Questions and Answers for Line of Sight.pdf

Questions for the Line of Sight-Short RFP

Solicitation FA8629-12-R-2421

Round 1

1) For the purposes of pricing related to production, does the Government view a "sim-to" approach acceptable for this development effort?

ANSWER: A “sim-to” approach needs to be further refined. This approach has not been discussed.

2) CLINs listed show Inspection and Acceptance to be at DESTINATION while L001

Information to Offerors (ITO) and Instructions for Proposal, Paragraph 8.1.4 Section E -

Inspection and Acceptance - Requests “the offeror shall propose inspection

ANSWER: The government is expecting Inspection and Acceptance to occur at

Destination.

3) Is the three (3) year warranty intended to cover the production units only or is it applicable to the prototypes as well?

ANSWER: Production units only

4) L001 Information to Offerors, Paragraph 3.6 Proposal Submission Content, Table 1 -

Proposal Organization defines volume contents of Vol IIB, Section 6 to contain the Small

Business Subcontracting Plan and Paragraph 9.1 General Instructions – Requires offerors to provide a “Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Atch 8)” as an attachment to the model contract

(Section J). Please clarify if the requirement is to provide the Small Business Subcontracting

Plan at Both locations

ANSWER: The Small Business Subcontracting Plan should only be provided once at

Volume IIB, Section 6.

5) This requirement states: “Performance Value: The ability to mark (T) designate (O) target aim points to sensors and weapons. Reference STANAG 3733 and 3875 PRF Codes (T) PEM

Codes (O).” These documents are RESTRICTED Distribution. Request a copy of these documents be provided to offerors.

ANSWER: A determination is being made if the STANAG 3733 can be released or if another avenue exists for PRF cross referencing, expect determination by 1600, 22 Feb

2012.

6) NATO STANAG 3875, “Criteria for Categorization of Laser Designator Systems” appears to have a status of “Withdrawn”. Is this correct? If so, is this document still applicable or has it been replaced by another?

ANSWER: NATO STANAG 3875 was subsumed by STANAG 3733. A determination is being made if the STANAG 3733 can be released or if another avenue exists for PRF cross referencing, expect determination by 1600, 22 Feb 2012.

7) Request the Government clarify page limit for reach of section’s B, w/respect to provided note

1 and lettered table on page 5.

ANSWER: The System Engineering Plan, SOW, IMS, CWBS, Small Business Plan, Contract Documentation, IMP and System Specification are exempted from the page count.

8) Do prime contractors need to submit sub-contractors agreements/teaming agreements/mou’s/letters of intent from their sub-contractors or partners from whom they are bidding on this proposal.

ANSWER: It is advisable for the offeror to submit those documents if those documents exist.

9) Does the Government require or prefer sub-contractor data be submitted in a sealed package.

ANSWER: Sealed packaging is acceptable.

10) Section L. requires data right assertions be segregated into 2 sections OMIT and Non-OMIT data. Can additional breakouts be provided such as EMD Data as not all Deliverables with Data rights fall directly into the OMIT and NON OMIT CLINS.

ANSWER: Data rights assertions can be made beyond the two categories listed.

11) SF 33 Page 7 B057 Contract Type: Cost Plus Incentive Fee, states Government 80%

Contractor 20%. What do those percentages apply to? Page 18 states the penalty and incentive for coming in above or below target cost is at 20 cents for each dollar above or below target.

ANSWER: The 80/20 share ratio in the contract means that the Government pays 80 cents, and the contractor pays 20 cents of every dollar of cost above the target of the contract. It follows that for every dollar of cost under the target, the Government saves 80 cents and the contractor earns an additional 20 cents over and above the target fee. The precise dollar amounts of the compensation adjustment are determined by this formula after the contract is completed.

12) SF 33 CLIN’s: The CLINS state INSPECTION and ACCEPTANCE both are at Destination, however, certain CDRL’s call out Inspection at Source and Acceptance at Destination.

