Amendment 0002_W91CRB-21-R-0030 RTES.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

Amendment 0002 removes the verbiage 'providing critical hardw are/services’ from Section L of the Draft RFP. See highlighted text on page 10 that w as removed for correction and clarification.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 20

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY

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 W91CRB21R0030

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-Mar-2021

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 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.

U0002

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

13-Apr-2021

CODE

ACC - APG - W91CRB

BLDG 4310

6515 INTEGRITY COURT

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD 21005-3013

W91CRB 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91CRB21R0030

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

SECTION L

PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS (Section L)

1. INTRODUCTION

This requirement is set aside for Small Businesses under NAICS 541715 (exception for aircraft, aircraft engines and aircraft parts). The Offeror’s proposal shall be submitted electronically, as set forth below. The RFP shall provide the Government address and receipt date for proposal submittal. Proposals shall remain valid for a period of at least 180 days of the closing date of the solicitation.

Proposals must be submitted electronically through the DOD Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) website at https://safe.apps.mil/ The SAFE system will provide a confirmation to the sender when files are transmitted successfully. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to allow adequate time to submit proposal files before the submission deadline. Any proposal that is received in the SAFE system after the appointed deadline is "late" and WILL NOT be considered for award. The SAFE website provides the date and time that proposals are submitted.

All Offerors and Subcontractors that will be submitting proposal information to the Government shall request a link from the Contract Specialist, Alyssa Grice (alyssa.r.grice.civ@mail.mil) and Contracting Officer, Erin Weber (erin.k.weber.civ@mail.mil) by email no earlier than fourteen

(14) days before the closing date of the solicitation. The Offeror will be sent a drop-off request with a link to use through the SAFE system. Note that a link is only valid for fourteen (14) days once it has been sent, and that it only allows a maximum of 25 files to be submitted.

In order to be considered for award, each Offeror must submit their proposal in accordance with these instructions. Failure to adhere to these instructions may result in rejection of the offer without evaluation or considered for award. All proposal information submitted shall be concise and complete and demonstrate that the Offeror understands and meets the requirements established in the solicitation for all Factors. The Government will consider how well the Offeror complied with the instructions when evaluating the Offeror’s capability to perform the prospective contract. The Government will consider an Offeror’s non-compliance with these instructions, or any attempt to take advantage of loopholes in these instructions, to be indicative of the type of conduct that it may expect from the Offeror during contract performance.

The Offeror’s complete approach shall consist of six (6) proposal volumes in total. The Volumes are depicted below:

VOLUME 1: FACTOR 1 - EXPERIENCE

VOLUME 2: FACTOR 2 – CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT

VOLUME 3: FACTOR 3 – ENVIRONMENTAL/SAFETY/QUALITY/PROCESS CONTROL

VOLUME 4: FACTOR 4 - PAST PERFORMANCE

VOLUME 5: FACTOR 5 - COST/PRICE

VOLUME 6: SOLICITATION, OFFER, AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND

CERTIFICATION/REPRESENTATIONS

Files shall not contain classified data. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

Offeror’s are cautioned that “parroting” of the technical requirements or the PWS with a statement of intent to perform does not reflect an understanding of the requirement or capability to perform. Offeror’s are responsible for including sufficient details to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

The Offeror's initial proposal should contain the Offeror's best terms from a technical and cost standpoint. Offeror’s shall submit a written proposal before or by the date and time specified in the beta.SAM RFP posting. Along with their proposal, Offeror’s must submit fully completed copies of any FAR certifications appearing in Section K of subject solicitation SF33.

Cost information shall not appear in any document other than Volume 5. Proposals shall remain valid for a minimum of one hundred and eighty (180) days after submission and shall not contain classified data/information.

Printing should be single spaced. Each paragraph shall be separated by at least one blank line. A standard, 12-point minimum font size applies. Arial or New Times Roman fonts are required.

Tables and illustrations may use a reduced font size no less than 8-point and may be landscaped.

