Contractor Questions for MUOS FOPR FA8552-20-R-0007.pdf

CONTRACTOR QUESTIONS

DATE 10/13/2020

MACM FOPR # FA8552-20-R-0007

TITLE UH-1N MUOS SATCOM

ID Q&A #

REFERENCE

(SOW PARAGRAPH, CLIN

STRUCTURE, GFI etc)

QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

A 1 FOPR letter page 3, paragraphs G and H

Email notification, Beta SAM posting, and Solicitation indicate that Proposals are due 16 October, 2020. However, the FOPR letter indicates a Proposal Due Date of 9 October, 2020. Which is the correct proposal due date?

The Proposal Due Date is 16 October 2020. FOPR letter and Beta SAM Posting have been updated (9/4) with the corrected Due Date. Notifications were sent to Offerors on 9/8.

A 2 FOPR letter page 3, paragraphs G and H

FOPR Letter paragraph G states proposal delivery is electronic via email or SAFE.

FOPR Letter paragraph H table and associated footnote requires written Tech and Cost Volume and electronic copies deliver via CD/DVD media which requires hard copy delivery. Please indicate which is required.

Only one (1) copy of everything is required electronically, via email or DoD SAFE is required.

Hard copies and CD/DVD are optional if you wish to do them. The FOPR has been updated to reflect number of electronic copies (1) and the option to submit Hard copies and/or

CD/DVD.

A 3 FOPR letter page 4, paragraph H

The table in FOPR paragraph H contains two volumes numbered "1". Please confirm that the correct designation for the Technical Proposal should be Volume II.

Technical Proposal should be Volume II. The FOPR has been updated to reflect correct Volume number II for Technical Proposal.

A 4 Contractor Questions for

MACM DRAFT FOPR FA8552-

20-R-0007-20200902.pdf

The answer for Question F 6, "Will information be provided by the USG for all inline RF components (filters, relays, amplifiers, etc.) to aide in the co-site analysis?" appears to have been omitted. "EN" appears in the Government response field. Please provide the response to this question.

ICD (integration control document) provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/6).

A 5 Contractor Questions for

MACM DRAFT FOPR FA8552-

20-R-0007-20200902.pdf

The Government response to Q. 23 acknowledged there will be different production kit configurations and raised the question if SubCLINs for CLIN 1015 would be appropriate. The Solicitation does not include SubCLINs, so did the Government determine they were not appropriate? Also the installs are at three different sites, and FOPR Letter pricing instructions require pricing by location, so it would also be desirable, if possible, to break out Install CLINs 0007, 0011 and 1017 by SubCLINs.

The Solicitation has been updated to incorporate SubCLINs for 0007 (Trial Install Kit), 0011 (Kit Proof Installation), and 1017 (Production Kit Installation) by Kit Configuration. The SubCLIN descriptions will include applicable Kit Configuration locations.

Fairchild AFB Legacy: 1 TI, 1 KP, 2 PI Andrews AFB Legacy: 1 TI, 1 KP, 16 PI Andrews AFB, Block I: 1 TI, 1 KP, 1 PI

A 6 FOPR Letter section 3.B FOPR Letter section 3.B. indicates Past Performance will be assessed on Relevance and Confidence, but no definition of Confidence rating is provided. Please provide table defining Confidence ratings.

The FOPR has been updated to incorporate the Confidence Ratings.

A 7 FOPR Letter

The FOPR letter does not address pricing of Over & Above CLINs for unknown FFP tasks, or CR no Fee CLINs for Travel and Shipping. Please indicate which of these are to be contractor priced versus Government estimated.

The FOPR is inclusive of all CLINs listed in the Solicitation. As such CLINs 0031 (Travel) and 0032 (Shipping) will need to be Contractor Priced (estimated). The actual cost for CLINs 0037/1037 (Over & Above) will be negotiated at the time an action is deemed necessary.

The Amount Description has changed to TBN in the Solicitation.

A 8 Solicitation FA8552-20-R-0007

The Solicitation Production Option does not include CLINs for Over & Above requirements or Shipping. Please indicate how these tasks are to be priced.

The Solicitation has been updated to incorporate CLINs 1032 (Kit Packaging, Handling, Shipping, and Transportation) and 1037 (Over & Above). CLIN 1032 is to be Contractor Priced (estimated). The actual cost for CLINs 0037/1037 (Over & Above) will be negotiated at the time an action is deemed necessary. The Amount Description has changed to TBN in the Solicitation.

