W91CRB-25-R-0007 Amendment 7.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provi ded herei n, all t erms and condit ions of t he document refere nced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore change d, remai ns unchanged and in ful l force and effect .

15A. NAME AND TIT LE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

ST ANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescr ibed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

See Continuation Page

1. CO NTRACT ID CODE P AGE OF P AGES

J 1 15

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

16C. DAT E SIGNED

BY 23-May-2025

16B. UNITED ST AT ES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contract ing Officer )(Signature of person authorized t o sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, Count y, Stat e and Zip Code) X W91CRB25R0007

X 9B. DAT ED (SEE IT EM 11)

14-Feb-2025

10B. DAT ED (SEE IT EM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITAT ION NO.

11. THIS IT EM ONLY APPLIES T O AMENDMENT S OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered soli cit ati on i s amended as set forth in It em 14. The hour and date specified for rece ipt of Offer is ext ended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowl edge rece ipt of t his amendment pri or to the hour and date specified in the sol ici tat ion or as amended by one of t he fol lowing methods:

(a) By compl eti ng Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copi es of the amendment ; (b) By acknowledgi ng recei pt of thi s a mendment on each copy of t he offer submit ted;

or (c) By s epara te let ter or t elegram whi ch i ncludes a refe rence t o t he s olic ita tion and amendment numbers . FA ILURE OF YOU R A CKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT TH E P LACE D ESIGNATED FOR TH E RECEIPT OF OFFERS P RIO R TO THE HOUR AN D DATE SP ECIFIED MA Y RESULT IN

REJECTIO N OF YOUR OFFER. If by vir tue of thi s amendment you desire t o change an offer already submit ted, s uch c hange ma y be made by t ele gram or let ter, provided each t elegram or l ett er makes reference to the sol ici tat ion and this amendment , and is re ceived prior to the openi ng hour and dat e speci fi ed.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DAT A (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 FORT H IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONT RACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. T HE ABOVE NUMBERED CONT RACT /ORDER IS MODIFIED T O REFLECT THE ADMINIST RATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORT H IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO T HE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. T HIS SUPPLEMENT AL AGREEMENT IS ENT ERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OT HER (Specify type of modification and authorit y)

E. IMPORTANT: Contract or is not, is required to sign this document and return copies t o the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/cont ract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/ MODIFICATION NO. 5. P ROJECT NO .(If appli cable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

23-May-2025

CODE

ACC - APG - W91CRB

BLDG 4310

6515 INTEGRITY COURT

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND MD 21005- 3013

W91CRB 7. AD MINISTERED BY (If other t han item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PU RCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See I tem 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91CRB25R0007

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

CONTINUATION PAGE

This Amendment is for the following:

This Amendment makes changes to the following which include changes to Section M Evaluation. There are no changes to Section L, and as such there is no requirement for re-submission of any Factor/Volume.

While there is no requirement or obligation, Offeror’s may choose to resubmit any Volume/Factor except for the Baseline Hardware “goggle”.

Should an Offeror desire to submit a change to any of the Volume(s)/Factor(s), the Offeror shall adhere to the following: All re-submission require two files. One “mark-up” copy with track changes turned on or with mark ups indicating the changes. One “clean” copy with no track changes or mark ups. Offeror shall Include “mark-up” or “clean” in the file name to which they correspond. Track changes shall be used on MS Word and as possible also on PDF type documents. With regards to tables, excel files for example, use highlights, add comments, etc. to indicate changes. The bottom line is that the government evaluators must be able to clearly identify all changes on the “mark-up” file(s).

The following identifies the parts of Section M that changed. Our current contract writing system does not work well with track changes. As such the parts changed are highlighted yellow in Section M.

3.2 Technical Factors Evaluation Approach

3.2.1 Technical Factor 1

3.2.2 Technical Factor 2

3.2.1 Technical Factor 3

3.4 Past Performance Evaluation Approach

All Offerors shall sign and return Amendment 7 via email to Gerald Simmons and Michael James no later than noon 12:00 PM Eastern Time on May 30th 2025. By signing Amendment 7, the Offeror is also acknowledging previous Amendments 1-6.

Any re-submission of a Factor/Volume shall be submitted via email to Gerald Simmons and Michael James no later than noon 12:00 PM Eastern Time on May 30th 2025.