The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

VOLUME TITLE

MAXIMUM

PAGES

Volume 1 – Factor 1: Experience 25 Volume 2 – Factor 2: Contract Administration and Management 75 Volume 3 – Factor 3: Environmental/Safety/Quality/Process Improvement 25 Volume 4 – Factor 4: Past Performance 25 Volume 5 – Factor 5: Cost/Price N/A Volume 6 – Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations

N/A

NOTE: Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Page count includes all pages including but not limited to; body, tables, figures, and all appendices. Cover sheets, table of contents, and resumes do not count toward page limits. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government.

3. PROPOSAL FILE FORMAT & ELECTRONIC COPIES

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. 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 RFP number in the header and/or footer. A Table of Contents should be created using the Table of Content 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”

NOTE: 11X17 sized pages are acceptable for tables/graphic representations; however, each 11X17 page counts as two pages, which MUST be clearly numbered.

The following additional restrictions apply:

b. File Packaging. Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. Each proposal volume shall be submitted in a separate PDF file and shall include ALL documents pertinent to the volume. All price breakdown information to aide in the cost/price evaluation shall be submitted in the Microsoft Office Excel template provided with the RFP. Zip files are not permitted. No additional encryption is needed when submitting proposals via the SAFE website as it encrypts them automatically.

d. Content Requirement. All information shall be confined to the appropriate file. The Offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file and counts towards the page count.

Proprietary information shall be clearly marked. The Government will use information provided under each Volume strictly to evaluate the applicable Factor and will not use that information to evaluate any other Factor in other Volumes.

The following shall be included in the Narrative discussion:

VOLUME 1 - FACTOR 1: EXPERIENCE

In accordance with the PWS and all other requirements outlined within the Solicitation, Offeror’s shall address the following within their proposals: The Offeror meets the minimum requirement of demonstrating two (2) years of experience (occurring within the past 7 years) in the following nine (9) Mission Support Requirements, meeting subtasks under the higher level task is sufficient to satisfy the experience requirement. The prime contractor or the managing partner of any joint venture must demonstrate a minimum of two (2) years of experience (occurring within the past 7 (seven) years) in at least two of sections 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3, or 4.2.6 of the Mission Support Requirements.

All contracts submitted by the prime contractor or the managing partner of any joint venture in response to the Experience Factor must have a total value of at least $40M a year over a two year period. Meeting this dollar threshold can be achieved via a combination of contracts. However, the contracts must have been performed concurrently over the given timeframe. (E.g. two $20M/year contracts that span the same two year period or one $30M/year contract and one $10/M/year contract that both span the same two year period).

Mission Support Requirements:

Major Mission Area

1) PWS Section 4.1.1

2) PWS Section 4.1.2

3) PWS Section 4.1.3

Engineering, Scientific and Technical Direct Support

4) PWS Section 4.2.1

5) PWS Section 4.2.2

6) PWS Section 4.2.4

7) PWS Section 4.2.5

8) PWS Section 4.2.6 Test Operations Support

9) PWS Section 4.3

Offeror’s shall complete APPENDIX C – ENCLOSURE 5: SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE

FORM.

*Note that the same efforts submitted in response to Factor 1, Experience, shall be submitted in response to Factor 4, Past Performance. However, the Government will not consider any information submitted in response to Factor 1 in evaluating Factor 4 and will not consider any information submitted in response to Factor 4 in evaluating Factor 1.

VOLUME 2 - FACTOR 2: CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION AND MANAGEMENT

In accordance with the PWS and all other requirements outlined within the Solicitation, Offeror’s shall address all of the following elements within their proposals:

The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

Recruit, Train and Retain a Highly Qualified Workforce:

This part of the factor evaluates the Offeror’s proposed capability in recruiting, training and retaining a highly qualified workforce for the basic contract period and all option years. The Offeror shall address the following:

RTC requires a highly qualified and flexible contractor workforce that can efficiently and effectively support the complex and fluctuating test and evaluation environment. It is anticipated that both incumbent re-capture as well as recruitment of new employees will be required to support the diverse mission.

Proposals shall address how the prime contractor, or the managing partner in the case of a JV, will retain responsibility and accountability for recruiting, hiring, training and retention of a highly qualified workforce for all RTES support requirements.

The proposal shall detail relevant hiring approaches for attracting and retaining new employees and recent graduates.