A 9 MACM IDIQ contract clause 52.232-16

The MACM IDIQ contract clause 52.232-16 states Progress Payments are applicable as specified in the Delivery Oder. This solicitation does not address applicability of Progress Payments; please authorize Progress Payments.

Progress Payments will be made available to utilize when requested / needed. Applicable Clause 52.232-16 has been added to the Solicitation.

A 10 Solicitation FA8552-20-R-0007

Solicitation Section L provision 252.215-7009 and provision L-499 are applicable when Certified Cost and Pricing are required under TINA. Since this is a request for competitive FFP proposal not subject to TINA, please confirm that these provisions do not apply to this proposal submission.

Certified Cost or Pricing Data will not be required for the subject effort as this is a competitive requirement. The Solicitation has been updated to remove the L-499 and 252.215-7009 Provisions.

A 11 FOPR letter page 7, Past Performance Questionnaire

The Government requests that three point of contacts (POCs) from previous contracts complete the Past Performance Questionnaires. Please clarify if these POCs are to be for three different contracts. Is the offeror required to supply three past performance citations?

The POCs for the Past Performance Questionnaires must be from 3 different contracts.

B 1 MUOS DRAFT Q&As A7 and F11

In the MUOS SATCOM Industry Q&As released 2 Sep 20 the answers to questions A7 and F11 state the PM is working to obtain access to TOs for the MACM contract awardees, in order to support the NRE design for this effort can the USG please provide a timeframe on when those TOs will be available?

AFTO 43 Forms were emailed to Offerors on 28 September 2020. Electronic TOs provided via DoD SAFE (10/7).

Contractor Questions for MUOS FOPR FA8552-20-R-0007 Dated : 13 October 2020 Page 1 of 8

MACM FOPR # FA8552-20-R-0007

TITLE UH-1N MUOS SATCOM

ID Q&A #

REFERENCE

(SOW PARAGRAPH, CLIN

STRUCTURE, GFI etc)

QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

B 2

FOPR 1.G states “…Each Offeror shall submit proposals electronically via email…” and “Proposals shall be emailed or delivered via the DoD SAFE site (https://safe.apps.mil) to AFLCMC/WIUKB, however the table under FOPR 1.H has a note that “*Technical and Cost/Price proposal information shall be submitted in written form (1 copy) and CD- R or DVD-R (write once/read only).

Can the USG confirm that proposals are only to be submitted electronically and that a written copy with CD-R or DVD-R is not required?

Only one (1) copy of everything is required electronically, via email or DoD SAFE is required.

Hard copies and CD/DVD are optional if you wish to do them. The FOPR has been updated to reflect number of electronic copies (1) and the option to submit Hard copies and/or

CD/DVD.

B 3

Proposal Adequacy Checklist and L-499 Cost Proposal Adequacy and Structure, Section (d).

Are the Proposal Adequacy Checklist and the Cost Proposal Requirements as listed in L-499 Cost Proposal Adequacy and Structure, Section (d) to be responded to in Excel per Proposal Submission instructions section H, or may they be responded to in narrative format for items such as Historical Cost Incurred?

The Government is expecting a Cost Narrative to substantiate information in the Excel Cost Volume.

B 4 MUOS Draft Q&As A7 and F11 We would like to request access to all applicable TO’s, in a searchable format, for the aircraft impacted by this modification.

Access is being worked at the MACM level. Electronic TOs provided to Offerors via DoD

SAFE (10/7).

B 5 MUOS SATCOM Order Description We would like to request a copy of TCTO 1H-1(U)N-701 Access is being worked at the MACM level. Electronic TOs provided to Offerors via DoD

SAFE (10/7).

B 6 MUOS SATCOM Order Description We would like to request the approved MAC for this modification. The MACC will be completed after the Design is completed.

B 7

Official notification of solicitation release dated 3 Sep 2020

FOPR Letter

The official notification of solicitation (FA8552-20-R-0007) release dated 3 Sep 2020 stated, "If this response date is unreasonable for the level of effort required in preparing the proposal, please contact the undersigned with your request for extension prior to the closing date and time."

Based on the delay in receiving the TOs required to support the NRE design for a FFP solution we would like to request an extension to the proposal due date of five (5) weeks from the date the TOs are received. For example, if the TOs are received on 2 Oct 2020 we would like to request that the proposal due date be extended to 6 Nov 2020.

The Proposal Due Date has been extended to 13 November 2020, NLT 4:30 pm EST.

