realism, and affordability.