Questions and Answers -- Joel 7 June.pdf

SPACE VEHICLES ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY (SVAT)

SOLICITATION NO.: FA9453-11-R-0287

REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL (RFP)

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

7 June 2012

1. QUESTION: Since the value of the resultant contract(s) is unknown, we respectfully request the

Government remove EVMS clause 252.234-7001 and 252.234-7002 from the solicitation. (Ref.

Section H.A. 252.234-7002, Page 12 of 26, and Section K.II.B, 252.234-7001, Page K-16 and K-

17 of 18).

ANSWER: The Defense Federal Acquisition Regulations Supplement (DFARS) paragraph

234.201 requires that if a cost or incentive contract or a subcontract is over $20M, EVMS applies. Since the maximum value of the award(s) may be $60M (See SVAT RFP B039 clause, Indefinite Quantity (DEC 2005)(TAILORED)), EVMS may apply. EVMS reporting is at the task order level (i.e., not for multiple task orders that cumulatively have a $20M or greater value).

Therefore, EVMS clauses are required to be left in the solicitation. The Government does not anticipate issuing individual task orders that are $20M or greater, but it is a possibility.

Ultimately, the EVMS clauses will remain part of the basic ordering agreement and will only apply to those SVAT task orders having a $20M or greater value.

2. QUESTION: Please confirm that none of the representations and certifications listed in paragraph

(c)(1) are applicable to the solicitation since nothing is checked. (Ref. Section K.II.A, 52.204-08, Pages K-2 and K-3 of 18).

ANSWER: FAR Clause 52.204-08 is updated. See amendment 1 to the FA9453-11-R-0287 solicitation.

3. QUESTION: Pursuant to DFARS 234.203(1), DFARS 252.234-7001 should be used instead of

FAR 52.234-03. Please confirm that FAR 52.234-03 should be removed from Section K. (Ref.

Section K.II.A, 52.234, Pages K-9 and K-10 of 18, and Section K,II.B, 252.234-7001, Pages K-

16 and K-17 of 18)

ANSWER: Yes. Thank you for bringing this our attention. Since this acquisition is issued from the Department of Defense (DoD), DFARS 252.234-7001 is to be in the solicitation instead of the FAR clause 52.234-03. See amendment 1 to the FA9453-11-R-0287

4. QUESTION: Assuming the Offeror’s proposal is less than $50,000,000, Offerors are required to submit the EVMS information identified in paragraph (b) and (c) of 252.234-7001. (a) Where in the Offeror’s proposal should this information be placed? (b) Since the required information could be quite voluminous, please confirm that the EVMS information will not be included in any page limitations. (Ref. Section K.II.B, 252.234-7001, Pages K-16 and K-17 of 18).

ANSWER: The EVMS shall be considered part of the cost proposal volume. Please note that EVMS is only applicable if a task order exceeds the $20M threshold.

5. QUESTION: Please confirm that none of the Representation and Certifications listed in paragraphs (d)(1) or (d)(2) are applicable to the solicitation since nothing is checked. (Ref.

Section K.II.B, DFARS 252.204-7007 Alternate A, Pages K-10 and K-11 of 18).

ANSWER: DFARS Clause 252.204-7007 has been revised by the contracting officer. In addition, FAR 52.204-08 was revised to include applicable clauses. See amendment 1 to the

FA9453-11-R-0287 solicitation.

6. QUESTION: The last paragraph of 2.1.5 states “Offerors shall provide a copy of the proposal to the perspective Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO) and the Defense Contract Audit

Agency (DCAA) at the time proposals are due to Det 8 AFRL/RVKS, above.” Please confirm than only Volume III (Cost/Price) needs to be submitted to the ACO and DCAA (i.e. Volumes I, II, and IV do not need to be submitted to the ACO and DCAA). (Ref. Section L.II.C, PRS-L001, Paragraph 2.1.5, Page L-6 of 24)

ANSWER: All proposal volumes are to be provided to DCMA and DCAA.

7. QUESTION: The last sentence of the first paragraph is Subparagraph [5.]2.c. states, “Fully disclosed Subcontractor/IOT proposal (including Tables 1 thru 4) are due by the closing date identified in this announcement.” The Final RFP contains no threshold for requirements to provide fully disclosed subcontractor proposals. The Draft RFP contained Clause L035 which set a threshold of $1,000,000 or over $500,000 and 20% of the Offeror’s proposed cost.” Any subcontractor over this threshold did not have to submit fully disclosed proposals. We respectfully request that the threshold identified in the Draft RFP be reestablished. (Ref. Section

LII.C, PRS-L001, Paragraph 5.2, Subparagraph 2.c, Page L-13 of 24.)

ANSWER: Paragraph 5.2.c. states that fully disclosed cost proposals are required for each subcontractor and interorganizational transfers for those subcontractors/IOTs performing actual labor hours. There is no longer a threshold and L035 was purposely removed prior to publishing the final RFP. In accordance with paragraph 5.2.c., these subcontracts should be priced using the same cost element breakout as required by Table 1 of Section L. Also, these fully disclosed Subcontractor/IOT proposals are to be listed in Tables 2-4 (as required and as applicable).