C 1

Part IV Section L Clause L-499 Cost Proposal Adequacy and Structure (pp 28-31) and Clause 252.215-7009 Proposal Adequacy Checklist (pp 24-28)

The solicitation requires the offeror to prepare and submit certified cost or pricing data and an associated Proposal Adequacy Checklist. See L-499 Cost Proposal Adequacy and Structure, paragraph a. Should these clauses be removed from the solicitation since this is a competitive acquisition with an expectation for adequate price competition? (Reference: FAR 15.403-1(c)(1) Prohibition on obtaining certified cost or pricing data)

Certified Cost or Pricing Data will not be required for the subject effort as this is a competitive requirement. The Solicitation has been updated to remove the L-499 and 252.215-7009 Provisions.

C 2 Past Performance Questionnaire

Is H.1. "Original MAX Contract $ Value" a mistake? Should it be Original Schedule instead of Original MAX contract value?

H.1. "Original MAX Contract $ Value" is correct - this information provides the original awarded contract value (including options)

C 3 Past Performance Questionnaire

Why are you asking for POP information in both G and H? The Period of Performance (PoP) in H is for a PoP that has been extended past the original PoP established for the contract. If the PoP has not been extended (from the original established PoP), then state in H that "Same as the PoP stated in G" or "Reference PoP stated in G"

Dated : 13 October 2020 Page 2 of 8

MACM FOPR # FA8552-20-R-0007

TITLE UH-1N MUOS SATCOM

ID Q&A #

REFERENCE

(SOW PARAGRAPH, CLIN

STRUCTURE, GFI etc)

QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

D 1 Past Performance Questionnaire

Please clarify how many past performances are to be submitted with the proposal. Do past performances have to be that of the prime or can they be from team mates?

Three (3) past performance questionnaires are to be submitted with the proposal. The PPQs will be that of the Prime Contractor as the Government does not have insight into subcontractor/team mates.

D 2 FOPR page 7 FOPR states past performance should be submitted on date and time specified in Block 8 on the face page of the RFP. Should that be block 9?

The referenced Block should be Block 9 in the FOPR. The FOPR has been updated to reflect state Block 9 for past performance submittal dated and time.

D 3 FOPR Cost Volume Is the Government expecting only a MS EXCEL Cost Volume without a MS Word/PDF Cost Narrative?

The Government is expecting a Cost Narrative to substantiate information in the Excel Cost Volume.

D 4 FOPR 1.G and 1.H

In the OBE_FOPR document it states under 1.G that proposals shall be delivered by email or DoD SAFE or a hard copy if desired. The table in 1.H. of the OBE_FOPR file has a requirement of 2 copies of the Cost Volume III and the asterisk note states CD delivery. What is the preferred method of delivery for the proposal? Does the Government expect to receive a CD-R/DVD-R with the Technical and Cost/Price Proposal in addition to the email/DoD SAFE submission? Is the 2 copies requirement related to the Cost/Price volume related to submitting 1 electronic copy and 1 CD copy or should it also only reference 1 copy?

Only one (1) copy of everything is required electronically, via email or DoD SAFE is required.

Hard copies and CD/DVD are optional if you wish to do them. The FOPR has been updated to reflect number of electronic copies (1) and the option to submit Hard copies and/or

CD/DVD.

D 5 Solicitation FA8552-20-R-0007

The Solicitation document lists the Proposal Adequacy Checklist and states that Certified Cost and Pricing Data is required in L-499. Is this correct for this solicitation that the Certified Cost and Pricing is required and the checklist must be submitted even though there are most likely going to be multiple offerors providing price competition?

Certified Cost or Pricing Data will not be required for the subject effort as this is a competitive requirement. The Solicitation has been updated to remove the L-499 and 252.215-7009 Provisions.

D 6 Solicitation FA8552-20-R-0007

This one is related to the Kit Packaging, Handling, Shipping, and Transportation under CLIN 0032 and the lack of a CLIN for this in the Option year for the Production Kits.

Will the Government consider either extending 0032 PoP from 20 months to 31 months or adding a CLIN 1032 to cover the Kit Packaging, Handling, Shipping, and Transportation for the 11 month Option Year PoP? Otherwise, the Production Kits in Option Year 1 do not have a line to send them to the install locations unless it is included in one of the OY1 Production Kit CLINs.

The Solicitation has been updated to incorporate CLINs 1032 (Kit Packaging, Handling, Shipping, and Transportation) and 1037 (Over & Above) with an 11 month PoP. CLIN 1032 is to be Contractor Priced (estimated). The actual cost for CLINs 0037/1037 (Over & Above) will be negotiated at the time an action is deemed necessary. The Amount Description has changed to TBN in the Solicitation.

