SOL-_FA8523-14-R-30059_-_Questions_Round_1.pdf

FA8523‐14‐R‐30059

# Question Reference Government Response

Apart from utilizing attachment 1, Multiple Quantity Ranges, the soliciation is slient on the format of ar a response. Is there a specific format that is required?

Solicitation Contractor's own format may be used as long as the chosen format contains the pertinent data fields from Attachment 1, Multiple Quantity Ranges.

Apart from the master bid set PDF the actual TDP could not be located in the FBO solicitation. Please advise where the full TDP can be accessed.

Solicitation Was added

On CLIN 0028, 1028, and 2028 PN 179735‐0005 does not match the NSN 5935‐01‐334‐3230. We believe the part number should be 176524‐0001 for these CLINs. Please clarify the correct PN for these CLINs

Solicitation page 23, 54, 86

You are correct, the P/N for CLINS 0028, 1028, 2028 and 3028 (Solicitation page 118) should be changed to 176524‐0001 to match NSN 5935‐01‐334‐3230. An amendment will be done to fix part number.

Section 2.8.4 of the SOW requires the development of a Counterfeit Prevention Plan to be approved by the Government. Who will be responsible to approve a counterfeit avoidance system? DFARS does not clearly identify what agency is responsible for granting approvals.

SOW Section

2.8.4 page 21

In accordance with the CDRL Data Item No. A00F, the Counterfeit Prevention Plan (CPP) requiring office is the Technical ‐ Air Force office. The requiring office will provide an approval or disapproval recommendation to the PCO. Data Item Description ‐ DI‐MISC‐81832 provides more detail as to the required elements of the CPP.

Contract Data Requirements List for A00F CLIN 0032AT could not be found in the solicitation package. Please provide a copy if available.

Solicitation CDRL A00F, Counterfeit Prevention Plan (CPP) for CLIN 0032AT has been added to the solicitation package.

For CLINs 33, 1033, 2033, 3033 for programmers shipped to P.O. Boxes is a total estimate cost required to be submitted for each CLIN?

Solicitation No proposed cost is needed. These CLINs will be shown as "To Be Cited" to accommodate Actual Costs

If an estimated cost is required to be submitted (question 6) will these costs be counted as part of the TEP?

Solicitation N/A. See Response to Question # 6

7/18/2014 Page 1 of 3

AOR Delivery requirements in section H901.

Question was: Is this a misunderstanding and there is an additional period after award that the contractor will be granted to procure material begin work and ramp to the volume that meets the customers' needs? Will proposals that offer the Government pre‐purchase of long lead material be acceptable?

Solicitation

For the initial delivery order only, the first production deliveries will have a delivery of 7 months ARO. This is to accommodate the fact that some of the one time only CDRLs, such as Reliability Test Plan, ESS procedures (CDRL A001), must be approved prior to initial production deliveries. Subsequent delivery orders will revert to the AROs as stated in the solicitation. Proposals that offer the Government pre‐ purchase of long lead material are not acceptable.

Section M‐900 Evaluation Basis for award indicates: In evaluation of the CLINS it appears that the Non‐Recurring Engineering effort associated with Exhibit C Test Procedures, and Exhibit D Technical Manual Contract Requirements are not separately priced. .

In oder to recover the cost/price of this NRE the contractor would have to include/distribute it in the priced CLINS and this would adversely impact the Total Evaluated Price. Give the importance of this NRE effort, would it not be best 1.) for these CLINs to be separately priced and 2.) that evaluation criteria take into account the understanding of the task and the effort to perform on these NRE CLINS, or 3.) include a guaranteed minimum order quantity and LRU configuration such that each contractor could apply amortization in a manner that provides for reasonable recapture of NRE.

Solicitation

CDRLS CLINS NSP: The only CDRLS that do not have to be produced by the incumbent contractor are the LRU ATPs and SRU ATPS. BAE has LRU ATPS, but they do not have SRU ATPs.

In acknowledgement of that fact, in SOW Section 2.2.2 the Government has allowed a 384 day ARO "grace period" in which SRUs orders may be tested outside of an SRU ATP requirement. In planning the acquisition, we determined that the anticipated cost of developing the CDRLs as compared to the overall contract ceiling was minimal. Therefore, we do not intend to price the CDRLS separately or provide a larger guaranteed minimum order for the life of the contract other than that of $1 Million that is already included in the solicitation.

7/18/2014 Page 2 of 3

Section L Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offers .

There appears to be no section L formal instructions for proposal preparation or proposal description. .

Given that there will be a good amount of NRE, to including technical data package update in parallel with production of hardware, we would expect that there would be a management or technical proposal requested to describe the contractors approach to accomplishing the requirements described in the ALE‐47 Statement of Work

Solicitation

Based on our Market Research and information provided by BAE Systems, Solicitation 14‐30059 (Prod 3.1) was intended to be a competition between two sources, already qualified, BAE Systems and Symetrics Industries, therefore a management or technical proposal was considered unnecessary.

The request for proposal vs the initial pre‐solicitation announcement is significantly different. The additional NRE was not anticipated. In order for BAE Systems to prepare and coordinate internally for this complex 5 year firm fixed price program, we would need an additional 45 days, past 31 July 2014, to complete and submit the proposal.

Solicitation

That is correct; Only the quantities were posted with the synopsis. The SOW nor the CDRLs were posted. The Government agrees to extend the proposal due date from 31 Jul 2014 to 5 Sep 2014. An amendment will follow soon.

7/18/2014 Page 3 of 3