Consolidated QAs from Final RFP - Round 2 - 08JAN2021.pdf

Integrated Battle Command System

(IBCS) LRIP/FRP

RFP W31P4Q-20-R-0015 Round 2 Questions

Question Document Section/Paragraph/

Page No. Questions

Section L, Volume III

Section 2 – Subfactor 2

The RFP requests the “public partner’s price and availability (P&A)” be provided in the proposal. Please provide clarification if this P&A is the Depot Teaming/Partnering Agreement, the Depot provided proposal, or something else?

Please provide clarification of where the Pricing content for the P&A should be provided? In accordance with the final RFP requirements the P&A that is requested per Volume III cannot disclose pricing information outside of the Cost Volume.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The public partner’s price and availability (P&A) in Section L, Volume III, Section 2, Subfactor 2, Depot Subcontractor Management, subparagraph (b) is referring to the Depot provided proposal arising from the Public/Private Partnerships (PPP) with the depots. The Pricing content for the P&A should be provided only in the Cost Volume.

Is the “implementation agreement” between the PPP and prime contractor required to be provided in Volume III?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Yes

Do the P&As and any implementation agreements (and accompanying technical descriptions) count against the Volume III page count?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The Government intends for the partnering agreements and the implementation agreements to be included in the page count. The page count in Section L, Volume III-Factor 2, Management was updated in the last amendment to reflect a page count of 175.

Volume II

Section 1 – Subfactor 1 Tech

Maturity and Section 2.(c).

In Scenario 1 of the Schedule component of Volume II requires the Offerors to provide non-recurring cost and unit cost as part of the Attachment 22 - Preliminary Class I ECP Candidates and ECP DD Form 1692.

However, in accordance with Section L 2. (c) "No price information shall be presented in any part of the Schedule or Management proposal."

Please provide clarification to Offerors on which Volume the requested ECP Form 1692 pricing information shall be provided and is this requested ECP cost/price information for PLANNING PURPOSES ONLY and shall not be evaluated as part of our Cost/Pricing contained in Volume V?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s understanding and approach to meet the requirements in Section L, Volume II, Scenario 1 and 2. Therefore, the requested ECP Form 1692 pricing information should be placed in the Technical Volume. The proposed information will be used for technical evaluation purposes only and will not be evaluated as part of the Cost/Price Volume.

Attachment 01, IBCS LRIP/FRP

SOW

1 Introduction, 4

General Requirements,

8.1.17 Technical

Manuals Data Rights

Requirements

In accordance with the USG's response to this question (No. 6 in 12/18/20 responses) Offerors were directed to: "Please follow standard data rights assertion process from the DFARS and FAR clauses to receive evaluation of data rights assertions".

However, in accordance with the USG response to Question 24 (12/18/21 responses) "The USG concurs and removed unlimited data rights in the Attachments 0001 SOW and Attachment 0021 SOW" and RESERVED the associated sections 8.1.17 (0001) and 6.1.14 (0021).

Please provide clarification if the USG is requiring data right assertions as a requirement for ECP and Technical Manual delta data in the IBCS RFP and in which Volume would it be added?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Yes, any data with less than unlimited rights subject to delivery under this contract should be asserted on the contract via the data rights assertion table, in the Technical Volume.

Section L.2

Proposal Files; pg. 7

In accordance with the USG response to Question 8 (12/18/20 responses) Offerors were directed that: "Since proposals are to be submitted electronically and on CDs, the requirement for EXCEL foldouts will be removed from Section L".

Please consider and clarify if 11x17 pages with 1" margins for graphic are allowed for the Schedule and Management Volumes? Please confirm as this allows improved graphical presentation of concepts such as "from-to" ECP changes to provide reviewers with a full understanding of the information presented.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Yes. 11x17 pages with 1" margins for graphic are allowed for the Schedule and Management Volumes.