D 7 Solicitation FA8552-20-R- 0007: CLIN 0037 Over and Above

Does the Government have a prescribed estimation formula or a plug number for the Over & Above? Or allow the O&A CLINs to be classed as TBN (To Be Negotiated)?

The way I interpreted the O&A is to cover unforeseen issues which would have a separate FFP proposal submitted during execution. Being as each aircraft is different, it would be highly likely we would have to revise any negotiated dollar amount as issues are discovered.

You are correct in that O&A will be utilized for unforeseen tasks that may come about during the MUOS modification upgrade. There is no prescribed estimation formula or plug number for O&A, however, this amount must be Contractor estimated to calculate into the TEP for all Offerors. The amount of money allocated to O&A will essentially be utilized on an as needed basis. If additional funding is necessary after all allocated funding were to be used up, then a request for additional funding would be initiated.

The pricing arrangement for the CLIN 0031/1037 Over & Above will remain FFP, however, the actual cost will TBN at the time an action is deemed necessary. Amount Description has changed to TBN in the Solicitation.

D 8 eMASS Access

Is the Government willing to allow the winning contractor to access an eMASS instance to facilitate cyber compliance?

Access to the eMASS system will not be applicable for this effort. eMASS is a cyber database used to store information such as documentation and specs, similar to the one Clinger-Cohen uses. Our Authorizing Official (AO) says it isn’t a good fit for Platform IT (PIT) systems, so we don’t use it.

D 9 ATO / IATT Has SOF/PR’s AO approved an IATT overlay for the RMF control set that is applicable here?

An ATO will be ready NLT September 2021 allowing testing and use of the radios.

D 10 TO Access Is the Government still planning on making the Technical Orders available and, if yes, when will they be available?

AFTO 43 Forms were emailed to Offerors on 28 September 2020. Electronic TOs provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/7).

Dated : 13 October 2020 Page 3 of 8

MACM FOPR # FA8552-20-R-0007

TITLE UH-1N MUOS SATCOM

ID Q&A #

REFERENCE

(SOW PARAGRAPH, CLIN

STRUCTURE, GFI etc)

QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

E 1 FOPR 3.A Subfactor 1.2

Looks like at least 5 of the bidders have the same general issue that the antenna co-site analysis is performed as part of the contract design process. The evaluation criteria is to provide correct calculations to demonstrate an understanding of the tasks.

Co-site analysis is done with a software package and modeling versus hand calculations, so there’s still confusion on what calculations are to be presented. Is there any additional information that can be provided on Co-site analysis?

The Government has reviewed the requirement and revised the Subfactor 1.2 requirement and applicable Rating Table.

G 1 Specs / ICDs Will the Government provide Specs and/or ICDs for the ARC-210 GEN VI and all additional GFM?

ICD (integration control document) provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/6).

G 2 Follow on to Question 1:

Specs / ICDs

What time/date will the ICDs and or specifications for the ARC-210 GEN VI and all additional GFM be available via DoD SAFE? This information will drive system solutions so will additional time to propose be authorized?

ICD (integration control document) provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/6). The Proposal Due Date has been extended to 13 November 2020, NLT 4:30 pm EST.

G 3 Solicitation FA8552-20-R- 0007: The Schedule

USAF DRAFT Letter RFP for the MUOS Capable SATCOM System provides Schedule, including the Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs), Pricing Arrangement(s) (PA), Quantity (Qty), Unit of Issue (U/I), Description, and PoP for this proposed modification. Please confirm this information is still accurate/complete and was not updated in the final solicitation.

The Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs), Pricing Arrangement(s) (PA), Quantity (Qty), Unit of Issue (U/I), Description, and PoP listed in the Official Solicitation are the same as what was provided in the DRAFT Letter RFP.

G 4 AFTO Forms for TO Access Contractor Questions states: The PM is working to obtain access to TOs for the MACM contract awardees. Please provide status.

AFTO 43 Forms were emailed to Offerors on 28 September 2020. Electronic TOs provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/7).

G 5 Follow on to Question 4:

AFTO 43 Forms for TO Access

When will the AFTO 43 forms that have been prepared by the MACM Program Manager and PCO for Offerors to obtain access to UH-1N TO library be sent? This information will drive system solutions so will additional time to propose be authorized?

AFTO 43 Forms were emailed to Offerors on 28 September 2020. Electronic TOs provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/7). The Proposal Due Date has been extended to 13 November 2020, NLT 4:30 pm EST.

G 6 CDRLs Order description section 5. a. states TBD CDRLs at the bottom of this list will be identified on MACM SOW Rev B; When will version "B" be issued?

