Clarifications RFP 19Sep08.pdf

Clarifications IAE RFP ‐ 19 Sep 2008 Page 1

Clarifications to IAE RFP 19 Sep 2008

Please note an RFP Amendment will be issued for those items that require such a change.

SF 33

1. On Page 4 of 35 ‐ is a FPIF amount requested for CLIN 0006 to manufacture and deliver a LOT of six test units? If yes, is an unit price not applicable?

CLIN 0006 should reflect the unit cost of each test garment, based on a BEQ of six garments.

2. On Page 11 of 35, CLIN 4004 refers to Exhibit E CDRL which is missing from the RFP package.

This should read exhibit D, not exhibit E. (See Amendment ‐0001)

3. On Page 18 of 35, CLIN 0007: CLIN 0007 identifies OA Support through month 33.

Assuming OA support commences with month 29; OA unit delivery, this equates to a 4 month duration. Section L, Para 7.1.4a., identifies the OA is a 1 month duration, followed by Government down select activities lasting 2 months. SOW Para 4.1.1 estimates SDD duration at 31 months. Should Section F be updated to reflect an OA commencing immediately after OA unit delivery (month 29) and lasting for 1 month (month 30)? Based on the Government’s clarification. The SOO or Section L IMS assumptions may require update as well. If so, please provide clarification of SDD duration; i.e., 30 months, 31 months or 33 months.

The period of performance to SDD is approximately 31 months, the period of performance for the OA is approximately 1 month, and the down select period of performance is approximately 2 months.

4. On Page 19 of 35, please verify end date for CLIN 1002 whether it should be 30 June or 31 July 2012.

30 June 2012 is the correct date. (See Amendment ‐0001)

5. On Page 19 of 35, CLIN 3001: CLIN 3001 (Ejection Seat FRP Year 1), shows a period of performance from 1 Apr 13 to 31 Mar 14 (12 mos). SOO Para 4.1.4 identifies a 9 month period. Which is correct? Also, we believe the SOO should reflect FY13 instead of

FY12.

Period of performance for FRP year 1 is 12 months, the date will be change based on the date of SDD contract award.

6. On Page 19 of 35, CLIN 4001: CLIN 4001 (Ejection Seat FRP Year 2), shows a period of performance from 1 Mar 14 to 30 Apr 15 (14 months). SOO Para 4.1.5 identifies the 2nd FRP option as FY13 and12 months duration. Shouldn’t FY13 be FY14 and should the duration reflect 14 months instead of 12? Please clarify.

Period of performance for FRP year 2 is 12 months, the date will be change based on the date of SDD contract award.

Clarifications IAE RFP ‐ 19 Sep 2008 Page 2

7. On Page 19 of 35, CLINs 4002, 4003, 4004: CLIN 4001 shows a period of performance from 1 Mar 14 to 30 Apr 14. CLINs 4002, 4003, and 4004 show the period of performance through 31 Mar 15. Shouldn’t all CLINs have the same period of performance?

CLINs 4001, 4002, 4003 and 4004 should all have the same period of performance, with the dates based on the date of SDD contract award

8. Please provide URL to access full text of Air Force Materiel Command Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement Contract Clauses.

There are several ways to access the FAR via the website in the public domain.

9. On Page 14 of 35, Clause C003, Item (a)(7) seems to repeat Risk Management Plan which is (a)(6), but identifies the acronym “(IMP).” Should this be the Integrated Master Plan (IMP)?

Change to Integrated Master Plan (IMP) (See Amendment ‐0001)

10. On Page 14 of 35, Clause C002: Should reference to “Statement of Work (SOW)” be changed to Statement of Objectives (SOO)?

SOO is the correct reference (See Amendment ‐0001)

11. Page 23 of 35, PSK‐H001, C. Specific Evaluation Criteria states, “Factors 1, 2, 3, and 4 are of equal importance”. D. Important of Cost/Price states, “factors other than price, when combined, are significantly more important than cost or price; however, cost/price will contribute substantially to the selection decision”. In Section M, page 2 of 10, YA‐M002a, states "The first three factors are of equal importance. Cost/Price, although an important factor, is of less importance." Please clarify whether Factors 1, 2, 3 and 4 are or are not of equal importance.

In Section M, page 2 of 10, YA‐M002a refers to source selection. Page 23 of 35, PSK‐H001, C. Specific Evaluation Criteria refers to down‐selection criteria following Government OA.

12. Page 26 of 35, PSK‐H003, Additional Special Contract Requirement – please provide information as to what "a" (therefore, presumed to be one) "development verification test beyond the proposed threshold or objective criteria” means. Will this test be in lieu of or in addition to the DVT under CLIN 0004. An additional verification test will surely have an impact on cost and schedule, what is the basis for requiring the contractor to perform this task without an equitable adjustment to the cost and schedule? Please clarify or specify limit of cost encumbrance to the contractor that might be associated with this clause.

PSK‐H003, Additional Special Contract Requirement clause is rescinded. (See Amendment ‐0001)

Clarifications IAE RFP ‐ 19 Sep 2008 Page 3

13. Solicitation Section H, Paragraph H044 ‐ The solicitation provides the contractor the opportunity to request Government owned test facilities and/or equipment on a rent‐ free, non‐interference basis for the execution of the IAE Program. Will the Government also provide the labor associated with operating the facilities and/or equipment, conducting and reporting the tests, and the test subjects at no cost to the contractor?

