W91QV1-23-R-0002 P0001 7-19-23 Amended Solicitation 7-20-2023.pdf

0011755365

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 as follow s:

(A) Provide Government Responses to Industry Questions received.

(B) All other terms and conditions remain unchanged.

POC: Cheryl Beaty, cheryl.d.beaty.civ@army.mil.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 45

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 20-Jul-2023

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 W91QV123R0002

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

29-Jun-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 is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

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

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

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

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

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

20-Jul-2023

CODE

MICC-FORT BELVOIR

9410 JACKSON LOOP

BLDG. 1425

FORT BELVOIR VA 22060-5116

W91QV1 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

W91QV123R0002

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been added by full text:

RESPONSES TO INDUSTRY QUESTION

1. Reference RFP Section Basis for Award (Section M), Paragraph(s), Page(s) 111 Please clarify if there is a typo in the sentence structure “The Small Business Subcontracting Plan Factor is significantly more important than the Pricing Factor. than the Past Performance and Small Business Participation factors combined.”

Government Response: The Past Performance Factor is significantly more important than the Small Business Subcontracting Plan Factor. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan Factor is significantly more important than the Pricing Factor. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than “Acceptable” must be achieved for all the Technical Capability Factors (to include all sub-factors). All non-price factors combined are significantly more important than price.

2. Reference RFP Section Technical Exhibit 3, Estimated Workload, Paragraph(s), Page(s) 103.

Please clarify the totally number of hours required for the 9 TERPS Support Specialist – the current figure states 15,040 hours.

Government Response: The correct number of hours is 28,200 for Technical Exhibit 3.

3. Reference RFP Section Instructions to Offerors- Section L, Paragraph 5, Page(s) 110-111.

As all sections of the RFP are not labeled, what is the Government’s intent for Offeror’s to complete Section G and Section K? Will a separate file be provided?

Government Response: Offeror’s shall complete Section G. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission. A separate file will not be provided.

The following have been modified:

BASIS FOR AWARD - M

BASIS FOR AWARD (Section M)

The award will be made based on the best overall proposal that is determined to be the most beneficial to the Government, with appropriate consideration given to the four evaluation factors: Technical, Past Performance, Cost/Price, and Small Business Participation). The Technical Capability Factor is significantly more important than the Past Performance Factor. Within Factor 1 (Technical Capability), Sub-Factor a (Technical Approach/Experience) and Sub-Factor b (Key Personnel) are approximately equal. The Past Performance Factor is significantly more important than the Small Business Subcontracting Plan Factor. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan Factor is significantly more important than the Pricing Factor. To receive consideration for award, a rating of no less than

“Acceptable” must be achieved for all the Technical Capability Factors (to include all sub-factors). All non-price factors combined are significantly more important than price. Additionally, any other than small business offeror must have an acceptable Small Business Subcontracting Plan to receive an award in accordance with FAR 19.702(a).

Offerors will be cautioned that the award may not necessarily be made to the lowest cost offered. NOTE: ALL NON-PRICED FACTORS COMBINED ARE combined are significantly more important than price. THAN

COST/PRICE.

FACTORS AND SUBFACTORS TO BE EVALUATED

The following evaluation factors and subfactors will be used to evaluate each proposal: Award will be made to the offeror whose proposal is most advantageous to the Government based upon an integrated assessment of the evaluation factors and subfactors described below. The Government reserves the right to make award based upon the Cost/Price factor if the Technical, Past Performance, and Small Business Participation evaluation results of all the offerors’ proposals are substantially the same.

Factor 1: The Technical factor is further divided into the following subfactors:

a. Technical Approach/Experience

b. Key Personnel

Evaluation of the offeror’s proposal shall address each Technical subfactor as it applies to the Performance Work Statement (PWS). A detailed explanation of the criteria for the evaluation is set forth in the “Evaluation Approach”, Paragraph C of this section. During evaluation of each proposal, the Government will assign each Technical subfactor an adjectival rating and write a narrative evaluation reflecting the identified findings.

Factor 2: Past Performance: Each offeror’s past performance will be reviewed to determine relevancy and confidence assessment.

Factor 3. Small Business Participation: Each offeror’s level and degree of commitment to utilize small business in execution of the requirement will be evaluated.