Address the plan for retention of skilled incumbent workforce essential in executing RTC’s mission.

Provide your expected retention rate during the contract transition from RWESS to RTES.

Describe the plan and initiatives to achieve your expected annual retention rate and list what the rate should be for the RTES workforce.

Include the plan for training of employees in their field of work as well as cross training to build a multi-skilled and flexible workforce with awareness of the full spectrum of the test center mission.

Identify how the prime contractor, or the managing partner in the case of a JV, will retain responsibility to promptly backfill vacated positions.

Address how Key Personnel will meet or exceed the requirements listed in section

1.3 of the RTES PWS. Provide a resume of the Key Personnel and an agreement showing the key personnel listed intends to be the in place at the start of the contract award.

Subcontract Management and Government Interaction:

This part of the factor evaluates the Offeror’s proposed capability in managing the efforts of the contract and interfacing with the government for the basic contract period and all option years. The Offeror shall address the following elements:

Provide a plan for subcontractor management that will ensure that the prime contractor, or managing partner in the case of a JV, will serve as the sole interface with the Government regarding all aspects of performance.

Explain how ultimate responsibility for all aspects of contract performance, including workforce management, purchases, costs control, and performance metrics will be managed and controlled by the prime contractor, or managing partner in the case of the JV.

If the offeror is a Joint Venture (JV), the proposal shall describe the makeup and organization of the JV and define the roles and responsibilities of the managing and all partner entities.

Contract Integration and Cost Control:

This part of the factor evaluates the Offeror’s proposed capability to manage a efficient contract for the basic contract period and all option years. The Contractor shall address the following elements:

The contractor shall manage an integrated, flexible, and cost efficient contract.

Address how integration of the entire contract will be achieved by the prime contractor or managing partner in the case of the JV, including how all goals, direction and information will be communicated to create a unified contract workforce working toward the same goals and mission.

Explain your plan to emphasize Test Center wide support and how you will avoid creating separate divisions and independent areas, subcontracted out for support.

Identify your plan for cross training of employees so they can work in multiple areas within the contract and can be move to support surges and/or reductions in workload as they occur.

Explain within the proposal how the contractor will execute a cost efficient and flat organizational structure.

Demonstrate your ability to limit costs associated with management, staff/overhead and non-direct test support personnel (not working directly on or charging their time to a test).

Demonstrate the offeror’s understanding of direct labor percentage (direct or reimbursable hours divided by total productive or billable hours) and how it will affect the RTES contract. Explain how the understanding will shape the offeror’s approach to manning the contract. Explain how the understanding can help the offeror achieve the cost control on the contract.

Address your plan for achieving zero or near zero labor cost growth over the life of the RTES contract.

Identify measures that can be used to control the growth of direct and indirect labor costs and how this will benefit the government.

Performance Metrics and Trend Analysis:

This part of the factor evaluates the Offeror’s proposed capability to manage the contract based upon metrics for the basic contract period and all option years. The Offeror shall address the following elements:

Establishing and achieving tailored performance metrics is essential to successful performance under this contract.

The proposal shall address the key performance areas and associated metrics that will be established by the prime contractor or managing JV member to ensure all quality, schedule and cost objectives are achieved.

The proposal shall explain why these metrics were chosen and how they will be evaluated and managed by the prime contractor or managing partner in the case of the JV. The following performance areas must be addressed in the proposal, in additional to any other areas selected by the contractor:

1) Environmental and Safety

2) Schedule

3) Reimbursable Hours and Percentages

4) Cost Control

5) Efficiency Initiatives

6) Procurements

7) Redirection of Personnel for Surges and/or Reductions

8) Personnel manpower, vacancies and loses

9) Recruitment and Retention

10) Training

Address how the prime contractor or managing JV partner will present the results of the performance metric analysis and resulting conclusions/recommendations to the Government.

Explain how the planned actions of this Factor will benefit the Government.