8. QUESTIONS: A) Is the Offeror to submit funding requirements by Government Fiscal Year or

Offeror Fiscal Year? B) Should the Offeror provide monthly projections or quarterly projections?

C) Are the “imposed Government budgetary constraints those listed Section L.II.C., PRS-L001, PRS-L001, Paragraph 1.1 (Budget/Funding Information), Page L-4 of 24? (Ref. Section L.II.C., Paragraph 5.4 (Funding Profile), Page L-22 of 24)

ANSWER: Question A) By Offeror Fiscal Year, Question B) The monthly/quarterly projections request has been removed from the solicitation (see amendment 1), Question C)

At this time, the Government’s best estimate for its budgetary constraints is listed in Section

L Clause PRS-L001, paragraph 1.1.

9. QUESTION: Paragraph 6.1.3 states, “Refer to Section G of the solicitation and complete all fill-ins.” There are not fill-ins in Section G of the solicitation. Please clarify. (Ref. Section L.II.C, PRS-L001 Paragraph 6.1.3, L-22 of 24)

ANSWER: There are no fill-ins in Section G. The language, “and complete all fill-ins” has been removed from the sentence under 6.1.3. See amendment 1 to the FA9453-11-R-0287

10. QUESTION: Paragraph 6.1.4 states, “Refer to Section H of the solicitation and complete all fill-ins.” There are not fill-ins in Section H of the solicitation. Please clarify. (Ref. Section L.II.C, PRS-L001, Paragraph 6.1.4, L-22 of 24)

ANSWER: There are no fill-ins in Section H. The language, “and complete all fill-ins” has been removed from the sentence under paragraph 6.1.4. See amendment 1 to the FA9453-

11-R-0287 solicitation.

11. QUESTION: Paragraph 6.1.5 states, “Refer to Section I of the solicitation and complete all fill-ins.” There are not fill-ins in Section I of the solicitation. Please clarify. (Ref. Section L/II.C,, PRR-L001, Paragraph 6.1.5, L-22 of 24)

ANSWER: There are some fill-ins in Section I (e.g., 52.223-03, 252.211-7003, 5352.223-9000, etc.).

12. QUESTION: Block 16 of CDRL A001 and CDRL A006 states that e-mail transmittal is not permitted. However, other CDRLs (e.g. A004 and A005) state that unencrypted and unsecure e-mail submission is not permitted. We respectfully request that Block 16 of CDRLs A001 and

A006 be revised to allow e-mail submission via encrypted or secure e-mail. (Ref. Exhibit A, CDRLs A001 and A006 (also reference Draft RFP Q&A #40 dated 2.22.12)

ANSWER: The Government agrees with this request. CDRLs A001 and A006 have been amended. See amendment 1 to the FA9453-11-R-0287 solicitation.

13. QUESTION: For cost estimating purposes, what contract award date (i.e., period of performance start date) should Offerors assume?) (Ref. General)

ANSWER: The estimated contract award date is currently in late 2012, the 4th quarter of the 2012 calendar year.

14. QUESTION: Reference Section L, Paragraph 5.2 ( page L-11) – The Government recommends flowing the AFPAC to subcontractors where certified cost and pricing data is required. For which of the sample tasks will certified cost and pricing data be required?

ANSWER: FAR 15.403-4 “Requiring cost or pricing data” states when certified cost or pricing data is required. Any proposed task order over the threshold stated in this FAR clause will require certified cost or pricing data.

15. QUESTION: Reference Section L.II.B, 5352.209-9001 (page L-2) – Paragraph (a)(2) requires

Offerors to provide complete information of previous or ongoing work that is in any way associated with the contemplated acquisition. Should this be included as part of Volume IV, Contract Documentation?

ANSWER: All information concerning previous or ongoing work that may create a conflict of interest should be listed in Volume IV, Contract Documentation. See amendment 1.

16. QUESTION: Reference Section L General Instructions, paragraph 2.2.1.1(b) (page L-7). We recommend that the Government allow us to use a sans serif font like Arial Narrow for graphics as it will improve legibility of 8 point text.

ANSWER: The requirement as stated is clear and Times New Roman shall be the font used throughout the proposal.

17. QUESTION: Do we need to submit an EVMS plan with our proposal if proposing a system that has not been determined to be in compliance with the EVMS guidelines? If so, should this be submitted as part of Volume IV – Contract Documentation?

ANSWER: 1) See DFARS 252.234-7001(a)(2) for the answer to the first question, and 2) See answer 15 for the answer to the second question.

18. QUESTION: Does the + or - $50M threshold apply in terms of submitting a comprehensive plan versus a written description of management procedures?

ANSWER: DFARS 252.234-7001 provides sufficient detail to answer this question.

