Attachment QA Amd 0004.pdf

Contractor Questions & Government Responses

Question 1: Will the Air Force please confirm that an offeror may propose a commercial product or service (as defined at FAR 2.101) for any individual item identified on the Pricing Matrix (in Attachment 5/Amendment 1)?

Government Response 1:

The question references Attachment 5/Amendment 1. The Government has already posted a revised Amendment 2 Pricing Matrix Attachment 5; see Solicitation Amendment 003. The Government has already responded to a similar question; see Solicitation Amendment 003, Q&A response #6. The government will expect, and contractor required to validate pricing to include that of commercial components, included in this NON-COMMERCIAL acquisition, consistent with 15.404-1 to include possible "other than certified cost and pricing data". Administration of the FPIF CLINs shall be IAW FAR 52.216-16.

This acquisition has been determined to be a supply not a service and is considered to be a non-commercial acquisition as it does not meet the definition of commercial product as defined in FAR 2.101.

IAW Section L, 6.3 “Price analysis techniques shall be used to ensure fair and reasonable pricing IAW FAR 15.404-1(b). Providing information to assist with pricing evaluation to further support proposed pricing will expedite the source selection process.”

In accordance with FAR 15.403-3(a), information other than cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. The Government reserves the right to obtain data as appropriate. Should the CO determine proposed prices appear unreasonable or the possibility that an Offeror does not fully understand the requirement, the offerors may be required to submit other than cost and pricing data to support price reasonableness and/or price realism.”

IAW Section L, 6.2.1 “If an Offeror’s proposed price/rate is zero, then the Offeror shall provide rationale to support the zero dollar.”

IAW Section L, 6.2.6 “Unexplained price variances from year-to-year could suggest unbalanced pricing. It is in the Offeror’s best interest to provide explanations or supporting rationale for any significant annual CLIN price/rate variances.”

IAW Section M, 2.5.4, “If requested by the CO, data other than certified pricing data shall be evaluated to support a determination of reasonable, balanced, and realistic pricing. This information will only be requested if all other sources have been insufficient to support a determination of reasonable and/or balanced pricing and/or price realism. Offerors may provide any additional data other than certified cost or price data as believed necessary to support or justify proposed pricing.”

Question 2: Will the Air Force please confirm that where an offeror proposes a commercial product or service (as defined at FAR 2.101) for an item identified on the Pricing Matrix (in Attachment 5/Amendment 1), the offeror may propose a fixed commercial price as the “Target Cost Unit Price,” and zero dollars for all other items in the Pricing Matrix for that CLIN, and the Air Force will then evaluate that proposed price for reasonableness?

Government Response 2:

The question references Attachment 5/Amendment 1. The Government has already posted a revised Amendment 2 Pricing Matrix Attachment 5; see Solicitation Amendment 003. The offerors proposal will be evaluated in accordance with the solicitation as referenced below:

IAW Section L, 6.3 “Price analysis techniques shall be used to ensure fair and reasonable pricing IAW FAR 15.404-1(b). Providing information to assist with pricing evaluation to further support proposed pricing will expedite the source selection process.”

In accordance with FAR 15.403-3(a), information other than cost or pricing data may be required to support price reasonableness. The Government reserves the right to obtain data as appropriate. Should the CO determine proposed prices appear unreasonable or the possibility that an Offeror does not fully understand the requirement, the offerors may be required to submit other than cost and pricing data to support price reasonableness and/or price realism.”

IAW Section L, 6.2.1 “If an Offeror’s proposed price/rate is zero, then the Offeror shall provide rationale to support the zero dollar.”

IAW Section L, 6.2.6 “Unexplained price variances from year-to-year could suggest unbalanced pricing. It is in the Offeror’s best interest to provide explanations or supporting rationale for any significant annual CLIN price/rate variances.”

IAW Section M, 2.5.4, “If requested by the CO, data other than certified pricing data shall be evaluated to support a determination of reasonable, balanced, and realistic pricing. This information will only be requested if all other sources have been insufficient to support a determination of reasonable and/or balanced pricing and/or price realism. Offerors may provide any additional data other than certified cost or price data as believed necessary to support or justify proposed pricing.”

Question 3: Will the Air Force please confirm, IAW RFP Section M at 2.5.4, that it will request “Data Other than Certified Pricing Data” for any particular line item on the Pricing Matrix (in Attachment 5/Amendment 1) only upon a determination by the Agency that “all other sources have been insufficient to support a determination of reasonable and/or balanced pricing and/or price realism”?