The Primary PCO for the MACM IDIQ Contracts will be issuing the MACM SOW Rev B with a forthcoming modification, which is currently in the works. In the meantime, the referenced DRAFT "TBD" CDRLS have been uploaded to Beta SAM (10/6).

G 7 Federated Installations Please confirm controlling software for MUOS and interface updates to the Gen VI ARC-210 are not included in this contract.

Correct, these are federated installations.

G 8 Follow on to Question 7:

Federated Installations

The following software CDRLs are required for this FOPR: 1.1.10.11 CDRL A00M Software Requirements Specification (SRS) 1.1.10.13 CDRL A00P Software Design Description (SDD) 1.1.10.14 CDRL A00V Software User Manual (SUM)

The following MACM SOW paragraphs are applicable: 3.9.10 Software 3.9.10.1 Software Requirements and Feasibility Analysis 3.9.10.2 Software Process 3.9.10.3 Software Design 3.9.10.4 Software Implementation 3.9.10.5 Software Test and Evaluation 3.9.10.6 Software Validation 3.9.10.7 Software Verification 3.9.10.8 Software Documentation 3.9.10.9 Software Configuration Management 3.9.10.10 Software Ownership and Rights 3.9.10.11 Development of New Software 3.9.10.12 Modification of Existing Software 3.9.10.13 Software Sustainment

If these are federated installations, will software MACM SOW paragraphs be applicable and required to address in the proposal?

If these are federated installations will software CDRLs be required for this contract?

Regarding the “Block 1” and the interface from the current installed Comms and the CDNU, the Government does anticipate there will be software requirements needed to modify the CDNU software to limit Comms controlled from the CDNU, or maintain the same control as present. The Software paragraphs and CDRLs will cover this requirement at a minimum. If your proposed solution indicates these are not going to be required based on your analysis of the data and what you propose, then you can recommend they be removed for your proposal.

G 9 Will the USAF provide a system diagram of the existing ARC-210 Gen V on the 3X Block 1 aircraft?

If the system diagram is not it the Technical Order, then The USAF Government does not have a system diagram of the existing ARC-210 Gen V on the 3X Block 1 aircraft that we are aware of. Will provide if found.

Dated : 13 October 2020 Page 4 of 8

MACM FOPR # FA8552-20-R-0007

TITLE UH-1N MUOS SATCOM

ID Q&A #

REFERENCE

(SOW PARAGRAPH, CLIN

STRUCTURE, GFI etc)

QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

G 10 TMCR

The TMCR does not call out and state a specific reference/requirement for xml files.

However, MUOS TM-86-01Q - dated 27 Oct 2017, TMCR Number H041 – 1 may 2020, para 6.2 states the following:

6.2. Page-oriented Military Specification (MIL-SPEC) TOs shall be formatted with text (Times New Roman font), graphics (Arial font), and delivered according to the TMSS specified in Section 2, Table 1. The Contractor shall develop according to the DTDs referenced in the appendix to MIL-STD-38784A and each applicable military detail specification (MIL-DTL).

The reference to MIL-STD-38784 DTD/FOSI implies an xml requirement. However, the Section 2 TM Type and Delivery Requirements calls out the following: FrameMaker

12.0 or earlier version file format (For Maintenance and FMs)

We are assuming the USAF is not asking for both xml and FrameMaker files. We believe USAF would prefer us to use the MIL-STD-38784 DTD to generate xml output.

Please confirm this assumption.

The Government required files delivered in FrameMaker 12.0 No .xlm files are required.

The only time we require DTDs/FOSI’s is if you are developing a new TO listed in Table 1. In this case the only requirement in Table 1 is for a TCTO and we will not require that for it.

G 11 TMCR

Section 2 TM Type and Delivery Requirements calls out the following: Check the ASSIST database, http://dodssp.daps.dla.mil/assist.htm, for updated versions of the required TMSS prior to initiating any work on this proposal/contract. We do not have access to the assist database. Will the USAF provide access to the database or send the required TMSS?

The ASSIST site was accessed through a non-Government home computer and opened a document without any CAC assistance. CAC access to the ASSIST database is not required. Try the following link to set up an account to access this database:

https://assist.dla.mil/online/start/

G 12 Solicitation FA8552-20-R-0007 Please confirm only 19 production Kits will be required for Option period I (11 months)?

There will be 25 installs; 3 Trial, 3 Kit Proof, and 19 Production. All 19 of the production are in the option year. NOTE: Please identify any production kit items you believe will be long lead.

G 13 Production Installs Will both installation locations (Fairchild and Andrews) be active for TK/KPK installs simultaneously or sequentially?