Addition changes:

FAR Clause for Prospective Price Redetermination has been added The Ordering Max Quantity is 42,885 per previous amendment. A FAR clause needed to be corrected for this quantity. See revised FAR Clauses CLIN 0001 changed the term “Prototype” to “Qualification”

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The order period end date has changed from 29-Feb-2032 to 30-Jun-2032.

The order period start date has changed from 01-Mar-2025 to 01-Jul-2025.

The following have been modified:

CONTRACT AWARD SUMMARY

SPECIAL INSTRUCTION

Absolutely NO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION shall be requested from the awarding Contracting Agency borne from information or requirements contained within this contract.

TYPE OF CONTRACT

1.) The basic contract is issued on an Indefinite Quantity/Indefinite Delivery basis, in accordance with FAR 16.504.

2.) Individual orders will be issued in accordance with FAR 16.505 and, orders will be firm-fixed price.

CONTRACT PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE

1.) The ordering period this contract is seven (7) years.

ORDERING AND MINIMUM LIMITATIONS

1.) Delivery orders will be issued, via e-mail, in accordance with FAR 16.505.

2.) Delivery orders will be issued by contracting officer located at Army Contracting Command-Aberdeen Proving Ground, 6515 Integrity Court, Building 4310, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005.

3.) The MINIMUM guaranteed quantity of supplies to be ordered under this contract is Delivery Order #1 (CLINs 0001 – 0005 and 0008 - 0010).

4.) The MAXIMUM quantity of supplies to be ordered under this contract are 42,885 Bi-NOD systems.

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

CLIN 0001

The CLIN description has changed from BiNOD Prototype Systems to BiNOD Qualification Systems.

SECTION I - CONTRACT CLAUSES

The following have been added by full text:

52.216-5 PRICE REDETERMINATION--PROSPECTIVE (JAN 2022)

(a) General. The unit prices and the total price stated in this contract shall be periodically redetermined in accordance with this clause, except that (1) the prices for supplies delivered and services performed before the first effective date of price redetermination (see paragraph (c) of this clause) shall remain fixed and (2) in no event shall the total amount paid under this contract exceed any ceiling price included in the contract.

(b) Definition. "Costs," as used in this clause, means allowable costs in accordance with Part 31 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) in effect on the date of this contract.

c)Price redetermination periods. For the purpose of price redetermination, performance of this contract is divided into successive periods. The first period shall extend from the date of the contract award to thirty-six (36) months, (see Note(1)) and the second period shall extend for twenty-four (24) months from the end of the last preceding period, except that the parties may agree to vary the length of the final period. The first day of the second and each succeeding period shall be the effective date of price redetermination for that period. At this time only one (1) Price Redetermination for the 2nd period is in effect. Another Price Redetermination may be considered in the future based on circumstances and consideration.

(d) Data submission for Price Redetermination request. (1) No sooner than 6 (six) months prior to the second period beginning, and no later than three (3) months prior to the begning of the second period. [see Note (2)]

The Contractor shall submit with the Price Redetermination Request--

(i) Proposed prices for supplies that may be delivered or services that may be performed in the next succeeding period, and--

(A) An estimate and breakdown of the costs of these supplies or services in the format of Table 15-2, FAR 15.408, or in any other form on which the parties may agree;

(B) Sufficient data to support the accuracy and reliability of this estimate; and

(C) An explanation of the differences between this estimate and the original (or last preceding) estimate for the same supplies or services; and

(ii) A statement of all costs incurred in performing this contract through the end of the 36th month [see Note (3)] before the submission of proposed prices, on Standard Form 1411, Contract Pricing Proposal Cover Sheet (or in any other form on which the parties may agree), with sufficient supporting data to disclose unit costs and cost trends for-

(A) Supplies delivered and services performed; and

(B) Inventories of work in process and undelivered contract supplies on hand (estimated to the extent necessary).

(2) The Contractor shall also submit, to the extent that it becomes available before negotiations on redetermined prices are concluded--

(i) Supplemental statements of costs incurred after the date stated in subdivision (d)(1)(ii) of this section for--

(A) Supplies delivered and services performed; and

(B) Inventories of work in process and undelivered contract supplies on hand (estimated to the extent necessary);

and

(ii) Any other relevant data that the Contracting Officer may reasonably require.