VOLUME 3 – FACTOR 3: ENVIRONMENTAL/SAFETY/QUALITY/PROCESS

IMPROVEMENT

In accordance with the PWS and all other requirements outlined within the Solicitation, Offerors shall address the following within their proposals:

Describe your approach to comply with the Environmental and Safety requirements at RTC in accordance with sections 5.2 and associated sub-paragraphs, and 5.3 of the PWS. As part of this submittal, the Offeror shall:

Provide corporate safety approaches which addresses PWS section 5.2 and sub-areas and document how risk will be mitigated center-wide. The contractor shall provide information about corporate safety history, training, and best practices that contribute to an incident and injury free culture at RTC.

The Offeror shall provide the corporate environmental approach which addresses PWS section 5.3.

Provide an approach that addresses the three key elements of PWS Section 4.5 – Quality Management. Offeror shall provide sufficient information on how the proposed approach will be implemented, and why it is beneficial to RTC. Provide information about any SOPs or programs that have been implemented by the contractor and resulting improvements to Quality Management. Demonstrate how the implemented programs are beneficial to RTC.

Provide an approach that addresses the Continuous Process Improvement aspects of section 4.5 of the PWS. Discuss strategy for identifying potential areas to improve efficiencies.

VOLUME 4: FACTOR 4 –PAST PERFORMANCE

This volume shall contain past performance information regarding recent and relevant contracts.

Offeror’s shall submit the same efforts provided under Factor 1, Experience, in response to Factor 4, Past Performance. Recent efforts are those that are in performance or awarded during the past seven years, from the issue date of this RFP. Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the effort required by the RFP. ALL efforts submitted in response to this Factor must be the same as those submitted in response to the Experience Factor. Data concerning the Offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. The Offeror shall also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror. In addition, letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered. 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, CAGE Code and 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).

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

(c) Government’s technical representative/COR and current email 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 number.

(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, include Delivery Order Numbers.

(g) Contract Type (specific type such as Fixed-Price (FP), Cost Reimbursement (CR), Time & Material (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 or work.

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

(2) Section 2 – Performance. Offeror’s shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed in Section 1, Contract Description, describing the objectives achieved and detailing how the effort is relevant to the performance requirements outlined in sections 3, 4, 5, and 6 of the PWS.

(a) For any contracts that did not/do not meet the original schedule, technical performance requirements or cost estimates, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The Offeror’s 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 Offeror’s shall also provide 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 Offeror’s 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 Offeror’s delivered product.

(3) Section 3 – Subcontracts. Offeror’s shall provide an outline of how the effort required by the RFP will be assigned for performance within the Offeror’s 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 PWS subparagraph number. This includes all subcontractors who will be providing critical hardware/services or whose subcontract is for more than 10% of the total proposed cost/price (Major Subcontractor). This section will further include written consent of major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of their subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror. In addition, letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors.

(4) Past Performance Questionnaire. For all contracts identified in Section 1, Contract Descriptions, a Past Performance Questionnaire must be completed and submitted. 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 Office no later than the proposal due date, to (alyssa.r.grice.civ@mail.mil or erin.k.weber.civ@mail.mil). The Offeror shall e-mail to the Contracting Officer a list of all the POC’s who were sent a questionnaire. The Government must receive this list no later than the proposal due date. 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; and Date E-Mail to POC (month/day).

Offeror’s with no prior contracts containing FAR 52.219-8 shall certify the same.

*Note that the same efforts submitted in response to Factor 1, Experience, shall be submitted in response to Factor 4, Past Performance. However, the Government will not consider any information submitted in response to Factor 1 in evaluating Factor 4 and will not consider any information submitted in response to Factor 4 in evaluating Factor 1.

VOLUME 5 – FACTOR 5: COST/PRICE:

Price/cost data shall only be included in the cost volume, Volume 6, and not within any other proposal volume.

This volume shall consist of all information, required to support proposed costs and prices.

Competition is anticipated therefore Certified Cost and Pricing Data are not currently required in accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b)(3); however, the Government reserves the right to request such data prior to award if none of the exemptions in FAR 15.403-1(b) apply. The information submitted in this volume shall comply with the cost element format FAR 15.408, Table 15-2, and the requirements set forth below. There is no page limitation for this volume.