Sequentially. However, if possible, the Kit Proofs at Andrews could be done simultaneously.

G 14 Cybersecurity

Do you have any information on who (or what Government organization) will be the Government's ACO (Authorization or Certifying Official) for cybersecurity aspects of the subject program?

To clarify the driver for the question about who the Authorization Official/Organization is likely to be, we want to be able to clarify whether the cybersecurity certification effort is targeted at achieving ATO (Authorization/Authority to Operate) or IATT (Interim Authorization/Authority to Test)?

The information regarding who will be the Government's ACO will not be released at this time. The Cyber effort is targeted at completing an ATO. If we are unable to complete one before install and testing, we will obtain an IATT until the ATO can be completed. The Government is currently on track to have an ATO completed NLT September 2021.

G 15 Software CDRLs

Is this (disabling Comm 1 & Comm 2 from the System Status pages) all that the Government will require, or are they looking for a software change to remove all occurrences of Comm 1 and Comm 2 in the CDNU pages? Appendix B makes no mention of this, but rather simply states that "Comm 1 and Comm 2 will be 'severed' from the bus. Clarification is requested.

Regarding the “Block 1” and the interface from the current installed Comms and the CDNU, the Government does anticipate there will be software requirements needed to modify the CDNU software to limit Comms controlled from the CDNU, or maintain the same control as present. The Software paragraphs and CDRLs will cover this requirement at a minimum. If your proposed solution indicates these are not going to be required based on your analysis of the data and what you propose, then you can recommend they be removed for your proposal.

Dated : 13 October 2020 Page 5 of 8

MACM FOPR # FA8552-20-R-0007

TITLE UH-1N MUOS SATCOM

ID Q&A #

REFERENCE

(SOW PARAGRAPH, CLIN

STRUCTURE, GFI etc)

QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

H 1 FOPR 1.G (p3)

FOPR 1.G (Proposal Submission) states that proposals shall be emailed or delivered via the DoD SAFE Site. However, the table on page 4 states (as a note), "Technical and Cost/Price proposal information shall be submitted in written form (1 copy) and CD- R or DVD-R (write once/read only) (1 copy)..." The table also shows that 2 copies of the Cost/Price proposal are required. If the proposal is to be emailed or delivered via the DoD SAFE Site, will the Government remove the requirement for 2 copies of the Cost/Price Proposal as well as the requirement for one CD-R or DVD-R copy from the

FOPR?

Only one (1) copy of everything is required electronically, via email or DoD SAFE is required.

Hard copies and CD/DVD are optional if you wish to do them. The FOPR has been updated to reflect number of electronic copies (1) and the option to submit Hard copies and/or

CD/DVD.

H 2 FOPR 3.A (p6) Technical Rating

FOPR 3.A (p6), under Technical Rating states, "One technical rating will be assigned to each technical factor. In order to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every factor."

Of the three factors (Technical, PP, and Cost), only the Technical (Factor 1) is rated using Acceptable/Unacceptable ratings. Will the Government clarify if this sentence should read "In order to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every sub-factor."

Additionally, Sub-Factor 1.1 has ratings labeled 'Mostly Acceptably" and "Partially Acceptable". Are "Mostly Acceptable" and "Partially Acceptable" ratings awardable?

FOPR has been updated to sentence to state "In order to be considered awardable, there must be an “acceptable” rating in every sub- factor".

"Mostly Acceptable" and "Partially Acceptable" ratings are considered awardable.

H 3 FOPR 3.B (p6) Past Performance

FOPR 3.B (Factor 2: Past Performance) states that the past performance evaluation will be based on data available to the Government through systems such as JAM/SPM/CORT and through questionnaires. The FOPR also states that the past performance will receive a relevance rating and a confidence rating.

Will the Government clarify, are offerors to provide write-ups for the past performance contract references? If offerors are not required to provide data on these contracts, will the Government clarify how they will determine relevance to scope, magnitude, and complexity (for the relevancy rating)?

Unless a contract is classified, the Government will be able to access the Past Performance contract references to determine relevance.

H 4 MUOS DRAFT Q&A C11, D12

Q&As C11 and D12 indicate that an IMS is required as part of the Technical proposal.

The requirement for an IMS is not part of the FOPR (Section 3) Technical Proposal Requirements. Will the Government confirm that an IMS is not part of the Technical proposal submission requirements?

IMS will not be required for the proposal

H 5 MUOS DRAFT Q&A F22

Will the Government update the FOPR to incorporate 10pt font as acceptable for charts, graphs, drawings, and supporting illustrations as stated in Q&A F22?