(3) If the Contractor fails to submit the data required by subparagraphs (1) and (2) of this section, within the time specified, the Contracting Officer may suspend payments under this contract until the data are furnished. If it is later determined that the Government has overpaid the Contractor, the Contractor shall repay the excess to the Government immediately. Unless repaid within 30 days after the end of the data submittal period, the amount of the excess shall bear interest, computed from the date the data were due to the date of repayment, at the rate established in accordance with the Interest clause.

(e) Price redetermination. Upon the Contracting Officer's receipt of the data required by paragraph (d) of this section, the Contracting Officer and the Contractor shall promptly negotiate to redetermine fair and reasonable prices for supplies that may be delivered or services that may be performed in the period following the effective date of price redetermination.

(f) Contract modifications. Each negotiated redetermination of prices shall be evidenced by a modification to this contract, signed by the Contractor and the Contracting Officer, stating the redetermined prices that apply during the redetermination period.

(g) Adjusting billing prices. Pending execution of the contract modification (see paragraph (f) of this section), the Contractor shall submit invoices or vouchers in accordance with the billing prices stated in this contract. If at any time it appears that the then-current billing prices will be substantially greater than the estimated final prices, or if the Contractor submits data showing that the redetermined price will be substantially greater than the current billing prices, the parties shall negotiate an appropriate decrease or increase in billing prices. Any billing price adjustment shall be reflected in a contract modification and shall not affect the redetermination of prices under this clause. After the contract modification for price redetermination is executed, the total amount paid or to be paid on all invoices or vouchers shall be adjusted to reflect the agreed-upon prices, and any requested additional payments, refunds, or credits shall be made promptly.

(h) Quarterly limitation on payments statement. This paragraph (h) applies only during periods for which firm prices have not been established.

(1) Within 45 days after the end of the quarter of the Contractor's fiscal year in which a delivery is first made (or services are first performed) and accepted by the Government under this contract, and for each quarter thereafter, the Contractor shall submit to the contract administration office (with a copy to the contracting office and the cognizant contract auditor) a statement, cumulative from the beginning of the contract, showing--

(i) The total contract price of all supplies delivered (or services performed) and accepted by the Government and for which final prices have been established;

(ii) The total costs (estimated to the extent necessary) reasonably incurred for, and properly allocable solely to, the supplies delivered (or services performed) and accepted by the Government and for which final prices have not been established;

(iii) The portion of the total interim profit (used in establishing the initial contract price or agreed to for the purpose of this paragraph (h)) that is in direct proportion to the supplies delivered (or services performed) and accepted by the Government and for which final prices have not been established; and

(iv) The total amount of all invoices or vouchers for supplies delivered (or services performed) and accepted by the Government (including amounts applied or to be applied to liquidate progress payments).

(2) The statement required by subparagraph (1) of this section need not be submitted for any quarter for which either no costs are to be reported under subdivision (1)(ii) of this section, or revised billing prices have been established in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section, and do not exceed the existing contract price, the Contractor's price-redetermination proposal, or a price based on the most recent quarterly statement, whichever is least.

(3) Notwithstanding any provision of this contract authorizing greater payments, if on any quarterly statement the amount under subdivision (1)(iv) of this section exceeds the sum due the Contractor, as computed in accordance with subdivisions (1)(i), (ii), and (iii) of this section, the Contractor shall immediately refund or credit to the Government the amount of this excess. The Contractor may, when appropriate, reduce this refund or credit by the amount of previous refunds or credits affected under this clause. If any portion of the excess has been applied to the liquidation of progress payments, then that portion may, instead of being refunded, be added to the unliquidated progress payment account, consistent with the Progress Payments clause. The Contractor shall provide complete details to support any claimed reductions in refunds.

(4) If the Contractor fails to submit the quarterly statement within 45 days after the end of each quarter and it is later determined that the Government has overpaid the Contractor, the Contractor shall repay the excess to the Government immediately. Unless repaid within 30 days after the end of the statement submittal period, the amount of the excess shall bear interest, computed from the date the quarterly statement was due to the date of repayment, at the rate established in accordance with the Interest clause.