Offeror’s shall consider the Section H clause on the limitation of Direct Labor Costs which states, “Any increase in direct Labor Rates beyond 10% for the contract period of performance inclusive of options, which has not been approved by the Contracting Officer, will be considered an unallowable cost, in accordance with FAR 31.201-2 under Determining Allowability, and will NOT be paid by the Government under this contract.”

Offeror’s shall be required to manage to the contract ceiling stated in their proposal. Offeror’s will be evaluated on their ability to manage to the target cost for each year of the contract. Any overrun above the target cost will result in a negative CPARS rating under cost control.

Proposed cost/price will not be adjectively rated. A total price will be evaluated for each Offeror. The total evaluated price will be the summation of the Section B CLINs, including any probable cost adjustments made by the Government. Each Offeror must propose manpower identical with the levels stated in the LOE_Spreadsheet.xls.

Each Offeror’s cost/price proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the price and cost criteria in FAR 15.404-1 as determined necessary by the Contracting Officer based on competition and other factors. The objective of price/cost proposal analysis is to ensure that all proposed costs are fair, reasonable and realistic. Accordingly, the analytical techniques and procedures described in FAR 15.404-1 may be used singly or in combination with others to ensure the costs are fair and reasonable. Cost realism analysis IAW FAR 15.404-1(d) will be performed only on cost reimbursable CLINs and SLINs in accordance with FAR 15-404-1(d).

As noted above, the Offeror's proposed costs will be evaluated by determining what the Government expects the Offeror's approach would most probably cost the Government when the work performed under the contract is completed. To the degree that the Government's most probable cost estimate is higher or lower than the Offeror’s proposed cost; the cost will be adjusted upward/downward for the purposes of evaluation only.

NOTE: The Government may use external sources of information in performing its cost analysis to include, but not limited to, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor, Department of State, DCAA, or DCMA. This DOES NOT excuse the Offeror from following the proposal submission instructions.

Offeror and subcontractor proposals will be evaluated based on the cost/price reasonableness and realism criteria contained in FAR 15.404-1. The manner and degree of the criteria used will be determined by the contracting officer based on competition and other factors. A proposal is presumed to represent the Offeror's best effort to respond to the solicitation. Any significant inconsistency, if unexplained, raises a fundamental issue of the Offeror's understanding of the nature and scope of the work required and may be grounds for rejection of the proposal.

Offeror shall provide proposed cost and/or fee as required for all CLINs in Section B.

Each Offeror's cost/price proposal shall contain sufficient quantitative and narrative documentation necessary to adequately support and explain the reasonableness and realism of the proposed cost/price proposed in proposal Section B. Offeror proposals shall conform to the reporting criteria in FAR 15.408, Table 15-2. FAR 15.408, Table 15-2 prescribe the FAR’s generally accepted format for cost proposals. More specifically, each Offeror's cost proposal shall be broken out by cost element as specified in Table 15-2, II Cost Elements. To help ensure this requirement, a Microsoft Excel workbook titled "LOE_Spreadsheet" has been provided as an attachment to this solicitation. Instructions for completing LOE_Spreadsheet.xls are contained in that file. FAR 15.403-5(b) allows the Contracting Officer to specify the format of other than cost or pricing data or data other than cost or pricing data to facilitate and enhance cost/price and cost realism analysis. These spreadsheets will help facilitate a more efficient, consistent, and fair evaluation of each Offeror's proposal, and aid in post-award contract administration. Offeror’s are permitted to alter the format of the spreadsheet (i.e. add and subtract rows, columns, and formulas as necessary, etc.) in order to conform to the nuances of the Offeror's accounting and estimating systems. However, it is requested that the general format be maintained as much as possible for Government evaluation purposes. Offeror’s are required to fill in rates for all labor categories included in the LOE_Spreadsheet, regardless of whether or not projected LOE hours are associated with the labor category. However, only those labor categories with projected LOE hours will be used in calculating each Offeror’s total evaluated cost/price. Offeror’s must not deviate from the stated LOE hours provided in the LOE_Spreadsheet.xls, or their proposal will not be considered for award.

Offeror’s are encouraged to provide whatever supplemental information necessary to help the government understand why the proposed costs are reasonable and realistic. Supporting narrative shall be submitted in Microsoft Word or Excel (2007 or later) compatible format. Any supporting schedules shall be submitted in a Microsoft Excel (2007 or later) compatible readable format.