Section L.2

Proposal Files; pg. 7

In accordance with the USG response to Question 8 (12/18/20 responses) Offerors were directed that: "Since proposals are to be submitted electronically and on CDs, the requirement for EXCEL foldouts will be removed from Section L".

Please consider and clarify if 11x17 pages with 1" margins for tables and spreadsheets are allowed for the Schedule and Management Volumes?

Please confirm as this allows improved representation of complex data for easier understanding by the reviewers.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Yes. 11x17 pages with 1" margins for graphic are allowed for the Schedule and Management Volumes.

Section L.3

Section B (CLINS 0013 through

0021)

In accordance with the USG's response to question (No. 15 in 12/18/20 responses) Offerors were directed to: "Price to the quantities provide for each CLIN."

However, These are FMS CLINs and they require Offset obligations, which are different per designated nations.

Please clarify and confirm that offset pricing are to be added to these CLINs, and who are the designated nations?

Also, if this information isn't available from the USG at this time, then that prior to execution of FMS designated CLINs that they will request offsets costs (per identified nation) for the awarded Contractor?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: IAW DFARS PGI 225.7303-2, an offset agreement is an agreement between the FMS customer and the US contractor. These agreements are distinct and independent; and are not part of the contract. There are no implemented LOAs with the FMS customers at this time

Attachment

Attachment 0021

DO-1 SOW Para 6

Attachment 0027, IDIQ CLIN to SOW Crosswalk, defines that IDIQ SOW paragraphs 8 and 9 will be part of CLIN 0008 Logistics Support, Reliability and Maintainability. Attachment 0021 DO-1 SOW combines elements of the IDIQ paragraphs 8 and 9 into DO-1 SOW paragraph 6 which would indicate that this scope be priced as part of CLIN 0008. However, page 14 of the draft Solicitation, Offer, and Award (W31P4Q-20-R-0015-+LRIP+FRP+- +25NOV2020.pdf) defines the number of CLIN 0008AA hours to be 231 which is not sufficient for all the scope defined in DO-1 SOW paragraph 6.

Would the Government please provide a detailed mapping of DO-1 SOW paragraphs to CLIN similar to Attachment 0027?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Total hours for CLIN 0008 (Logistic/Reliability Support) for all 5 ordering periods is 1,312,597 hours. Section L, Attachment 18, and the Schedule B will be updated for the offeror to propose to each CLIN.

W31P4Q-20-R-

Section I, 252.227-

Inclusion of FAR 252.227-7023 conflicts with DFARS 252.227-7013. Further DFARS prescribes use of this clause only in limited circumstances - none of which apply. Request deletion of this clause. If the Government disagrees with deletion, please advise which deliverable artifact(s) would be subject to each clause under LRIP/FRP.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: FAR 252.227-7023 is deleted.

Section I, 252.227- 7020 and 252.227-

Inclusion of DFARS 252.227-7020 and DFARS 252.227-7021 conflict with DFARS 252.227-7013 and DFARS 252.227-7014 Request deletion of both clauses. If the Government disagrees with deletion, please advise which deliverable artifact(s) would be subject to each clause under LRIP/FRP.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: DFARS clauses 252.227-7020 and 252.227-7021 will be deleted.

Section I, 52.246-25

52.246-25 is a required clause for acquisition in accordance with the prescription. Request this clause be added. If the Government disagrees with adding this clause, please explain.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: FAR 52.246-25 is hereby added.

Amendment

Section M, Factor 4:

Cost/Price and Government Response to Question 10 Published on beta.SAM.gov on December 18, 2020

The current RFP has two TEP calculations identified, one for the IDIQ and one for DO 0001. While we understand all CLINs, in both the IDIQ and DO 0001, will be evaluated for Unbalanced Pricing, Reasonableness, and Cost Realism on the cost-reimbursement CLINs, can you please confirm that the TEP for the IDIQ will be used by the source selection committee to identify an offeror’s total proposed price?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The TEP for the IDIQ will be used by the source selection committee.