(i) Subcontracts. No subcontract placed under this contract may provide for payment on a cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost basis. The Contractor shall--

(1) Insert in each price redetermination or incentive price revision subcontract the substance of paragraph (h) of this section, and of this paragraph (i), modified to omit mention of the Government and to reflect the position of the Contractor as purchaser and of the subcontractor as vendor, and to omit that part of subparagraph (h)(3) of this section relating to tax credits; and

(2) Include in each cost-reimbursement subcontract a requirement that each lower-tier price redetermination or incentive price revision subcontract contain the substance of paragraph (h) of this section, and this paragraph (i), modified as required by subparagraph (1) of this section.

(j) Disagreements. If the Contractor and the Contracting Officer fail to agree upon redetermined prices for any price redetermination period within 60 days (or within such other period as the parties agree) after the date on which the data required by paragraph (d) of this section are to be submitted, the Contracting Officer shall promptly issue a decision in accordance with the Disputes clause. For the purpose of paragraphs (f), (g), and (h) of this section, and pending final settlement of the disagreement on appeal, by failure to appeal, or by agreement, this decision shall be treated as an executed contract modification. Pending final settlement, price redetermination for subsequent periods, if any, shall continue to be negotiated as provided in this clause.

(k) Termination. If this contract is terminated, prices shall continue to be established in accordance with this clause for (1) completed supplies and services accepted by the Government and (2) those supplies and services not terminated under a partial termination. All other elements of the termination shall be resolved in accordance with other applicable clauses of this contract.

NOTES:

(1) Express in terms of units delivered, or as a date; but in either case the period should end on the last day of a month.

(2) Insert the numbers of days chosen so that the Contractor's submission will be late enough to reflect recent cost experience (taking into account the Contractor's accounting system), but early enough to permit review, audit (if necessary), and negotiation before the start of the prospective period.

(3) Insert "first," except that "second" may be inserted if necessary to achieve compatibility with the Contractor's accounting system.

(End of clause)

52.216-18 ORDERING. (AUG 2020)

(a) Any supplies and services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of delivery orders or task orders by the individuals or activities designated in the Schedule. Such orders may be issued from the effective date of the contract award through the seven year ordering period.

(b) All delivery orders or task orders are subject to the terms and conditions of this contract. In the event of conflict between a delivery order or task order and this contract, the contract shall control.

(c) A delivery order or task order is considered "issued" when--

(1) If sent by mail (includes transmittal by U.S. mail or private delivery service), the Government deposits the order in the mail;

(2) If sent by fax, the Government transmits the order to the Contractor's fax number; or

(3) If sent electronically, the Government either--

(i) Posts a copy of the delivery order or task order to a Government document access system, and notice is sent to the Contractor; or

(ii) Distributes the delivery order or task order via email to the Contractor's email address.

(d) Orders may be issued by methods other than those enumerated in this clause only if authorized in the contract.

52.216-19 ORDER LIMITATIONS (OCT 1995)

(a) Minimum order quantity. When the Government requires supplies or services covered by this contract in an amount of less than 1 BiNOD systems, the Government is not obligated to purchase, nor is the Contractor obligated to furnish, those supplies or services under the contract.

(b) Maximum order. The Contractor is not obligated to honor -

(1) Any order for a BiNOD systems in excess of 42,885 Bi-NOD Systems;

(2) Any order for a combination of BiNOD systems in excess of 42,885 Bi-NOD Systems; or

(3) A series of orders from the same ordering office within 180 days that together call for quantities exceeding the limitation in paragraph (b) (1) or (2) of this section.

(c) If this is a requirements contract (i.e., includes the Requirements clause at subsection 52.216-21 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR)), the Government is not required to order a part of any one requirement from the Contractor if that requirement exceeds the maximum-order limitations in paragraph (b) of this section.

(d) Notwithstanding paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, the Contractor shall honor any order exceeding the maximum order limitations in paragraph (b), unless that order (or orders) is returned to the ordering office within 30 days after issuance, with written notice stating the Contractor's intent not to ship the item (or items) called for and the reasons. Upon receiving this notice, the Government may acquire the supplies or services from another source.

SECTION J - LIST OF DOCUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND OTHER ATTACHMENTS

ATTACHMENTS

The following are attached hereto and hereby incorporated by reference:

Changes are in red text.