Factor 4: Cost/Price: The resulting award will be a Firm Fixed Price Contract. C Price reasonableness will be utilized in the evaluation of the Firm-Fixed Price effort.

EVALUATION APPROACH

All proposals shall be evaluated by the Source Selection Team (SST).

1. The overarching evaluation approach for all factors and subfactors is as follows:

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.

2. The Technical factor is divided into the following subfactors:

Subfactor 1: This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s proposed Technical Approach/Experience for the basic contract period and all option years. Marginal levels of overall Technical Approach/Experience could indicate a lack of understanding concerning mission requirements and may result in the entire proposal receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range. The evaluation will focus on the offerors’:

(i) Demonstrated experience working policies and capabilities pertaining to Army aviation, airspace, Army airfields and heliports infrastructure criteria and standards, Air Traffic Control, and UAS requirements in the National Airspace System.

(ii) Understanding and in-depth knowledge of DoD, Federal Aviation Administration, (FAA) international civil aviation rules, and other applicable laws, regulations, instructions, and directives as they pertain to airfield standards and management, air traffic control, aircraft operations, and instrument flight procedures.

(iii) Demonstrated understanding of DOD/Army programming, budgeting and execution processes and the

Management Decision Package (MDEP) program related to specific Army aviation, airfield and ATC programs.

(iv) Demonstrated ability working HQDA-level aviation, airfield, and/or ATC resource programs and must have a clear understanding of Army Mission, Organization, and Structure as well as demonstrated ability to represent General Officer or Senior Executive Service resource requirements.

(v) Demonstrated ability to plan, organize, control, and integrate technical work involving the development and maintenance of Army instrument flight procedures; and

(vi) Demonstrated ability to perform U.S. and foreign instrument procedures design criteria and development, validation and evaluation of procedures, processes, techniques, models and/or methodologies used to develop complex instrument flight procedures

Subfactor 2: Key Personnel

The Offeror shall submit a Commitment letter with resumes of Key Personnel as identified in Section 1.5.12 and Section 1.5.19 including 1.5.19.1 and 1.5.19.2) of the PWS. Resumes must be clearly written, and specifically state qualifications as related to is solicitation. These candidates must meet posted education and experience levels as outlined within the PWS. Offeror must provide a narrative describing the qualifications/experience of their Key Personnel in addition to submitted resumes. The proposal shall include a matrix of the company’s proposed Key Personnel mapped to the appropriate PWS tasking that supports the proposed labor category. The Offeror shall submit a Key Personnel project staffing plan, which includes recruitment, retention, placement, qualifications, exchangeable skill-sets, and estimated hours of Key Personnel.

In accordance with the Army Source Selection Supplement (AS3), Section 3.1, the Army methodology for evaluating Technical Approach and Related Risk is the Combined Technical/Risk Rating, (see Table 1 below). This methodology considers risk, in conjunction with the strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses, uncertainties, and deficiencies in determining technical ratings.

TABLE 1 – 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 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.

Cost/Price Factor. Offerors shall not submit a price for the potential six-month extension of services period. The Government may choose to exercise the extension of services at the end of any performance period (base or option periods), utilizing the rates of that performance period. Price will be evaluated for completeness and reasonableness using the techniques in FAR 15.404-1(b) (2). No adjectival ratings will be used to evaluate Price. Price will not be scored or rated. Evaluation of price will be performed using one or more of the price analysis techniques in FAR 15.404-1(b). In as much as the best value offer will be determined through tradeoff analysis, the Government is not bound to award to the lowest evaluated price. The techniques and procedures described under FAR 15.404-1 will be the primary means of assessing price reasonableness. Reasonableness is defined as follows: The Government will evaluate the price reasonableness of the Offeror's proposed price in accordance with the definition in FAR 31.201-3.