Government Response 3:

The question references Attachment 5/Amendment 1. The Government has already posted a revised Amendment 2 Pricing Matrix Attachment 5; see Solicitation Amendment 003. IAW Section M, 2.5.4, “If requested by the CO, data other than certified pricing data shall be evaluated to support a determination of reasonable, balanced, and realistic pricing. This information will only be requested if all other sources have been insufficient to support a determination of reasonable and/or balanced pricing and/or price realism. Offerors may provide any additional data other than certified cost or price data as believed necessary to support or justify proposed pricing.”

Question 4: Section M, 1.8 contemplates that offerors may take exceptions to RFP requirements, but that it reserves the right to determine such exceptions unacceptable. Are there any RFP requirements for which the agency is not willing to consider exceptions, and, if so, what are they?

Government Response 4:

The solicitation allows Offerors to submit exceptions to solicitation requirements (per Section L, paragraph 7.2 and Section M, 1.8.) However, Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements, such as terms and conditions, representations and certifications, and technical requirements, in addition to those identified as evaluation factors or subfactors. Failure to comply with the terms and conditions of the solicitation may result in the Offeror being ineligible for award.

In accordance with Section L, paragraph 7.2, Offerors must clearly identify any exception to the solicitation terms and conditions and must provide complete supporting rationale. Each exception shall be specifically related to each paragraph and/or specific part of the solicitation to which the exception is taken. Provide rationale in support of the exception and fully explain its impact, if any, on the performance, schedule, cost, and specific requirements of the solicitation. This information shall be provided in the format and content of Table 7.2. Offerors are cautioned the government could determine any identified exceptions to be unacceptable, which would make the proposal ineligible for award.

The Government will review each exception an Offeror provides with their proposal submission IAW the solicitation.

Question 5: Section LCMC/WLK - H002 – Delivery and License Rights For Technical Data Necessary for Operation, Maintenance, Installation, Training, and Testing (OMITT).

Special Clause H002 requires delivery of and licenses for technical data, computer software documentation, computer databases, and graphics that are necessary to support “OMITT.” OMITT includes a broad array of activities, including, for example, “all data to identify, catalog, stock, source, acquire, procure, replenish, package, handle, store, and transport of the Fuel System and Flight Display System” and “depot-level maintenance and repair.”

Question 5a: OMITT Data therefore appears to be broader than the types of data that are needed for repair and maintenance or for the proper installation, operating, or handling of a product. Please confirm whether that interpretation is correct.

Government Response 5a:

OMITT includes a broad array of activities, including, but not limited to “all data to identify, catalog, stock, source, acquire, procure, replenish, package, handle, store, and transport of the Fuel System and Flight Display System” and “depot-level maintenance and repair.”

Question 5b: According to Special Clause H002(a)(2), “depot-level maintenance” includes, among other things, “material maintenance or repair requiring the overhaul, upgrading, or rebuilding of parts, assemblies, or subassemblies.” The RFP further states that “data needed to perform depot-level maintenance include . . . Software maintenance” (H002(b)(2)(A)) and “Detailed technical data and information regarding all systems.” H002(a)(2)(A) “Depot-level maintenance” expressly excludes “the manufacture of new items” (H0002(a)(2)(D)). Please confirm that H002 does not require the delivery of or licenses to technical data, computer software documentation, computer databases, and graphics if such technical data, computer software documentation, computer databases, and graphics are needed for the manufacture of new items.

Government Response 5b:

Section H Special Contract Requirements title is DELIVERY AND LICENSE RIGHTS FOR TECHNICAL DATA NECESSARY FOR OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, INSTALLATION, TRAINING, AND TESTING (OMITT). If delivery of or licenses to technical data, computer software documentation, computer databases, and graphics are necessary for OMITT, then delivery and license rights for technical data are required.

Provide sufficient supporting documentation for any assertion less than the Government requested via the CDRL Assertion Matrix at RFP Attachment 7.

Question 5c: Please explain whether it is the government’s intent for Special Clause H0002 to require delivery of OMITT Data pertaining to commercial products, commercial services, or commercial processes, even if such data exceeds what is customarily provided to the public.

Government Response 5c:

The government's intent is for the vendor to provide OMITT Data as called out in H002. If data pertaining to commercial products or commercial processes is not needed for repair or maintenance or for the proper installation, operating, or handling of a commercial product then it would not apply to this clause for OMITT delivery and license rights.

Then refer to CDRL Assertion Matrix at RFP Attachment 7 for government's requested rights. Provide sufficient supporting documentation for any assertion less than the Government requested via the CDRL Assertion Matrix at RFP Attachment 7.

Question 5d: Please explain whether it is the government’s intent for Special Clause H0002 to require delivery of OMITT Data pertaining to commercial products or commercial processes, even if such data is not needed for repair or maintenance or for the proper installation, operating, or handling of a commercial product. See DFARS 227.7102-1(a).