1. Statement of Work Rev (11Mar2025)

2. Performance Specification Rev (24Feb2025)

3. Compliance Growth Matrix (27Jan2025)

4. DD-254 (25Sep2024)

5. CLIN Structure_Step Ladder Pricing (25Feb2025)

6. GFP Attachment

7. CDRLs A001 – E002 (27 total)

8. Question and Answer Template (Amendment 5) 13Mar2025

9. Past Performance Questionaire (13MAR2025)

10. Small Business Participation Commitment Document (6Mar2025)

11. Drawing A3297308

SECTION M - EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

EVALUATION

3. Evaluation (Section M)

Award will be based on the best overall (i.e., best value) proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the 6 evaluation factors: Technical Factor 1 (Cost Reduction Strategy), Technical Factor 2 (Technical Maturity), Technical Factor 3 (Technical Program Management), Cost/Price, Past Performance, and Small Business. The Government may award more than one contract. A best value trade-off analysis will be conducted between the Technical Factors 1,2, 3 and Cost/Price.

Offerors are strongly cautioned that an award may not necessarily be made to the Offeror with the lowest cost or the Offeror with the highest technical rating.

Basis of Award:

Within the Technical Factors 1, 2 and 3, Factor 1 is the most important factor and is significantly more important than Factor 2. Factor 2 is significantly more important than Factor 3. Technical Factor 1 is of equal importance with Factor 4 Cost/Price. The Government will evaluate the Past Performance and Small Business Factors (Factors 5 & 6) as Acceptable or Unacceptable. The non-cost factors combined are more important than the Cost/Price factor.

To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for all Technical Factors 1 to 3 (and each subfactor), Past Performance, and Small Business. An evaluation of Unacceptable for any of the subfactors will cause the entire Factor to be rated as Unacceptable. An evaluation rating of Unacceptable at the Factor level will cause the entire proposal to be evaluated as Unacceptable, and thus ineligible for award.

Additionally, to be considered for award, the Offeror(s) must be deemed responsible IAW FAR Part 9 – Contractor Qualifications.

It is the Government’s intent to make award without discussions, in accordance with FAR 52.215-1.

Therefore, Offerors should provide their best terms from a price and technical standpoint in their initial proposal. 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.

3.1 Factors & Sub-factors to Be Evaluated

Award will be made to the Offeror whose proposal provides the best value to the Government based on an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below.

Evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal will address each Technical Factor’s subfactors. A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the Technical Factors Evaluation Approach in Paragraph 3.2 below.

The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal.

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL, System Cost Reduction Strategy

Subfactor 1 – Kit Price Reduction Strategy

Subfactor 2 – Sustainment Cost Reduction Strategy

Subfactor 3 – Cost Neutral Soldier Burden Reduction Strategy

FACTOR 2: TECHNICAL, Technical Maturity

Subfactor 1 – Baseline Hardware System Maturity

Subfactor 2 – BINOD Performance Compliance Roadmap

FACTOR 3: TECHNICAL, Technical Program Management

Subfactor 1 – Schedule

Subfactor 2 – Facilities and Resources

FACTOR 4: COST/PRICE

FACTOR 5: PAST PERFORMANCE

FACTOR 6: SMALL BUSINESS

3.2 Technical Factors Evaluation Approach

A team consisting of Government personnel, augmented by System Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) contractor support personnel in an advisory role, will evaluate all proposals. The SSEB will evaluate the proposals to determine whether each requirement of the solicitation has been addressed IAW Section L of the solicitation. The contractor support personnel advising the SSEB will be from CACI.

The evaluators will consider the following criteria when evaluating each Technical subfactor:

Understanding of the Problem: The SSEB will evaluate the extent to which the proposal demonstrates a clear understanding of all the requirements and the technical features involved in solving the problems and meeting the requirements. The SSEB will also evaluate the extent to which uncertainties/ risks are identified and resolutions/mitigations proposed.

Feasibility of Approach: The SSEB will evaluate the extent to which the proposed approach to meeting the solicitation requirements is feasible. The SSEB will evaluate the proposal to determine the extent to which the proposed approach is workable and the end results achievable.

Completeness: The SSEB will evaluate the extent to which the proposal is complete and addresses the solicitation requirements. The SSEB will evaluate the proposal to determine whether the Offeror's methods and approach have adequately considered, defined, and satisfied the solicitation requirements. The SSEB will also evaluate the extent to which the Offeror's performance claims, and other assertions are substantiated.