A price is reasonable if, in its nature and amount, it does not exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person in the conduct of a competitive business. The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by adding the total evaluated price, which is the price of all CLINS, including Options, as well as adding 1/2 of the last option period price (to evaluate the potential -8 extension period). Evaluation of options will not obligate the Government to exercise the option(s).

a. FFP Evaluation. For a price to be fair and reasonable, it must represent a price to the Government that a prudent person would pay in the conduct of competitive business. The Offeror’s proposed fixed-price CLINs may be evaluated, using one or more of the techniques described in FAR 15.404-1 in order to determine if they are fair and reasonable.

c. Overall Cost/Price Proposal Evaluation: The overall Cost/Price proposal will be evaluated for the following:

1) Compliance: The Cost/Price proposal submitted by the Offeror will be evaluated for compliance based upon the submission requirements contained in the Section L-X Cost/Price instructions. The Offeror shall provide a pricing narrative that should address, at minimum, the price rationale to include wages and benefits, calculations of fringe cost, ODCs, indirect rates and price breakdown for each CLIN identified in the solicitation.

2) Unbalanced Pricing: The Offeror’s overall Cost/Price proposal will be evaluated for unbalanced pricing as defined in FAR 15.404-1(g). An offer may be rejected if the contracting officer determines that the lack of balance poses an unacceptable risk to the Government (see FAR 15.404-1(g)(1) through FAR 15.404-1(g)(3)).

3) Errors: The Offeror’s Cost/Price proposal will be reviewed for errors. The Offeror may be given an opportunity to clarify certain aspects of their proposal at the sole discretion of the Contracting Officer.

4) Business Systems: The Government will verify the adequacy of the Offeror’s business systems.

5) Total Evaluated Price: The Total Evaluated Price consists of summing the Offeror’s proposed fixed-price and the probable cost amount for the cost-reimbursement

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/or risk of unsuccessful performance is unacceptable.

Proposal is not awardable.

To evaluate the option to extend services (FAR 52.217-8) CLINs, one-half of the probable cost for the last year of the performance period under shall be added to the Total Evaluated Price.

The Total Evaluated Price will only include the proposed cost flast option (Option Year X) for the Transition-Out CLINs.

Past Performance Factor. The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the PWS.

a. Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D.

b. The Government will focus its inquiries on the offeror’s (and major subcontractor’s) record of performance as it relates to all solicitation requirements, including cost, schedule, performance, and management of subcontractors.

For the purposes of this SSP/Requirement, major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform 50%i percent or more of the proposed effort. A significant achievement, problem, or lack of relevant data in any element of the work can become an important consideration in the evaluation process.

Therefore, offerors will be reminded to include the most recent and relevant efforts (within the past three years) in their proposal. Absent any recent and relevant past performance history or when the performance record is so sparse that no meaningful confidence assessment rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be assigned a “neutral confidence rating” and its proposal will not be evaluated either favorably or unfavorably on past performance. The Government may use data 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 under Federal, State or Local government or commercial contracts for same or similar services as compared to the NAICS 488111.

c. Offerors shall submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past five (5) years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this RFP. The Government may consider a wide array of information from a variety of sources but is not compelled to rely on all of the information available.

d. The past performance factor considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract requirements. There are three aspects to the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and quality.

(i) RECENCY: The first aspect is to evaluate the recency of the offeror’s past performance. Recency is generally expressed as a time period during which past performance references are considered relevant and is critical to establishing the relevancy of past performance information.

(ii) RELEVANCY: The second aspect is to determine how relevant a recent effort accomplished by the offeror is to the effort to be acquired through the source selection. Relevancy is not separately rated; however, the following criteria (see Table 2) will be used to establish what is relevant which shall include similarity of service/support, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and degree of subcontract/teaming.

Table 2 - Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition

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.

(iii) QUALITY ASSESSMENT: The third aspect assesses the overall quality of the offeror’s past performance. Documented results from Past Performance Questionnaires, interviews, CPARS, and other sources form the support and basis for this assessment.

e. Performance Confidence Assessment: Utilize the Performance Confidence Assessment (see Table 3 below) to select the most appropriate confidence level for each Offeror. Ensure the rationale for the conclusions reached are included.

TABLE 3 - Performance Confidence Assessments

Rating Definition

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 facto 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.

5. Small Business Participation Factor. IAW Defense FAR Supplement (DFARS) 215.304(c)(i), the extent to which offeror’s identify and commit to small business performance of the contract shall be evaluated.

