Q A_28_Oct_2014.pdf

Questions (Q) & Answers (A) for Request For Proposal

(RFP) FA8523-14-R-30015

28 October 2014

Q5: Does the guidance of the five referenced documents(DD Form 254, HC/MC-130J

Recapitalization program Security Classification Guide, Anti-Tamper Security Classification

Guide, Anti-Tamper Security Classification Guide Change 1, Anti-Tamper Security Classification

Guide Change 2 require CLINs 0002, 1002 to be submitted at the Secret level? Will the formal

RFP provide additional information on submitting this information as part of the contractor’s response?

A5: Amendment 0003 will give further instructions concerning Anti-Tamper. Amendment 0003 will incorporate a new DD Form 254 referencing the AC/MC-130J Commando II RFCM and the Air Force

Anti-Tamper Security Classification Guide, and supporting change 1 and 2. The Air Force Anti-Tamper

Security Classification Guide will be posted on FBO using the explicit access function. The AC/MC-130J

Commando II RFCM Security Classification Guide can be found in the Bidders Library. In amendment

0003 an updated RFP attachments 3b and 4 will be provided. A separate RFP attachment 4a will be provided to support the Secret level submittal of CLIN 0002 & 1002. Based on these additional documents, Schedule B and RFP Attachment 3b will be unclassified as the financial details are at the

RFCM system level. CLIN 0002 & 1002 information for Attachment 4 will be considered Secret and should be submitted accordingly on the separate Attachment 4a supplied.

Q6: Contractors are now required to submit a Contractor Safety and Health Plan with their proposal. Which volume would the Government like this included in? This document is not specified in the section L and M requirements.

Additionally, this submittal is required of the Contractor and is required to be flowed to its subcontractors. Given the extent to which this policy touches our other internal policies, and in turn those documents will need to be submitted with our proposal, would we also be required to provide these document submittals for our subcontractors?

A6: The requirement for a Contractor Safety and Health Plan is only applicable to contractors performing work on a Government installation. An RFP Amendment will be posted to state that the Contractor Safety and Health Plan shall be submitted with Volume I.

Q7: The documents that were received in the Bidder’s Library CD, in some cases, have different revisions / dates than those shown in the Bidder’s Library list and Appendix 7.1 to the SOW, Applicable Documents (please see attached list of documents). Are we to use the ones provided on the CD or will the Government be sending updated versions, as shown in the lists?

A7: Updated Bidder’s Library List will be posted to FBO. There were dates and version numbers that were not correct on the Bidder’s Library List. This list was released when the Bidder’s Library was released upon the request of an offeror. The documents were correct but the Bidder’s Library List was incorrect.

Q8: There are disconnects between the periods of performance identified in Schedule B of the solicitation and the time phasing in Attachment 5 (i.e. CLIN 1006 states 13 months in Schedule B, but in Attachment 5 it reflects 18.5 months after option exercise; Likewise, for CLIN 0004 the

Schedule B reflects 1 month, but Appendix 5 shows 9 months after award). We are assuming based on the Order of Precedence - Uniform Contract Format that the periods of performance in

Schedule B would take precedence. Will the dates in either the Schedule B or Attachment 5 be updated to remove any inconsistencies?

A8: An RFP Amendment will be posted to change CLIN 0004 to state that the required delivery is 280 days after award. An RFP Amendment will be posted to change CLIN 1006 to state that the required delivery is 876 days after award.

Q11: The Volume II RFCM System Specification has the following three (3) errors in the SRD text column provided:

SRD_380 Has SRD_346 text erroneously copied into the SRD_text field.

SRD_285 Has SRD_2311 text erroneously copied into the SRD_text field.

SRD_1529 Has SRD_2080 text erroneously copied into the SRD_text field.

The correct text from the RFCM SRD should be:

3.9.18 SRD_380 (U) The RFCM System design and equipment installations must be compatible with current aircraft operations, and aircrew tasks and workload requirements (Reference: AC/MC-130J Workload Analysis).

3.9.18 SRD_285 (U) Installation of the RFCM System shall not protrude into the cargo enveloper and permit existing cargo loading and payload capabilities of the aircraft (T).

3.9.18 SRD_1529 (U) All RFCM System LRUs shall be accessible for maintenance directly or by removal of a panel or radome (O).

A11: An RFP Amendment will be posted requiring all Offerors to replace the language in the Model

Specification for the following SRD Elements with correct language below:

3.9.18 SRD_380 (U) The RFCM System design and equipment installations must be compatible with current aircraft operations, and aircrew tasks and workload requirements (Reference: AC/MC-130J

Workload Analysis).