Each subfactor will be evaluated using either (1) the Adjectival ratings in the Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method table (i.e., O, G, A, M, U) or (2) the ratings in the Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating table (i.e., A, U). The ratings method for each subfactor is specified below. Ratings will be assigned at the subfactor level, and then rolled up to an overall Technical Factor rating for each Technical Factor.

The following definitions will be used:

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.

STRENGTH: An aspect of an offeror's proposal with merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the advantage of the Government during contract performance.

SIGNIFICANT STRENGTH: An aspect of an Offeror’s proposal with appreciable merit or will exceed specified performance or capability requirements to the considerable advantage of the Government during contract performance.

WEAKNESS: A flaw in the proposal that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

SIGNIFICANT WEAKNESS: A flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Combined Technical/Risk Rating Method Color

Rating Adjectival

Rating

Description

Blue 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.

Purple 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.

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.

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

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

The combined technical/risk rating includes consideration of risk in conjunction with the significant strengths, strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating Method

Rating Description

Acceptable Proposal meets the requirements of the solicitation

Unacceptable Proposal does not meet the requirements of the solicitation

For the Acceptable/Unacceptable rating method, no strengths or significant strengths will be assigned. A deficiency will result in an Unacceptable rating. A combination of significant weaknesses that increase the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level may be considered a deficiency.

The rating method for each subfactor is as follows:

3.2.1 Technical Factor 1: System Cost Reduction Strategy

Subfactor 1: Kit Price Reduction Strategy / Rating Method – Adjectival (O, G, A, M, U)

The Offeror’s Kit Price Reduction Strategy will be evaluated using the Combined Technical/Risk Rating method.

Subfactor 2: Sustainment Cost Reduction Strategy / (A, U)

The Offeror’s Sustainment Cost Reduction Strategy will be evaluated using the Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable Rating method.

Subfactor 3: Cost Neutral Soldier Burden Reduction Strategy / (A, U)

The Offeror’s Cost Neutral Soldier Burden Reduction Strategy will be evaluated using the Technical

3.2.2 Technical Factor 2: Technical Maturity

Subfactor 1: Baseline Hardware System Maturity / (A, U)

The Offeror’s Baseline Hardware System Maturity will be evaluated using the Technical

Subfactor 2: BiNOD Performance Specification Compliance Roadmap / (O, G, A, M, U)

The Offeror’s BiNOD Performance Compliance Roadmap will be evaluated using the Combined Technical/Risk Rating method.

3.2.3 Technical Factor 3: Technical Program Management

Subfactor 1: Schedule (O, G, A, M, U)

The Offeror’s BiNOD Schedule will be evaluated using the Combined Technical/Risk Rating method.

Subfactor 2: Facilities and Resources / (A, U)

The Offeror’s Facilities and Resources will be evaluated using the Technical Acceptable/Unacceptable method.

3.3 Factor 4 – Cost/Price Evaluation

Adequate competition is anticipated in response to this solicitation. Therefore, IAW FAR 15.403- (1)(b)(1) certified cost or pricing data may not be required. Furthermore, IAW FAR 15.403-3, data other than certified cost or pricing data is required, and additional information other than what’s stated above maybe be requested.

If it is determined by the Contracting Officer that adequate competition does not exist, the Government reserves the right to request and evaluate certified cost or pricing data in a format prescribed in FAR 15.408, Table 15-2 prior to award. In accordance with FAR 15.403-5(b), the Contracting Officer may specify the format of cost or pricing data or data other than certified cost or pricing data.

The Offeror’s Cost/Price will be evaluated based on the following:

i. The extent to which Offeror complied with the Cost/Price information requested in accordance with paragraph 2.5.

ii. The analytical techniques and procedures described in FAR 15.404 may be used, singly or in combination with others, to ensure that the final price is fair and reasonable

iii. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1, the analytical techniques and procedures used in the price analysis will be determined by the Contracting Officer.

iv. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(b), the Offeror’s proposed CLIN prices, will be evaluated for price fairness and reasonableness.

v. In accordance with FAR 15.404-1(g), proposed unit prices will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing.

Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total evaluated price, the price of one or more line items is significantly over or understated as indicated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques. Offerors shall use sufficient detail and provide documentation to explain any potential lack of balance. An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government.