Offerors shall submit a Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) which specifies the offeror’s level and degree of commitment to small business utilization/participation in performance of this requirement. An SBPCD is required from all offerors, including companies with commercial plans and comprehensive subcontracting plans. The Government will evaluate the following:

All prime offerors, including small businesses, submitting a proposal are required to meet or exceed the Minimum Quantitative Requirement(s) (MQRs) relative to the total contract value as follows:

Small Business (SB) _____%

Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB) _____%

Women Owned Small Business (WOSB) ____%

HUBZone-Certified Small Business (HUBZone) ____%

Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB) ____%

Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) ____%

Small business utilization metrics/performance requirements are specified in the Performance Requirements Summary of the Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan.

E. DISCUSSIONS

1. GENERAL INFORMATION. In accordance with FAR 15.306(d), discussion sessions with each offeror may be held. Should discussions take place, all offerors in the competitive range will be allowed a minimum of (5) five calendar days to submit Final Proposal Revisions.

2. DISCUSSION SCHEDULING. If discussions are conducted, the Contracting Officer will schedule the discussion sessions, and each offeror will be notified of the time and place at least (5) five business days prior to their discussion session. Appropriate security clearances should be provided by the offerors in sufficient time to process the requests. The Contracting Officer will provide additional instructions with the notification. The discussion sessions will take place at a facility of the Government’s choosing in the Fort Belvoir, Virginia area.

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS

INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS - L

Proposal Submission and Design Package Requirements

1. The Government intends to make a single Firm-Fixed Price award as a result of the solicitation. The Government may reject any offer not substantially in compliance with the terms and conditions of the requirement. Proposals submitted in response to this solicitation shall include the following identified volumes: Cover Letter, Technical Capability, Past Performance, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, and Pricing. An Offeror's failure to provide in its proposal the information specified below might result in that proposal not being considered by the Government for award. The proposal shall represent the Offeror's best effort to respond to the solicitation.

TABLE 4 – Small Business Ratings

Color Rating Description

Blue Outstanding Proposal indicates an exceptional approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Purple Good Proposal indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

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

Yellow Marginal Proposal has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the small business objectives.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet small business objectives.

All supporting data required for development of the proposal shall be included or summarized in each proposal within the stated page limitations. Mere statements that the Offeror understands the requirements and can or will comply with the requirements without supporting information are not acceptable and may be reason for determining a proposal to be unacceptable. The Government is not responsible for evaluating aspects of the proposal that are not in the appropriate volume.

In order to maximize efficiency and minimize the effort involved in the proposal evaluation process, the Offeror must comply with the following instructions for proposal format and content including applicable page limitations and number of volumes. If the proposal does not comply with these instructions, the Offeror may be considered non-responsive and ineligible for award. The proposal must be clear, coherent and prepared in sufficient detail for effective evaluation of the Offeror’s proposal against the evaluation criteria.

Proposal that contain exceptions, qualifications, conditions, assumptions or any other deviations from the solicitation may be rejected by the Government and considered ineligible for award.

NOTE: The Government intends to make contract award without discussions. During the evaluation process, the Government may, at its discretion enter into clarifications or communications as needed. The Government need not enter into communications or clarifications with all Offerors. In evaluating the proposals, the Government may establish a Competitive Range to reduce the Offerors participating in the competition to only those Offerors most likely to receive the award. Any Offeror eliminated from further consideration will be notified officially in writing.

2. Submittal of Solicitation Questions. Questions, concerns, clarifications, and any other communications regarding this solicitation shall be made via email to the primary Contract Specialist, Cheryl Beaty, Cheryl.d.beaty.civ@army.mil and Contracting Officer, Gwendolyn Bridges, gwendolyn.bridges5.civ@army.mil

3. DUE DATE FOR QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS REGARDING THIS RFP IS 12 July 2023 at 10:00

AM EASTERN STANDARD TIME.

When submitting questions and comments, please refer to the specific text of the RFP in the Following format:

Subject: W91QV1-23-R-0002

Reference RFP Section ______, Paragraph(s) _____, Page(s) _____.

All questions shall be submitted in writing by email to POC’s Contract Specialist, Cheryl Beaty, Cheryl.d.beaty.civ@army.mil and Contracting Officer, Gwendolyn Bridges, gwendolyn.bridges5.civ@army.mil, prior to 10:00 AM, 12 July 2023 and will be answered via amendment and provided to all Offeror’s via the Government Point of Entry, System for Award Management (SAM) at https://sam.gov and questions will not be attributed to the submitting Offerors.