FOPR letter has been updated to incorporate font size 10 for charts, graphs, drawings, and supporting illustrations

H 6 Attach 1 MOUS SATCOM Order Description. Section 3.

Page 1, Section 3.a, of Attachment 1 MUOS SATCOM Order Description states "The SOW paragraphs listed below are applicable for this delivery order and must be addressed in the proposal:" The section then provides approximately 3 pages of SOW section headings. Offerors will be unable to provide actual methodologies for each of these SOW headings within the required 40 pages allowed for the technical proposal.

Will the Government reword the requirement to state, "The SOW paragraphs listed below are applicable for this delivery order and must be addressed as appropriate based on the sub-factor requirements in 3.A of the FOPR.

The SOW paragraphs must be addressed even if the response is Not Applicable.

H 7 MUOS DRAFT Q&A F11 F11: AFTO 43 Forms were emailed to Offerors on 28 September 2020. In the interim, Electronic TOs provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/7).

H 8 MUOS DRAFT Q&A F26 F26: An on-site survey will not be possible. The Government attempted to acquire/create a photo book, however, with the current COVID situation, we were unable to do so.

H 9 Proposal Due Date Extension Proposal Extension: The Proposal Due Date has been extended to 13 November 2020, NLT 4:30 pm EST.

Is the Government going to make this information available to support the FOPR and will an extension be granted to support evaluation of this material and effects on vendor solutions and submissions in response to the FOPR?

Dated : 13 October 2020 Page 6 of 8

MACM FOPR # FA8552-20-R-0007

TITLE UH-1N MUOS SATCOM

ID Q&A #

REFERENCE

(SOW PARAGRAPH, CLIN

STRUCTURE, GFI etc)

QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

H 10 Attach 1 MOUS SATCOM Order Description. Section 3.a

Can the Government explain why MACM SOW Section 3.9.10 Software requirements are included when the Scope description, paragraph 2, does not include software integration or modification? The system to be integrated is federated and software modifications of the federated system are not expected. Will the Government exclude the software reference and all associated CDRLS?

While the Government is expecting a federated install, the Government believed some form of software requirement may exist. These SOW paragraphs were left in to cover any of those possibilities. If your proposed solution does not require them, please state so in your proposal.

H 11

Attach 1 MOUS SATCOM Order Description. Section 2.c FA855220R0007, page 14 Production Kits

Due to the variability of TO Development will the Government eliminate the Option Year from this effort or consider ROM pricing?

It will be at the Government's discretion to exercise the 11-month Option for this effort.

However, if the 11-month Option is not priced, then the submitted proposal will not be responsive to the Government's requirements. As such, the Government will not consider this alternative.

H 12 Attachment 1, Order Description Appendix B:

AFDW Block I, 3 Aircraft

Will the Government provide a block diagram for Comm 3 on the AFDW Block 1 aircraft to support vendor responses to this RFP?

The Government has provided via the TO description and the Technical Orders, everything they are aware of that exists for these aircraft as it pertains to this effort.

H 13 Attachment 1, Order Description Appendix A, B, C

Will the Government provide detailed part number list of all system components for each Comm position currently installed on the subject aircraft, broken down by each of the 3 configurations, to include type of ICS system installed and diagrams to indicate where system items are installed (RT, Antennas, Amps, Filters, Control Heads, COMSEC, Fill Ports, ICU's) to support vendor responses to this RFP?

The Government has provided via the TO description and the Technical Orders, everything they are aware of that exists for these aircraft as it pertains to this effort.

H 14 Attachment 6, GFP Will the Government provide System Specification data for all Government Furnished Property to be integrated to support vendor responses to this RFP?

This information should be in the ICD provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/6).

H 15 MUOS DRAFT Q&A F5 Will the Government provide the ICD referenced in the Government response to question F, 5 to support vendor responses to this RFP?

ICD (integration control document) provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/6).

H 16 MUOS DRAFT Q&A F11

Notice to vendors for access to the WIU TO Library was received on 9/29/2020.

Vendors without CAC access will have to complete the CAC issue process and the WIU Library access process to obtain required data to support vendor proposals. Will the Government provide assistance in obtaining CAC access and extend the RFP due date to support this activity?

Access to the WIU TO Library will be granted for your IDIQ contract, not at the TO/DO level, so the Primary PCO / PM will work to get you CAC access if needed. In the interim, Electronic TOs provided to Offerors via DoD SAFE (10/7). The Proposal Due Date has been extended to 13 November 2020, NLT 4:30 pm EST.