3.9.18 SRD_285 (U) Installation of the RFCM System shall not protrude into the cargo envelope and permit existing cargo loading and payload capabilities of the aircraft (T).

3.9.18 SRD_1529 (U) All RFCM System LRUs shall be accessible for maintenance directly or by removal of a panel or radome (O).

Q12: Request addition of FAR 52.248-1 Value Engineering to the contract.

A12: An RFP Amendment will be posted to FBO to incorporate this clause.

Q15: Item No. 1007AA, 1007AB and 1007AC—The Fixed Fee column appears to be missing. Will you be adding a column for Fixed Fee for these Cost Plus Fixed Fee line items, or should that contractor add them?

A15: An RFP Amendment will be posted to correct this error.

Q16: Long lead funding is critical to maintain the aggressive delivery schedules. Suggest the USAF add long lead to the following items identified below

Suggest the USAF add item 4001AD Long Lead Material Group A & Item 4001AE Long

Lead Material Group B.

Suggest the USAF add item 5001AC Long Lead Material Group A & Item 5001AD Long

Lead Material Group B.

Suggest the USAF add item 5002AC Long Lead Material Group A & Item 5002AD Long

Lead Material Group B.

Suggest the USAF add item 5003AC Long Lead Material Group A & Item 5003AD Long

Lead Material Group B.

A16: An RFP Amendment will be posted to revise the Period of Performance for CLINs 4001AA, 4001AB, 4002, 5001AA, 5001AB, 5002AA, 5002AB, 5003AA, 5003AB, 5007, 5008 and 5009.

Q17: Item No. 5001AA: Required delivery date is not provided. Please provide the required delivery date.

A17: An RFP Amendment will be posted to FBO to correct this omission.

Q18: RFP Attachment 3a contains a quantity matrix that exceeds beyond the period of performance of the CLIN summary. In addition, some of the quantities on the matrix differ from the CLIN structure. What is the intent of this matrix?

A18: Response: Column A (Time Period Allowed to Exercise CLIN) of RFP Attachment 3a_CLINs Cost

Price_Initial Submittal will be deleted and posted in an upcoming Amendment. Quantities are reflected in

Column F.

Q19: RFP Attachment 5: Request the USAF identify the contractors Demo run dates to the schedule for Team Assurance and Endeavor in March 2016.

A19: See RFP Attachment 5 (Top Level Milestone Schedule). Per Attachment 5, Team Assurance - 7 Jun

2016 and Team Endeavor - 15 Jun 2016.

Q20: If an offeror is deemed outside of the competitive range, will they be given an opportunity to adjust their proposal?

A20: It is the Government's intent to award the contract(s) after discussions which will be conducted in accordance with FAR 15.306. The Government may make a competitive range determination after oral presentations are conducted. If an offeror is deemed outside of the competitive range at this point, they will not be provided an opportunity to adjust their proposal.

Q21: If an offeror is deemed outside the funding profile for the Base contract yet within the EMD funding profile, will they be given an opportunity to adjust their proposal?

A21: The Government’s funding profile will not be addressed. Offerors will be permitted to adjust their proposals at FPR.

Q22: Program-related trips between the prime and its subcontractors are required to ensure efficient, low-risk program execution, including reviews, PDR, CDR, vendor test events, etc. Is the

USG declaring the costs of travel to manage suppliers’ unallowable costs?

A22: Travel will only be reimbursed for travel to and from Government test events and meetings. Other travel should be handled in direct charges or overheads.

Q23: Section B, item Numbers 4001AA, 4001AB, 4003AA, 4003AB, 5001AA, 5001AB, 5002AA, 5002AB, 5003AA, 5003AB, 5010AA, 5010AB, 5011AA, 5011AB, 5012AA, 5012AB: It is acceptable to provide range pricing for referenced CLIN quantities?

A23: Yes, this is encouraged per FAR 52.207-4, Economic Purchase Quantity—Supplies.

Q24: Item 5014 Systems Engineering/Program Management: The solicitation specified SEPM in units of months with the ability to purchase it “month to month”. This makes it impossible for the contractor to execute the program. We suggest the contractor bid 1 to 3 Lots with each lot be defined as 12 months of SEPM and be exercised concurrent with individual FRP lots.

A24: It is the Government’s intent to exercise this CLIN concurrent with individual FRP lots. Therefore, if only some units were exercised at one time, then SEPM would only be exercised for the time period it takes to produce those units.