Attachment 19

Proposal Submission

With regard to delivery of the proposal DVDs, please confirm that USG personnel will be physically present at the address below on 25 JAN 2021 and the hours personnel will be present.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The DVDs are to be delivered to Redstone Arsenal, Building 5250 Martin Rd.

Due to Covid restrictions, each contractor will be given a 15 minute window to deliver the DVDs. The delivery time window will be sent via email to each contractor separately. The POC collecting the DVDs will be Mr. George Brown.

Attachment 19

Proposal Submission

With regard to delivery of the proposal DVDs, please confirm that USG personnel will be physically present at the address below on 25 JAN 2021 and the hours personnel will be present.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The DVDs are to be delivered to Redstone Arsenal, Building 5250 Martin Rd.

Due to Covid restrictions, each contractor will be given a 15 minute window to deliver the DVDs. The delivery time window will be sent via email to each contractor separately. The POC collecting the DVDs will be Mr. George Brown.

0019, Section 2 Section 9

In accordance with the USG's response to question (No. 18 in 12/18/20 responses) Offerors were told that: "Attachment 0019, Section L, refers to the offeror’s “capability” to produce and deliver “up to 3 EOCs/ECTs and 6 Relays per month” for surge capabilities.

"However, this response still indicates that the quantities for Attachment 0021 (DO 001) appear to be at 4x the rate of the EOC quantities in Attachment 0019 (Section L)?

Please provide clarification that the quantity requirements in SOW Attachments 0019 and 0021 are therefore standalone quantities and if the quantities in Attachment 0021 are to be considered as hypothetical "capability surge" totals will this distinction be incorporated into the appropriate sections of Attachment 0021 and Section L?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Quantities identified in Attachment 0021, DO 0001 are the quantities to be delivered in the Delivery Order 0001. These quantities are to be delivered within the 15 month period of performance identified in DO 0001. The quantities identified in Attachment 0019, Section L, will be used to evaluate the offeror’s capability to provide up to 3 EOCs/ECTs and 6 Relays per month within a 15 month period. The quantities in Section L are for evaluation purposes of the offeror’s surge capacity and have no affiliation with the quantities to be delivered in DO 0001.

N/A

In accordance with the USG's responses to questions (No. 2 and No. 30 in 12/18/20 responses) Offerors were told that: the requested "3D Models, CAD files, or other digital models and the IBCS Program Protection Plan (PPP) will be provided upon contract award.

Accordingly, will the foregoing documents be provided by the USG to Offerors at its earliest convenience?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The 3D models cannot be provided prior to proposal submittal. The 3D model product is not in possession of the USG. The USG will provide the 3D models at award. The contractor will have the opportunity to propose ECP efforts after award. The 3D models will be provided in time for the contractor to utilize in the ECP process. The draft PPP has been made available via AMDAN for viewing purposes only and intended recipients have been notified. The USG will host the signed PPP, when available, for all offerors to “view only” and will notify the contractors when it’s available. Due to the nature of the PPP content, the USG will deliver the actual PPP to the final awardee only. The password to access the draft PPP will be provided separately via DOD SAFE.

In accordance with the USG's response to question (No. 22 in 12/18/20 responses) Offerors were told that: "The offeror’s proposal will be valid for 120 calendar days after date of required proposal submission.

"However, in accordance with Section L, Volume V (1), it is directed that, "the offeror shall assume an award date of 4th Q FY21."

That would indicate that after the 120 day proposal validity period that Offerors would have to update their proposals for rates, material quotes, travel fares, etc. for the balance of the months until contract award.

Please provide clarification that it is the USGs intent to have offerors revise their proposals upon the 120 day validity offer date expiration?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The proposal needs to be valid until 30 Sep 2021. Section L will be updated to reflect this change.