I 1 Solicitation FA8552-20-R-0007

In the model contract document, FA855220R0007 there is no CLIN for PHS&T in production Option 1. Recommend the addition of CLIN 1032 to cover PHS&T costs (CRNF). CLIN 1029 (Program Management) and CLIN 1037 (Over and Above) are missing from Option Year I.

Regarding Over and Above in Base Year (CLIN 0037) and Option I (CLIN 1037), we recommend the Government add “TBN – To Be Negotiated” to the “Amount” entry in the model contract. We cannot bid these FFP CLINs at this time because we don’t know the details on the O&A to be performed.

The Solicitation has been updated to incorporate CLINs 1029 (Program Management), 1032 (Kit Packaging, Handling, Shipping, and Transportation) and 1037 (Over & Above). CLINs 1029 and 1032 are to be Contractor Priced (estimated). The actual cost for CLINs 0037/1037 (Over & Above) will be negotiated at the time an action is deemed necessary.

The Amount Description has changed to TBN in the Solicitation.

I 2 Attachment 1 Order Description, Paragraph 3.a Description of Requirement

Tasks includes MACM SOW para 3.9.10 Software (and sub-para’s 3.9.10.1 – 3.9.10.13) as well as software related CDRLs including A00M (SRS), A00P (SDD), A00V (SUM). Request clarification on the software tasks related to this modification upgrade since SOW/OD para 2.a states this installation is a “federated” system – meaning there is no software integration required with the UH-1N OFP. Does the Government want software deliverables (i.e., SRS, SDD, and SUM) for the ARC-210 Gen IV system itself?

While the Government is expecting a federated install, the Government believed some form of software requirement may exist. These SOW paragraphs were left in to cover any of those possibilities. If your proposed solution does not require them, please state so in your proposal.

I 3 Attachment 1 Order Description, Paragraph 3.a Description of Requirement

Tasks includes MACM SOW para 4.9 Earned Value Management. Since this contract is Firm Fixed Price (all CLINs except for Travel and PHS&T), why is EVM required?

Recommend deletion of this SOF MACM SOW requirement.

EVM will not be required. EVM references have been removed from Order Description.

Dated : 13 October 2020 Page 7 of 8

MACM FOPR # FA8552-20-R-0007

TITLE UH-1N MUOS SATCOM

ID Q&A #

REFERENCE

(SOW PARAGRAPH, CLIN

STRUCTURE, GFI etc)

QUESTIONS GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

I 4 Attachment 1 FOPR MUOS SATCOM, Para 1.H

States Technical and Cost/Price proposal information shall be submitted in written form and CD-R or DVD-R media types which is in conflict with paragraph 1.G that states proposals shall be e-mailed or delivered via DoD SAFE. Request clarification on proposal delivery requirements.

Only one (1) copy of everything is required electronically, via email or DoD SAFE is required.

Hard copies and CD/DVD are optional if you wish to do them. The FOPR has been updated to reflect number of electronic copies (1) and the option to submit Hard copies and/or

CD/DVD.

I 5 FOPR MUOS SATCOM, Para 3.B

Past Performance states the questionnaire must have three POCs from previous contracts. Does this mean three POCs from each past performance contract? Or one POC from three past performance contracts? Request clarification on the number of past performance contracts to be submitted and the number of POCs from each contract that should complete questionnaires.

Only one (1) POC is required for each past performance contract submitted for a total of three (3) POCs. The POC for the Past Performance Questionnaires must be from 3 different contracts.

I 6 MACM SOW para 3.8 cybersecurity requirements and the associated CDRLs

From previous Q&A the Government stated, “An ATO is being worked on and is scheduled to be completed by Jan/Feb 2021 timeframe”. Is the in-work ATO being developed using the same RMF elements/artifacts required in the SOW and CDRLs;

and if so, will those RMF elements/artifacts be available for review by the selected SOF MACM prime for this task order?

Yes, we will be using the same RMF artifacts we are requiring the contractor to produce. We can provide the artifacts that are considered Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI), if they are available when the contractor needs them. Please note that some of these documents are CLASSIFIED SECRET, and those documents will not be available. We might be able to provide templates or outlines of the documents if the need arises.

I 7 Solicitation FA8552-20-R-0007

Regarding another CLIN that may need to be added to Option 1… CDRL A035, Engineering Data For Provisioning (EDFP) is listed as “BOTH” in Attachment 1, Section

5. If this CDRL is required during Option 1, shouldn’t CLIN 1025 be added to capture cost/price for updating and re-delivering this CDRL during production, Option 1?

The Solicitation has been updated to incorporate CLIN 1025 (Provisioning).

Dated : 13 October 2020 Page 8 of 8