Each Offeror is to provide two electronic copies of their cost/price proposal. The Excel version of the completed LOE_Spreadsheet.xls shall also be included with the rest of the proposal submission. One shall be locked (read only) and one shall be open. Worksheet formulas shall be readable.

Since this requirement is for a cost reimbursable type contract, each Offeror shall provide documentation necessary to demonstrate that the Offeror’s accounting system is adequate in accordance with the requirement in FAR 16.301-3(a)(3) with respect to cost type contracts.

In accordance with FAR 16.301-3(a)(3), the Offeror must have an accounting system that is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract to be awarded. To substantiate this, the Offeror shall provide evidence of an adequacy review from DCAA (i.e. audit reports) or DCMA if available. Additionally, submission of forward pricing rate agreements (FPRAs, FPRRs, etc.)

or other agreements should also be submitted to substantiate the reasonableness and allowability the Offeror's direct and indirect rates/costs if this information is available. If such agreements do not exist, Offeror’s shall provide their forward pricing indirect expense rate forecast for each rate, to include expense pool by expense account as well as allocation base details. Offeror’s shall also provide three years’ historical pool and base detail (same information as provided for forecasted rates) for each indirect expense rate.

In accordance with FAR 15.404-3(b)(1) each Offeror shall conduct appropriate price and/or cost analysis to establish the reasonableness and realism of proposed subcontractor cost/prices.

Evidence of their review shall be submitted as part of the Offeror’s cost/price proposal. Any subcontractor proprietary information can be submitted under separate cover to contracting officer if the subcontractor declines to provide documentation to the Offeror.

If any of the Offeror or subcontractor labor rates contain "uncompensated overtime" as defined in FAR 52.237-10 the Offeror and/or subcontractor shall so indicate the existence of uncompensated overtime and its cost/price impact on the Offeror's or subcontractor's proposal to the Offeror as part of the Offeror's cost/price proposal.

The impact of any Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBAs) and prevailing DoL Wage Determinations shall be considered and incorporated as necessary in proposing direct labor rates,for Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), non-exempt personnel/wage categories covered by the Service Contract Act as referenced in FAR Part 22. Since wage increases/adjustments for proposed FLSA/SCA non-exempt labor will be covered by CBA and DoL Wage

Determination,changes during the life of the contract, Offeror’s are NOT to apply escalation to non-exempt base labor rates covered by CBA/DoL. Escalation can be applied to FLSA exempt labor categories (i.e. management, professional, and administrative) as defined by DoL, however cannot be applied to FLSA/SCA non-exempt wage categories for the purposes of this solicitation and resulting contract. CBA and Wage Determination adjustments will be granted on the annual anniversaries from time of award of the initial contract in accordance with FAR 52.222-43 or 52.222-44 as reference in this contract

A DCMA approved or compliant purchasing system is required for performance of this contract.

In accordance with DFARS Subpart 44.3, the offeror’s purchasing system must be reviewed to determine adequacy for award. To substantiate this, the offeror shall provide evidence of a contractor purchasing system review (CPSR) from DCMA if available. In the case of a JV, at least one member of the JV must submit evidence of a CPSR from DCMA at time of proposal submission. If evidence of a CPSR from DCMA is provided by a non-managing member of the JV, the proposal must address how material purchases will be accomplished by the JV without compromising the seamless interaction between the managing JV member and the Government.

In the event that a CPSR has not been conducted by DCMA, the offeror shall provide a completed Solicitation Attachment 6 - Purchasing System Review Form documenting compliance with the requirements of DFARS Clause 252.244-7001(c). The Government will not initiate the DCMA CPSR prior to award.

VOLUME 6 – PARTICIPATION– SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD

DOCUMENTS AND CERTIFICATIONS/REPRESENTATIONS

Certifications and Representations – Each Offeror shall complete (fill-in and signatures) the solicitation sections indicated below using the file (without modification to the file) provided with the RFP. An authorized official of the firm shall sign the SF 33, all solicitation amendments, and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission. Offerors shall specifically and very clearly identify any assumptions or exceptions taken to the solicitation.