4. Proposal Submission. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted, using the most current amendment to the solicitation, as instructed herein. Late proposals may be rejected from consideration IAW FAR 15.208. It is the Offeror’s responsibility to confirm the Government has received the proposal. All proposals shall be delivered to and labeled as follows:

a. Each volume shall be submitted electronically by email. Any portion of the proposal that is changed

(as a result of negotiations or proposal revisions) should be annotated and dated. Each volume shall be clearly labeled with its Title and a copy number (e.g., copy 1 of 5).

b. Each paragraph should be single spaced and 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 produced in landscape mode.

c. The following volumes of material shall be submitted:

Volume Title Digital Copies Maximum Pages

I Technical 2 50

II Past Performance 2 25

III Small Business Participation 2 25

IV Cost/Price 2 No page limit

V Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents, and Certifications / Representations

2 No page limit

NOTE: Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government.

THE DUE DATE FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSIONS IS 31 July 2023 AT 10:00 AM EASTERN STANDARD

TIME.

5. Discussions. It is the Government’s intent to award without discussions. Initial proposal submission shall contain the offeror’s best technical proposal and prices. If discussions become necessary, the Government reserves the right to conduct them. If the Government enters into discussions, it will be with those Offerors considered to be within the Competitive Range. During the negotiation process all proposal revisions must be submitted electronically in MS Word track changes format and accompanied by a complete electronic resubmission of the electronic file.

Proposals shall be submitted electronically to:

Contract Specialist: Cheryl Beaty Cheryl.d.beaty.civ@army.mil Contracting Officer: Gwendolyn Bridges, gwendolyn.bridges5.civ@army.mil

Mission and Installation Contracting Command 9410 Jackson Loop Fort Belvoir, VA 22060

a. Format. The submission shall be clearly indexed and logically assembled. Each volume shall be appropriately numbered and clearly identified with the date and solicitation number in the header and/or footer and shall begin at the top of each page. (.doc) files shall use the following pages 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”

The following additional restrictions apply: 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 not less than 8-point and may be landscape.

Those pages that exceed the page counts for each volume or attachment will not be evaluated.

d. Content Requirements. All information shall be confined to the appropriate volume. The offeror shall confine submissions to essential matters, sufficient to define the proposal details, in a concise manner, to permit a complete and accurate evaluation of each proposal. Each volume of the proposal shall consist of 1) a Cover Sheet that identifies the Volume 2) Table of Contents 3) Summary Section and 4) the Narrative discussion. The Summary Section shall contain a brief abstract of the volume. Proprietary information shall be clearly marked.

The following shall be included in the Narrative discussion:

(i) VOLUME I – Technical. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

This volume shall consist of three parts which include the Executive Summary (Part 1), a Cross Reference Matrix (Part 2) and the Technical Proposal (Part 3) as detailed below. Part 1 will not be evaluated, and no additional credit will be given.

Part 1 – Executive Summary.

The Executive Summary shall contain a synopsis of the Offeror's technical approach to satisfying the requirements of the solicitation and summarizing the key issues and how the Offeror plans to address them. No Pricing data shall be included in the Executive Summary. The Executive Summary need not be revised as a result of discussions and proposal revisions.

Part 2 – Cross-Reference Matrix.

The Offeror shall provide a matrix that will direct Government evaluators to the specific areas of the Technical Proposal that address each task/requirement of the PWS. The Cross-Reference Matrix shows proposal completeness by mapping the PWS’s paragraphs, requirements and tasks to the Offeror’s proposal’s applicable part, section, paragraph and page number. The Cross-Reference Matrix shall contain a “PWS-to-proposal” matrix that indicates the PWS paragraph that is being addressed by the indicated proposal paragraph.

Part 3 – Technical Proposal.