Please clarify where inspection and acceptance will occur?

ANSWER: Destination

13) What are the Definitions of a Class 1 and Class 2 change?

ANSWER: Class I Changes: Any change that affects Form, Fit or Function of an item.

Will also include Specification Requirement changes. Class II Changes: Any changes to manufacturing processes, substitution of parts due to obsolescence, or changes to contractual documents.

14) Attachment 6 SOO: Areas of the SOO refer to meetings to be held at the Test Location.

Please clarify for pricing purposes where those locations will be so the Contractor can propose the necessary round trips.

ANSWER: Test locations are in Eglin AFB, Florida and Tucson, Arizona

15) Attachment 7 List of Clauses: This document references Sections of the SF33 by Letter and page number, however, the page numbers don’t tie with the referenced letter sections and descriptions. Is the Contractor to assume the Section letters are the proper reference point?

ANSWER: The Section Letters are the proper reference point.

16) Small Business Subcontracting Plan: What are the Small Business Subcontracting Plan

Goals by small business type for this procurement?

ANSWER: Specific goals will be outlined on 22 Feb 2011 with an amendment to the RFP.

17) Section L requests pricing to be provided under CLIN0001 EMD by major cost element using Attachment 9 to Section L. Are “major cost elements” a subjective determination to be made by the Contractor? Do the FFP CLIN’s require any kind of pricing breakdown similar to Attachment 9 by cost element or merely a LOT price to be substantiated by backup documentation that can be provided upon request? Estimating Methodology of how the Contractor arrived at the LOT number would be delineated in the cost volume narratives for FFP CLIN’s.

ANSWER: The major cost elements are a subjective determination to be made by the offeror. The FFP CLIN’s do not require a price element breakdown. Estimating methodology shall be delineated in the cost volume narratives.

18) Section L under ASC/HM037 Data Right Assertions, it mentions Pre Award Identification and Assertion and references an Attachment 10 in the SF33 but as an Attachment 11 in

Section L. Which Attachment should Pre Award Identification and Assertions be submitted as?

ANSWER: The offeror should return as attachment 10 to the SF33

19) The ASC/HM014 Data Rights Clauses reference “Type 1 Training”. Where is “Type 1

Training” defined?

ANSWER: “Type 1” training is synonymous with the “Train the Trainer” concept where the offeror trains Government personnel and that training is then passed to the users.

20. Deliverable Drawing Package Requirements~ Request copy of Air Force drawing 9579776 and 9579777 (cage code 98752).

ANSWER: Drawing are attached to this amendment.

21. Request clarification on the number of units that may be purchased under this contract. Line

Item 0002 of the solicitation indicates up to 600 units may be ordered under each of the four option years, totaling 2400 units. What is the maximum number of units that may be procured under this contract?

ANSWER: The initial production requirement is for 600 production assets. The offeror may price out to 2400 using the associated matrix.

22. Section L, Paragraph 3.6, Table 1, Note 1 states that SOW, IMS, CWBS, and Small Business

Plan will not have a page limit. Section L, Paragraph 3.8 unnamed table allows the Integrated

Master Plan and System Specification to also be excepted from page count. Please clarify which documents are excluded from page count?

ANSWER: The System Engineering Plan, SOW, IMS, CWBS, Small Business Plan, Contract Documentation, IMP and System Specification are exempted from the page count.

23. Initial phase of the LOS-S procurement is an EMD effort including LOS-S unit Test &

Evaluation by the contractor, followed by government Developmental Test & Evaluation and government Operational Test & Evaluation all of which may lead to design updates. These updates may in turn impact production cost and schedule. SOO paragraph 5.f.v states that CDR will include “Updated cost, to include production costs”. Section H001 Options states that in the event an option is exercised, Section B of the contract will be modified as appropriate. Will the government allow the contractor to revise the Section B FFP CLINs and the Section J, Attachment 1 Pricing Matrices as appropriate to reflect these updates prior to exercising the production CLINs?