Q25: RFP Attachment 4, Total Resources Material Summary: Page 21 of the solicitation states to provide “an unburdened version of the Priced Bill of Material” while the BOE Material Summary ta/worksheet of the RFP Attachment 4 states “proposed unit prices and extended cost should be sanitized version of the Priced Bill of Material.” Please clarify if offerors are to remove all pricing information, or just the burden, from this BOE Material Summary.

A25: Offerors are to remove just the burden from the BOE Material Summary.

Q27: What is the minimum EIRP required over the Field of Regard to support the mission profile?

A27: The SRD does not define a minimum EIRP at the Field of Regard level. The transmit and receive

Field of Regard is defined in the SRD. The minimum EIRP requirement is defined at the aperture level in the SRD. The Government’s intent is not to drive to a specific design solution.

Q28: The RFCM Solicitation does not contain an option exercise clause. Can you provide an option exercise period by Fiscal Year for the LRIP and FRP options?

A28: The RFCM Solicitation contains FAR 52.217-9 Option to Extend the Term of the Contract.

Estimates as to when the Government could, if at all, exercise options are located in Attachment 5, Top

Level Milestone Schedule.

Q29: The anticipated award date shown on RFP Attachment 5 – Top Level Milestone Schedule and

FBO.gov is Sep 2015, however the RFP SF 1447 Block 11 only requires a proposal validity of 120 days. Please confirm that the proposal validity period is sufficient.

A29: An RFP Amendment will be posted stating the revised proposal validity date of 365 days.

Q30: Is Direction Finding included in the pre-CDR Critical Technology Demonstration? SOW 3.1.1

Table 1, SOW 3.1.5 and the RFCM Critical Technology Demonstration Plan conflict on whether

DF is a CTE that will be tested in the Pre-CDR Demonstration.

A30: An RFP Amendment will be posted which will require the contractor to update RFCM Critical

Technology Demonstration Plan and to delete paragraph 2.1.3.

Q31: RFP Attachment 5 – Top Level Milestone Schedule shows two different start dates for LRIP

Option 4. Please clarify why two start dates are illustrated for the same award.

A31: The Government plans to order LRIP assets during FY17 (CLIN 4001AA) and FY18 (CLIN

4001AB).

Q32: To which CLIN deliverables does the warranty apply? We presume the warranty applies to

LRIP Option 4 and FRP Option 5 only. Please confirm if that is the case.

A32: Warranty applies to any items produced under the RFCM contract (including but not limited to production representative articles [Group A and Group B]) produced and accepted by the Government.

Q33: How will cost be evaluated for the post-CDR down select? Will the total evaluated cost include

Options 1-8 or options 4-8 only?

A33: M-901 paragraph 3b(4), which states the following:

The TEP will be used for evaluation purposes only. It will be calculated by adding together the evaluated prices of all the CLINs (fixed quantity or quantity ranges) as outlined below in both the Basic and Option periods, as shown in the Line Item Schedule, as outlined above in the initial submittal example. Offerors are advised that the evaluation of options shall not obligate the Government to exercise such options.

The Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be the sum of:

• The proposed cost and fixed fee amount for the CPFF CLINs.

• The proposed price of the FFP CLINs (will not include Data Rights CLIN 2001).

• The proposed target cost and target cost incentive fee amount for the CPIF CLINs.

• The proposed target cost and target profit for FPIF CLINs.

Q34: Please note that SOW section 3.1.15.3.1 is in conflict with the FAR. Please consider removing this clause as FAR 52.245-1 applies.

A34: The Government has decided to delete SOW paragraph 3.1.15.3.1. An RFP Amendment will be posting with a revised SOW.

Q36: Does the Government intend to issue a conformed Solicitation prior to the due date of

November 14, 2014?

A36: The Government does not intend to issue a conformed Solicitation prior to the due date of

November 14, 2014. Note, the Government is assuming “conformed” means a solicitation incorporating all amendments up to this date.

Q38: Is there an industry partner for processing classified information located on the base? In other words can you receive / print classified documents on our behalf as we do not possess any classified computer equipment?

A38: The Government will not print classified documents on a contractor’s behalf. Refer to the RFP for proposal submission instructions.

Q39: Would the USG be willing to accept early delivery of AFSOC RFCM Proposals? If so, how early please.

A39: The USG is willing to accept early delivery of the AFSOC RFCM Proposal; however, the offeror is cautioned that any Amendments that occur after an early submission must be acknowledged and submitted by the contractor. Refer to the RFP for proposal submission instructions.