Section A – Standard Form 33 (SF 33), Solicitation, Offer and Award Section K – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors 52.204-7 – System for Award Management 52.204-8 – Annual Representations and Certifications 52.209-7 – Information Regarding Responsibility Matters

52.204-24 – Representation Regarding Certain Telecommunications and Video Surveillance Services or Equipment

52.204-26 – Covered Telecommunications Equipment or Services-Representation

Solicitation Attachment 4, OCI Certification, with the four Conflict of Interest Provisions in Section 5.9 of the PWS shall be included in this volume.

E. DISCUSSIONS

In accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions with each Offeror may be held. Should discussions take place, all Offeror’s in the competitive range will be allowed an opportunity to submit Final Proposal Revisions.

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

The following have been modified:

SECTION M

EVALUATION APPROACH (Section M)

The Government intends to award a contract to the Offeror whose proposal represents the best overall value that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government. The evaluation will be accomplished utilizing the listed five (5) evaluation factors: Experience, Contract Administration and Management, Environmental/Safety/Quality/Process Improvement, Past Performance, and Cost/Price. Below is further discussion of the factors in detail. In order for an Offeror to be considered for award, the proposal must receive at least an “Acceptable” rating in every non-price Factor. A proposal receiving a rating of “Unacceptable” in any non-price Factor will not be eligible for award.

All proposals shall be subject to evaluation by the Government’s Source Selection Team (SST).

For the purposes of the evaluation, the term “Offeror” refers to the prime contractor and all major subcontractors. In the case of an Offeror that is a Joint Venture (JV), the term “Offeror” refers to the managing and any partner JV members and all major subcontractors. Major subcontractors are defined as members of an Offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform ten (10) percent (%) or more of the proposed effort. However the following exception applies:

For all OCI evaluations, the term Offeror refers to the Offeror and all subcontractors and affiliates regardless of relative size contribution to performance of the proposed effort.

Factors that will be evaluated are as follows:

Factor 1: Experience The Government will determine if the Offeror as an entity (Prime contractor and all proposed major subcontractors or the JV partners and all proposed major subcontractors) clearly meet minimum requirements of the solicitation for experience in each of the functional areas listed below utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix C – Enclosure 5. All major subcontractors identified in the Offeror’s proposal are considered as part of the entity.

The Experience factor will be evaluated as “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable.” Each Offeror’s experience will be reviewed to determine whether the government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror has relevant experience.

Acceptable: Offeror meets the minimum requirement of demonstrating two (2) years of experience (occurring within the past 7 years) in the following nine (9) Mission Support Requirements, which are tied directly to subtask areas in Section 4 of the PWS below. The prime contractor or the managing partner of any joint venture must demonstrate a minimum of two (2) years of experience (occurring within the past 7 (seven) years) in at least two of sections 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3, or 4.2.6 of the Mission Support Requirements.

All contracts submitted by the prime contractor or the managing partner of any joint venture in response to the Experience Factor must have a total value of at least $40M a year over a two year period. Meeting this dollar threshold can be achieved via a combination of contracts. However, the contracts must have been performed concurrently over the given timeframe. (E.g. two $20M/year contracts that span the same two year period or one $30M/year contract and one $10/M/year contract that both span the same two year period).

Mission Support Requirements:

Major Mission Area

1) PWS Section 4.1.1

2) PWS Section 4.1.2

3) PWS Section 4.1.3

Engineering, Scientific and Technical Direct Support

4) PWS Section 4.2.1

5) PWS Section 4.2.2

6) PWS Section 4.2.4

7) PWS Section 4.2.5

8) PWS Section 4.2.6 Test Operations Support

9) PWS Section 4.3

Unacceptable: Offeror does not meet the minimum requirement of demonstrating two (2) years of experience (occurring within the past 7 years) in the nine (9) Mission Support Requirements, which are tied directly to subtask areas in Section 4 of the PWS below. The prime contractor or the managing partner of any joint venture does not demonstrate a minimum of two (2) years of experience (occurring within the past 7 (seven) years) in at least two of sections 4.1.1, 4.1.2, 4.1.3, or 4.2.6 of the Mission Support Requirements.