ANSWER: SOO paragraph 5.f.v shall be deleted from the effort.

24. Please provide a list of "specific targets" that are referred to in SRD Requirement 3.2.16

ANSWER: The “specific targets” are 2 meter by 2 meter standard NATO targets.

25. We are interested in providing best value low risk solutions for the LOS-S program. We and others in the industry have existing systems that exceed the 86 in^3 threshold requirement. Will the government entertain solutions that exceed the 86 in^3 threshold volume requirement?

ANSWER: No, at this point we are not interested. As we are entering into this as a developmental effort, we desire to work to get down to that threshold.

26) In the spirit of providing best value offerings, will the government consider proposals that trade off meeting some threshold requirements and not others?

ANSWER: No, the Government will not accept meeting some threshold requirements and not others.

27) Due the developmental nature of the program and that CLINS 2-7 are FFP, we would like more time to respond to this RFP. This allows us time to accurately assess the system production cost and ensure that we are providing the government with the best price possible. Can the government extend the proposal due date by two weeks?

ANSWER: The proposal due date can not be extended.

27. How do we get access to the BAO Kit Increment II Capability Development Document

(CDD) (ref 1.2.1)?

ANSWER: The BAO Kit Increment II CDD does not provide information which will benefit proposal preparation and will not be provided under this RFP.

28. How do we get access to the BAO HMI, CDD, 17 May 2007 (ref 2.1.1.1)?

ANSWER: The BAO HMI CDD does not provide information which will benefit proposal preparation and will not be provided under this RFP.

29. How do we get access to the CoT XML Interface Control Document (ref 2.1.1.2) or is everything covered in the BAO_Kit_ICD_3_-_Software document?

ANSWER: CoT XML Interface Control Document is attached to this amendment.

30. How do we get access to CJCSI 6212.01E, 8 March 2006 (ref 3.2.4.2)?

ANSWER: Reference to the CJCSI 6212.01E is removed from the SRD. A revised SRD will be loaded 22 February 12 with this update.

31. Is there a distinctive difference between “highlighting aim points” and designating targets

(ref 3.2.4.2)?

ANSWER: For this instance, there is no distinctive difference between the two.

32. What does the acronym IA stand for (ref 3.2.4.6)?

ANSWER: Information Assurance

33. How do we get access to DoDI 8500.2 (ref 3.2.4.6)?

ANSWER: Attached to this amendment.

34. How do we get access to STANAG 3733 and 3875 (ref 3.2.4.7)?

ANSWER: A determination is being made if the STANAG can be released or if another avenue exists for PRF cross referencing, expect determination by 1600, 22 Feb 2012.

35. What is a PEM code and how are they different from standard laser guided munitions

PRF requirements (ref 3.2.4.7)?

ANSWER: The reference to a PEM code is removed from the SRD. A revised SRD will be loaded 22 February 12 with this update.

36. What are the threshold and objective ranges for the rangefinder, laser designator and observation capabilities for LOS-S?

Why are there differences from one component to another?

ANSWER: The SRD component values noted with differences, have all been made consistent, see SRD language change at Section 3.2.4.2.

Could you please specify the ranges at which you wish to detect, recognize and ID targets?

ANSWER: See below.

Please also specify what size targets these ranges apply to.

ANSWER: a standard NATO target 2 meter by 2 meter.

a. Section 3.2.4.2 states the threshold range for the designator must be 3m to 3km on a 26km or greater visibility day.

ANSWER: A revised SRD will be loaded 22 February 12 to update this section.

b. Section 3.2.11.2 states the threshold range for the rangefinder must be 25m to

3km on a 26km or greater visibility day.

ANSWER: No change

c. Section 3.2.16.1 states the observation resolution must “recognize” at ranges from

25m to 3km, but it does not specify a target size.

ANSWER: Standard NATO 2 meter by 2 meter target.