No adjectival ratings shall be utilized for evaluating cost or price. The Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be the total CLINS 0001 – 0016. A weighted average method will be utilized by quantity ranges and Program Year for the BiNOD system production price. See Attachment 5 – BiNOD CLIN Structure Step Ladder Pricing.

This attachment will be incorporated into any resulting award.

Normalized CLINs 0017 - 0019: The Government has provided normalized amounts for these CLINs, which, for the purposes of this solicitation, will not be evaluated during solicitation evaluation, but will be reviewed for price fair and reasonableness after award of a base contract and issuance of individual Delivery Orders.

3.4 Factor 5 – Past Performance Evaluation Approach

The SSEB will evaluate the Offeror’s probability of meeting the solicitation requirements based on the Offeror’s record of recent and relevant past performance information. The SSEB will use this information to determine an acceptable or unacceptable rating for each Offeror. Past performance will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 15.304(c)(3).

Recent and Relevant:

The SSEB will evaluate the Past Performance information to determine that the Offeror information is Recent and Relevant as defined below:

*See note regarding a neutral rating. The Government will categorize contracts as either relevant or not relevant as defined below:

Recent: The past performance information includes a minimum of six months of contract performance within the past five (5) years from the proposal due date.

Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved development and/or production contracts with similar scope, magnitude of effort, and complexities to those required by this solicitation.

Not Relevant: Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope, magnitude of effort, and complexities to those required by this solicitation.

Based on an evaluation of the Past Performance information that has been determined to be Recent and Relevant, the SSEB will determine an overall past performance rating of Acceptable or Unacceptable.

NOTE: 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 (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

Acceptable: Based on the Offeror’s recent/relevant performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will successfully perform the required effort, or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. (See note above).

Unacceptable: Based on the Offeror’s performance record, the Government does not have a reasonable expectation that the Offeror will be able to successfully perform the required effort.

3.5 Factor 6 – Small Business

In accordance with DFARS 215.304(c)(i), the Government will evaluate whether the Offeror’s (both small businesses and other than small businesses) proposed Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) meets the below small business objectives and includes documentation to support how the Offeror will meet their proposed Small Business participation commitment. The Offeror’s Small Business Participation will be rated using Table 4 below. The Government may use websites or databases such as Dynamic Small Business Search (DSBS) or sam.gov to verify small business status. A rating of “Acceptable” must be achieved to be considered for award.

The Government will evaluate the following:

• Whether or not, in accordance with, FAR Part 19, Small Business Concerns (SBC) are specifically identified by name in each category in the Offeror’s SBPCD proposal and the Offeror’s commitment to SBCs.

• The type, variety, and complexity of work SBCs are proposed to perform IAW the work supporting Statement of Work (SOW).

• Whether or not the Offeror demonstrates a substantive commitment to SBCs, such as letters of commitment, Joint Ventures, mentor/protégé agreements, or other demonstrations of commitment. Binding commitments will become enforceable/contractual requirements.

• Whether or not the Offeror’s proposed SBC participation meets the minimum quantitative requirement (MQR) (small business objective) of 13% of the work based on the total contract ceiling; Small Disadvantaged Business

{0.50%} Women-Owned Small Business {0.50%} HUBZone Small Business: {0.50%}and Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business {0.50%}.

Failure to meet a significant portion of the MQR may result in the Offeror being unacceptable for this factor and therefore ineligible for award. Offerors shall include a narrative describing a plan to achieve the stated goals, if any goals can not be meet at the time of proposal submission.

• The Offeror’s detailed explanations/documentation supporting their proposed quantitative participation.

• The Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan, when it is required. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is required (FAR 52.219-9) for Other Than Small Businesses (OTSB) offerors ONLY (i.e., Large Businesses). OTSB Firms must submit acceptable subcontracting plans in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 to be eligible for award. Any Small Business Subcontracting Plan submitted shall be relevant to the SBPCD and Small Business Participation.

NOTE: Subcontracting plans will only be reviewed for acceptability for the Offeror deemed to be apparent awardee.

Small Business Participation Rating Definitions are listed in Table 4 below.

Rating Description Acceptable Proposal indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Unacceptable Proposals does not meet small business objective.

(End of Summary of Changes)