The Offeror shall demonstrate its knowledge and understanding of the requirements outlined in the PWS. The technical approach shall include a logical sequence of tasks that will be performed to accomplish the requirements, how all tasks, standards, and deliverables outlined in the PWS will be achieved. The Offeror shall identify and describe the specific techniques and steps that will be applied during the accomplishment of each requirement of the PWS. No pricing information is to be provided in the Technical Proposal

(1) Section 1 – Subfactor 1. Technical Approach/Experience This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s. The Offeror will provide information to substantiate the following:

Technical Approach/Experience. This approach shall convey to the Government the ability to perform the services as required by the solicitation, that the Offeror is capable and possesses the technical expertise, has adequate resources, and is able to plan, organize and use resources in a coordinated and timely manner in order to achieve the technical requirements and has identified and mitigated potential risks. Offeror’s proposal shall indicate a comprehensive approach, a detailed work plan as to how each task will be accomplished and shall demonstrate a thorough understanding of the PWS. Additionally, the Offeror shall provide a narrative of its corporate experience in the areas identified in the evaluation criteria for Sub-Factor a.

(2) Section 2 – Subfactor 2. This subfactor evaluates the offeror’s Key Personnel. The offeror will provide information to substantiate the following: The Offeror shall submit a Commitment letter with resumes of Key Personnel as identified in Section 1.5.19 (including 1.5.19.1 and 1.5.19.2) of the PWS. Resumes must be clearly written, and specifically state qualifications as related to this solicitation. These candidates must meet posted education and experience levels as outlined within the PWS. Offeror must provide a narrative describing the qualifications/experience of their Key Personnel in addition to submitted resumes. The proposal shall include a matrix of the company’s proposed Key Personnel mapped to the appropriate PWS tasking that supports the proposed labor category. The Offeror shall submit a Key Personnel project staffing plan, which includes recruitment, retention, placement, qualifications, exchangeable skill sets, and estimated hours of Key Personnel.

(ii) VOLUME II – Past Performance. This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. This volume shall not exceed 25 pages plus five pages for each major subcontractor, excluding Past

Performance Questionnaire Forms. Offerors shall submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past three years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the effort (as compared to North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 488111 required by the RFP. 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/Contracting Officer’s Representative 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. Offerors 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 requirement of this RFP.

(a) For any contracts that did not/do not meet original schedule or technical performance requirements, provide a brief explanation of the reason(s) for the shortcomings and any corrective action(s) taken to avoid recurrence. The offerors shall list each time the delivery schedule was revised and provide an explanation of why the revision was necessary. All Requests for Deviation and Requests for Waiver shall be addressed with respect to causes and corrective actions. The offerors shall also provide copy of any Cure Notices or Show Cause Letters received on each contract listed and a description of any corrective action implemented by the offeror or proposed subcontractor. The offerors shall indicate if any of the contracts listed were terminated and the type and reasons for the termination.

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

(3) Section 3 – Subcontracts. Offerors 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 50% of the total proposed cost/price. 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) Section 4 – New Corporate Entities. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its offices and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above. Letters of Commitment shall be included in the proposal for these employees in order to be considered.

(5) 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 Cheryl Beaty, Contract Specialist, at cheryl.d.beaty.civ@army.mil and Gwendolyn Bridges, Contracting Officer, at gwendolyn.bridges5.civ@army.mil The offeror shall e-mail to the Contracting Officer a list of all the POCs 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

(6) Submissions. Offerors are discouraged from providing points of contact with another contractors’ facility, i.e., in case an offeror (or one of his/her team members) is in a subcontract with another contractor who has submitted a proposal on the same requirement. Offerors shall provide and submit the prime contract number and all Governmental agency POCs in lieu of subcontract numbers or prime contract POCs in situations as described above.

responding to such negative information. Offerors with no prior contracts containing FAR 52.219-8 shall certify the same.

(7) Small Business Participation Past Performance. All Offerors shall submit information substantiating the Offerors’ past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, maximizing opportunities for U.S. small business subcontractors. Offerors shall also provide a statement indicating whether any negative information has been reported in the past six years concerning the Offerors’ past compliance with FAR 52.219-8. If any such negative information has been reported, the Offeror may submit explanations or comments responding to such negative information. Offerors with no prior contracts containing FAR 52.219-8 shall certify the same.

(iii) VOLUME III – Small Business Participation.