Please provide power information for the A234 Router Power Supply MIL- VIC-15-5V component, which we were unable to locate in the data provided, or direct us to where the data is located.

Also, please clarify whether the information for the Media Converter, miConverter 18, is for all of the converters as well as the chassis.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: Vendor’s Website (https://www.ajpowersupply.com/military-vehicle-dc-dc-low-output-power-converter/#tab-1-1): DC Input Voltage: 18-36VDC (9-36 VDC Available) DC Output: Multiple outputs Operating Temperature: -20C to 100C (max) Storage Temperature: -40C to 125C(max) Overload Protection:

110 to 180% of full load Total Output Power: 0 – 500 Watts (depending on input voltage) Efficiency: up to 93% Line Regulation: 0.2% for 10% Line Change Load Regulation: < +/- 1% Ripple: 2% of Output Voltage Current Limit: Over Current & Short Circuit Protection Physical Dimensions: Depends on Power Output Connector: Circular Connectors Weight: Est. 2-12LBS

Over Voltage Protection: Depends on Output Voltage Set Point Accuracy: < +/- 1%

Power information provided is for the Chassis and media converters.

Attachment 01, IBCS LRIP/FRP

SOW

1 Introduction, 4

Requirements,

8.1.17 Technical

Manuals Data Rights

Requirements

In accordance with the USG's response to question (No. 6 in 12/18/20 responses) Offerors were directed to: "Please follow standard data rights assertion process from the DFARS and FAR clauses to receive evaluation of data rights assertions".

However, in accordance with the USG response to Question 24 (12/18/21 responses) "The USG concurs and removed unlimited data rights in the Attachments 0001 SOW and Attachment 0021 SOW" and RESERVED the associated sections 8.1.17 (0001) and 6.1.14 (0021).

Please provide clarification if the USG has deleted data rights requirements in their entirety or is still requiring data right assertions as a requirement for ECP and Technical Manual delta data in the IBCS RFP and in which Volume would it be added?

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: The USG has NOT deleted data rights assertion requirements. The requirement and process for asserting data rights is still applicable via the DFARS clauses on contract. The applicable DFAR 252.227-7013 clauses shall apply to any technical data the contractor is intending to deliver to the USG (i.e. CDRLs, ECP and Technical Manual delta data as examples).

Amendment

Government Response to Question 59 Published on beta.SAM.gov on December 18, 2020

The impact of this change is two-fold. First, without any pricing backup requirement for these CLINs, we believe the Government will not be able to evaluate offerors’ proposals on either the completeness or reasonableness of their pricing. And second, offerors will have no accountability for their proposed MEI pricing, and the successful offeror will not be bound by its proposed fixed-price amounts, creating reopeners that will have a cost and schedule impact for the Army in execution.

Request that the Solicitation add back in the Section L requirement for providing buildup of the proposed FPIF unit prices.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSE: RFP Amendment 0002 will revise the Section L Cost/Price instructions for the FPIF CLINs to add back the following paragraph to the RFP, that was deleted in Amendment 1: “The offeror shall provide additional worksheets in Attachment 18 showing the offeror’s calculations used to build-up the FPIF unit prices by CLIN/SLIN. The offeror’s calculations shall identify the offeror and any lower-tier subcontractor labor categories, labor hours, and labor rates; direct material types, quantities, and unit prices; ODC types, quantities, and unit prices; travel types, quantities, and unit prices;

indirect rates/factors; proposed profit; etc. used to calculate the proposed FPIF unit prices by CLIN/SLIN. Provide formulas in the FPIF price lists to show how the direct labor costs, indirect costs, subcontract costs, material, ODC, travel, and profit costs are calculated from the additional worksheets in Attachment 18. If the FPIF price lists at each quantity are derived from quantity price points, the offeror shall provide the calculations to show the build-up of the FPIF unit prices at the quantity price points and the calculations used to derive the unit prices for the quantities in between that are proposed in the FPIF Price Lists."