If not, which of these costs would the contractor be expected to bear and, consequently include in our cost proposal?

All cost associated with utilizing Government owned test facilities/equipment should be reflected in the cost proposal.

Section K

1. Page 4 of 8, 252.217‐7026 Identification of Sources of Supply ‐ it is not possible to complete the table required herein because the final configuration of the IAE design is/will not be determined prior to award. This table could be completed prior to award of contract options for LRIP & FRP supply. Please advise?

Provision 252.217‐7026, Identification of Sources of Supply, should be completed prior to the exercise of the LRIP option.

Section L

1. L011(a), please check the titles of the specified FAR clauses; L011(e) what is the source document for the “219.702(a)” reference?

L011(a) shall read:

(a) Patent Rights. If the Offeror is a small business firm or nonprofit organization, then FAR 52.227‐11, PATENT RIGHTS‐OWNERSHIP BY THE CONTRACTOR (SHORT FORM), and DFARS 252.227‐7039, PATENTS ‐ REPORTING OF SUBJECT INVENTIONS will be used in Section I. Otherwise, FAR 52.227‐12, PATENT RIGHTS ‐ RETENTION BY THE CONTRACTOR (LONG FORM), will be included in Section I consistent with FAR Part 27.

Please see DFARS 219.702(a)

(See Amendment ‐0001)

2. Page 7 of 17, Section 2.3.9, second paragraph and Page M ‐ 9 of 20, 6th paragraph under f. Factor 4 ‐ Cost/Price both state "The Offeror's cost/price proposal will be evaluated by total price for the entire effort ..... A Total Evaluated Price (TEP) will be calculated by adding the Target Prices ..... All prices will be calculated using the maximum quantity for each CLIN". Section M, page 1 of 10, 5352.291‐9008 states "Offers shall be evaluated on the basis of the unit prices ... by multiplying the proposed price(s) by the best estimated quantity(s). Is the "maximum quantity" the "best estimated quantity"? Please clarify.

Offeror’s should propose and the Government will evaluate the cost/price based on the BEQ for each production CLIN.

Clarifications IAE RFP ‐ 19 Sep 2008 Page 4

3. Should the original copy of SF 33 not hole‐punched and kept separate from other contracting documents in Volume 1 as instructed under Part IV, Section L, 3.1.1 or be bound in the three‐ring loose‐leaf binder as instructed in 2.3.5?

The original copy of the SF 33 should be hole‐punched with two hole punches 2 ¾” apart in the center of a 8 ½ x 11 page. (See Amendment ‐0001)

4. Please provide Attachment L‐1 that is referred to under 3.4, Page L‐8.

Attachments were posted to FedBizOpps, IAE synopsis under YA‐L001 SEC L Atchs 1‐10 dated 14 July 08.

5. Section L, Para 8.4 (k) ‐‐ PPI are requested 30 days from date of solicitation release. Day 30 falls on a weekend. May we deliver PPI on the following Monday?

Yes, the following Monday will be fine.

6. Section L, Para 9.4.1 ‐‐ The Cost Elements are listed first for the Prime Contractor and then for the Subcontractor. However, under the word Subcontractor, the phrase "Prime Contractor" appears again. Is this a typographical error?

Yes and also, The Milestone Decision Authority has requested the use of EVM for the IAE effort; however, to allow us to make a sound business case analysis on whether or not to seek a waiver on the use of EVM for this effort look for the addition of EVM in Section L, para 9.4.1, under COST ELEMENTS, Prime Contractor, Indirect Costs, Other Indirect Costs, of the IAE solicitation requesting that industry provide separate pricing data for

EVM.

(See Amendment ‐0001)

7. Page L, 16 of 17, 9.4.1 Cost Summary by Cost Elements (SDD only) ‐ this section seems to indicate the cost summary by cost elements are only required for the base contract, SDD, not production options. Therefore, please clarify why LRIP information is requested in this section. Is the inclusion of LRIP here an error? Please provide CLIN numbers that require Cost Summary by Cost Elements.

“(SDD only)” should be changed to “(SDD and LRIP)”. (See Amendment ‐0001)

8. In Section L, page 4 of 17, Paragraph 2.1.1, Ms. Alice Sanders is named as the point of contact. Mr. Richard Williams is named as the point of contact in Attachments L‐6, L‐ 8, and L‐9. Please confirm two points of contact.

All points of contact should be changed to Ms Alice Sanders.

9. Attachment L‐10 ‐‐ Can the offeror submit a modified price template? For example, should this table also include a column for Ceiling Price for each line item? Also our understanding is that Target Cost + Target Profit = Target Price. Should there be separate columns for Target Cost and Target Price rather than placing both values in the same box?

Offerors are allowed to modify the pricing template, however, all requested information should be provided.

Clarifications IAE RFP ‐ 19 Sep 2008 Page 5

Section M

1. Section M, Page 6 of 10, Relevance ‐‐ Subparagraph iii lists several factors that will be used to determine relevance. The table at the bottom of the page includes only two factors: magnitude and complexity. Please resolve apparent inconsistency.

The table describes the ratings that the Government will apply to the past performance factors listed in subparagraph iii.

2. Section M, Page 7 of 10, Performance, Subparagraph iv ‐‐ The definitions are presented twice.

Noted, duplication will be deleted.