(1) The Offeror shall demonstrate small business participation by detailing its proposed approach to meet the requirements under the Small Business Participation factor by addressing the following areas in its Small Business Participation Commitment Document:

(a) Proposed Small Business Participation Plan in performance of the potential contract (applies to both Other Than Small Businesses and Small Businesses)

(b) Commitment to Small Business

(i) Payment Procedures (applies to both Other Than Small Businesses and Small Businesses)

(ii) Compliance with Small Business Subcontracting Plans (applies to Other Than Small Businesses only)

(2) Commitment to Small Business

(a) The Offeror shall include a written statement of its established procedures to ensure timely payments to small business subcontractors in accordance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns (for those contracts under which it was required within the past three years from the closing date of this solicitation). If not required in any recent contracts, the Offeror shall so state.

(b) For Other than Small Businesses ONLY. Compliance with terms and conditions of FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if required on recent contracts). The Other than Small Business Offeror shall provide three Individual Subcontracting Reports (ISRs) for recent contracts (within the past three years from the closing date of this solicitation) that required a subcontracting plan. If not required in any recent contracts, the Offeror shall so state. If the Offeror has less than three recent contracts, the Offeror shall provide the most recent ISR for each contract it has, and state that the Offeror does not have three recent contracts.

(iv) VOLUME IV – Cost/Price. The volume shall be organized into the following sections:

(1) Electronic Copy. Files contained on the Volume (iv) may not be password protected. Electronic links are only permissible within the Cost Volume. If files contain links, the links must be intact and maintained through all revisions. The Offeror shall not include pivot tables in Excel spreadsheets. The Offeror shall provide a completed Section B Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs and shall complete.

(2) Compliance. Failure to comply with the RFP requirements for Cost information may result in an adverse assessment of an offeror’s proposal and reduce or eliminate its chance of being selected for award. Offerors shall ensure that the information presented in this volume is consistent and correlates with the information contained in the other proposal volumes. Also, the Offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF33 and continuation sheets.

(2) General Instructions. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.402 and 15.403-1, certified cost or pricing data are not required based on the fact that adequate competition is expected for this procurement. Information other than certified cost or pricing data may be provided in contractor format providing that sufficient information is made available. Information submitted shall be prepared following the instruction in FAR 15.403-5. If after receipt of proposals the Contracting Officer determines that there is insufficient information available to determine price reasonableness and none of the exceptions at FAR 15.403-1 apply, the Offeror may be required to submit cost or pricing data. Additionally, in the event that adequate competition is not obtained, the Contracting Officer may incorporate FAR 52.215-20 entitled, “Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information Other Than Cost or Pricing Data,” into the solicitation and request a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data. There are no page limitations for this volume. Proposal information included in this volume which is not directly related to Cost will be disregarded.

(v) VOLUME V – 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 1449 and all certifications requiring original signature. An Acrobat PDF file shall be created to capture the signatures for submission. A separate file will not be provided.

Section A – Solicitation, Offer and Award Section G – Contract Administration Data Section K – Representations, Certification and Other Statements of Offerors

Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications/Representations shall not be addressed separately from that submitted in VOLUME V – SOLICITATIONS, OFFER AND AWARD DOCUMENTS AND

CERTIFICATIONS /REPRESENTATIONS.

PERFORMANCE WORK STATEMENT

Performance Work Statement (PWS) Army Airfields and Heliports Resource Integration and Sustainment Support

And Army Instrument Flight Procedures Development and Maintenance Support

For United States Army Aeronautical Services Agency (USAASA)

PART 1

GENERAL INFORMATION

1. Background. The US Army Aeronautical Services Agency (USAASA) serves as the Army’s responsible official for Airspace, Aeronautical Flight Information, Air Traffic Control (ATC), Flight Procedures Policy, Joint Military- Civilian use of Army airfields, and as the Force Modernization proponent for Army airfields and Heliports (AAF/AHPs) worldwide. USAASA is the HQDA DCS, G-3/5/7 functional proponent for AAF/AHPs worldwide, USAASA has oversight of 100 plus AAF/AHPs and develops policies and procedures pertaining to ATC, AAF/AHPs and airspace operations. USAASA manages the development and integration of the Army’s Management Decision Package (MDEP) to support resourcing and sustainment of Army AAF/AHP operations across major and service commands. USAASA supports intra and inter-military organizations, the Army Staff (ARSTAF), the Joint Staff, Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD), and International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO), North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), etc.

USAASA is HQDA DCS,…