Factor 2: Contract Administration and Management The overarching evaluation approach for the Contract Administration and Management factor is:

a. Adequacy of Response. The proposal will be evaluated to determine whether the Offeror’s methods and approach have adequately and completely considered, defined, and satisfied the requirements specified in the RFP. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which each requirement has been addressed in the proposal in accordance with the proposal submission section of the RFP.

b. Feasibility of Approach. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which successful performance is contingent upon proven devices and techniques. The proposal will be evaluated to determine the extent to which the Offeror is expected to be able to successfully complete the proposed tasks and technical requirements within the required schedule.

The Offerors shall address this factor in the Contract Administration and Management volume of its proposal. Offerors must receive a rating of at least Acceptable in order to be eligible for award. All requirements in Section L must be addressed.

Recruit, Train and Retain a Highly Qualified Workforce:

Subcontract Management and Government Interaction:

Manage Contract Integration and Cost Control:

Performance Metrics and Trend Analysis:

Factor 2 will be rated as Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal or Unacceptable. If an Offeror receives a rating of Unacceptable or Marginal the factor will be rated as Unacceptable.

All Offeror’s must receive a rating of acceptable or better in the Contract Administration and Management factor to be eligible for award. Factor 2 ratings are defined as follows:

COMBINED TECHNICAL/RISK RATINGS

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 very 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 requirements, and risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Factor 3: Environmental/Safety/Quality/Process Improvement This factor evaluates the Offeror’s proposed capability in Environmental and Safety Compliance and Quality Control and Process Improvement as described within Section L. The Environmental/Safety/Quality/Process Improvement factor will be evaluated as “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable”. The ratings are defined as follows:

Rating Rating Definition Acceptable Plan clearly meets the minimum requirements of the solicitation as specified in Section L.

Unacceptable Plan does not clearly meet the minimum requirements of the solicitation as specified in Section L.

Factor 4: Past Performance Each Offeror’s past performance proposal will be rated as either “Acceptable or Unacceptable” and is based on an assessment of the Offeror’s probability of meeting the minimum past performance solicitation requirements. This assessment is based on the Offeror’s record of relevant and recent past performance information that pertain to the services outlined in the solicitation. Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the effort required by the RFP. Recent efforts are defined as those performed during the last seven years, from the issue date of this RFP. The efforts used for Past Performance shall be the same as those submitted in response to the Experience factor. T The government will also evaluate how well the Offeror performed on the contracts detailed in the Offeror’s proposal.

The Government will focus evaluation on the forms and questionnaires provided by the Offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including data in Government files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance government contracts for same or similar services that are relevant and recent.

Under this factor, the Government may evaluate third party references provided as to each Offeror’s and major subcontractor’s relevant and recent efforts, to verify the probability of successful accomplishment of the required effort.

Offeror’s shall be deemed to satisfy requirements of the Past Performance factor when ALL references providing feedback as to recent and relevant efforts by the Offeror and each of its major subcontractors, indicate that the firms performance was acceptable in all of the areas evaluated by the reference. Marginal ratings in CPARS will be considered unacceptable. Areas

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

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements, and thus contains one or more deficiencies, and/or risk of unsuccessful performance is acceptable. Proposal is not awardable.

where third party reference information will be sought are indicated on the Past Performance Questionnaire attached to this Solicitation. Where a reference indicates that an Offeror’s performance was unacceptable in a particular area, the Government will consider any information provided by the Offeror to explain or rebut any unacceptable performance in a particular area. The burden is on the Offeror to identify in its proposal any and all extenuating circumstances which may bear on the Governments evaluation of unfavorable reference information.

For the past performance factor, Offeror’s will be evaluated in accordance with the chart below.

This rating considers the assessed quality of the relevant/recent efforts gathered.

Past Performance Evaluation Ratings Rating Definition

Acceptable Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the Offeror’s performance is unknown.

Unacceptable Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government has no reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the Offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the Offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, “unknown” shall be considered “Acceptable.”

Factor 5: Cost/Price The resulting award will be a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) and Firm Fixed Price (FFP), Term (Level of Effort) single award ID/IQ contract with the capability to issue…