Government Response 5d:

The government's intent is for the vendor to provide OMITT Data as called out in H002. If data pertaining to commercial products or commercial processes is not needed for repair or maintenance or for the proper installation, operating, or handling of a commercial product then it would not apply to this clause for OMITT delivery and license rights.

Then refer to CDRL Assertion Matrix at RFP Attachment 7 for government's requested rights. Provide sufficient supporting documentation for any assertion less than the Government requested via the CDRL Assertion Matrix at RFP Attachment 7.

Question 5e: Please explain whether it is the government’s intent for Special Clause H0002 to require delivery of commercial computer software documentation that is not customarily provided to the public. See DFARS 227.7202-1.

Government Response 5e:

The government's intent is for the vendor to provide OMITT Data as called out in H002. Section H Special Contract Requirements title is DELIVERY AND LICENSE RIGHTS FOR TECHNICAL DATA NECESSARY FOR OPERATION, MAINTENANCE, INSTALLATION, TRAINING, AND TESTING (OMITT). If delivery of or licenses to technical data, computer software documentation, computer databases, and graphics are necessary for OMITT, then delivery and license rights for technical data are required.

Provide sufficient supporting documentation for any assertion less than the Government requested via the CDRL Assertion Matrix at RFP Attachment 7.

Question 6: Section LCMC/WLK – H004 – Commercial Computer Software License; Question:

Alternate I, paragraph 1, states that “Any license shall be perpetual in nature . . . .” However, Alternate I, paragraph 14 states that “Contractor shall provide a listing of license renewal dates,” which suggests that licenses may be renewed (i.e., need not be perpetual). Please clarify this apparent ambiguity.

Government Response 6:

Alternate 1 paragraph 1 refers to vendor-originated software licensing, which shall be perpetual in nature. Alternate I paragraph 14 refers to all other software licensing to include renewal dates and associated fees/costs if applicable.

Question 7: Section M, 2.2.4, Subfactor 4: Data Rights

Question 7a: Section M.2.2.4 states that “The Government will evaluate the Government requested data rights versus the Offeror’s data assertions. The subfactor minimum is met by completion of the CDRL Assertion Matrix (RFP Attachment 7) with sufficient supporting documentation for any assertion less than the Government requested. The data rights subfactor is considered to be acceptable when the information provided by the Offeror supports its position and the Offeror’s Data Rights Assertions Matrix clearly demonstrates the ability to meet the requirements.” Question:

Please clarify whether an Offeror will receive an Acceptable rating when “the subfactor minimum is met by completion of the CDRL Assertion Matrix (RFP Attachment 7) with sufficient supporting documentation for any assertion less than the Government requested,” or whether Offeror’s Data Rights Assertions Matrix must also “clearly demonstrate[] the ability to meet the requirements” in order to be deemed Acceptable under Subfactor 4.

Government Response 7a:

The Government will evaluate the Government requested data rights versus the Offeror’s data assertions. The subfactor minimum is met by 1. Completion of the CDRL Assertion Matrix (RFP Attachment 7) 2. Providing sufficient supporting documentation for any assertion less than the Government requested.

The data rights subfactor is considered to be acceptable when the information provided by the Offeror supports its position and the Offeror’s Data Rights Assertions Matrix clearly demonstrates the ability to meet the requirements.

Question 7b: Please clarify what “requirements” are referred to in the last sentence of M.2.2.4. For example, do these requirements refer to providing supporting documentation for assertions that are less than unlimited rights, or something else?

Government Response 7b:

The requirements are the government requested data rights contained in the CDRL Assertion Matrix at RFP Attachment 7.

Question 8: Section M For each of the following RFP provisions, please identify which, if any, evaluation factor(s) the government will use to evaluate compliance with the following RFP requirements:

Question 8a: Section LCMC/WLK - H002

Government Response 8a:

Please see full solicitation to include the L&M. Section M 2.1 Evaluation Factors and Subfactors (pg. 4),

2.1.1 Evaluation Factor used to Evaluate each Proposal (pg. 4) Factor, Factor 1: Technical, Factor 2:

Technical Risk, Factor 3: Past Performance, Factor 4: Price.

Question 8b: Section LCMC/WLK – H004

Government Response 8b:

Please see full solicitation to include the L&M. Section M 2.1 Evaluation Factors and Subfactors (pg. 4),

2.1.1 Evaluation Factor used to Evaluate each Proposal (pg. 4) Factor, Factor 1: Technical, Factor 2:

Technical Risk, Factor 3: Past Performance, Factor 4: Price.