19. QUESTION: Section K, pg. 16 requires an EVMS for proposals submitted in the amount of

$50M or more. Section L, pg 4, 1.1 states that each awarded basic IDIQ contract will have a

$60M ceiling. Question: if the value of initial task orders awarded to a contractor is less than

$50M and over the period of performance the value of all task order received never exceeds the

$50M threshold, will we be required to implement an EVMS? IF we are required to implement an EVMS, when would be have to have the EVMS implemented?

ANSWER: As stated above, EVMS applies at the task order level. DFARS clause 252.234-

7001(a) states EVMS requirements for proposals valued at $50M or higher and 252.234-

7001(b) states EVMS requirements for proposals valued between $20M and less than $50M.

The timing of EVMS implementation is stated in the DFARS 252.234-7001 clause.

20. QUESTION: Item 11.h: Requires a COMSEC Account. Question: Is it permissible to use the

Government’s COMSEC account at the worksite until our own COMSEC account is finalized?

ANSWER: COMSEC material is normally provided to a Contractor working at our facilities on Kirtland AFB, NM. The Offeror should keep this in consideration when proposing for on-base work under SVAT.

The Contractor's account is for COMSEC use at their off-base facility, if off-base work is proposed.

21. QUESTION: Is an interim SECRET clearance acceptable for administrative staff? Final determination may not be received in time for contract task performance.

ANSWER: An interim clearance is acceptable. A Contractor will need, at a minimum, an interim Secret clearance to be issued a Common Access Card to receive a computer account.

22. QUESTION: Item 11.d: The Contractor must provide adequate storage for classified hardware to the level of SECRET which exceeds two cubic feet and is of size or quantity that cannot be safeguarded in an approved storage container. Question: Since the Government is providing office space and other Base Support services for Contractor personnel and work is expected to take place on-site at Kirtland AFB, is it correct to assume that the Government will supply this capability within the work area on-site at Kirtland AFB?

ANSWER: Level of safeguarding required - only applies at the Contractor's off-base facility. Security Containers will be provided for the work done at Kirtland AFB, NM. Yes

- the Government will supply this capability within the work area on-site at Kirtland AFB, NM.

23. QUESTION: Section M, pg 2, Subfactor 2 – Personnel evaluation will evaluate the PM, Deputy

PM and Chief Scientist/Engineer against each Task Order.

ANSWER: Correct. Personnel - the PM, Deputy PM and Chief Scientist/Engineer, for each of the proposed task orders will be evaluated. In addition, the appropriate staffing, subcontract and consultation required to complete each task order (Task Orders 0001 through 0006), will be evaluated for consistency with the Offeror's technical and programmatic approach.

See M002 EVALUATION CRITERIA (SEP 2006)(TAILORED) for all information regarding the Government's evaluation criteria, to include Subfactor 2.

24. QUESTION: With respect to question # 23, this would imply that we need to identify personnel for the overall contract as well as for each task. Since we are not pricing the Basic Contract, how will the program-level deputy and chief scientist be evaluated?

ANSWER: The Government is evaluating each task order in the Offeror's proposal. The personnel (Subfactor 2) will be evaluated for each of the task order requirements. These personnel are not required to be identified at the overall contract level.

25. QUESTION: Task Order 2; 3.7 – “RPO guidance technology” – is this supposes to be “RSO”?

ANSWER: RPO = Rendezvous and Proximity Operations.

26. QUESTION: Task Order 2; “Tiny Operationally Responsive CMG” – Does CMG mean Control

Moment Gyroscope?

ANSWER: Yes, CMG = Control Moment Gyroscope.

27. QUESTION: Task Order 4; Meaning of EOL, CIGS and CIC?

ANSWER:

EOL = End of Life (power degrades over the lifetime of a satellite and the Government often specs requirements for power at the end of "x" years in orbit)

CIGS= Copper Indium Gallium Diselenide (a material system used for thin film photovoltaic)

CIC= Coverglass Integrated Cell (solar cell that has had an adhesively bonded cover glass attached)

28. QUESTION: Task Order 3, 3.1.1 “Recurring cost of $3M” – Does this include the unique integration and test costs for each new installation? Is this intended to be an annual figure, or is it over the life of the asset?

ANSWER: Recurring cost refers to per unit cost for the hardware (e.g., buying off the lot).

It does not include the cost of integration, etc., a one-time purchase price.

29. QUESTION: Task Order 3, 3.14.2 “Flight tentatively scheduled for June and September of

2012,” can we assume that new dates will be scheduled based on contract award and readiness of system? What dates should we use for the purpose of our task order response?

ANSWER: Flights scheduled within 2012 are removed from the SVAT Schedule. See amendment 1. Please propose to scheduled flights in subsequent years.

30. QUESTION: All Task Orders refer to “TDY to remote locations” – Where are the remote locations?

ANSWER: The TDY locations are tentative. The Government included the estimated number of trips per year in the various task orders to assist Offerors to price travel costs for such TDYs. The locations for the TDYs reflected in the task orders, while tentative, are expected to be in CONUS locations.

31. QUESTION: Is the Government considering ground-based or space-based geo imagers, or both?

ANSWER: The Government is considering both.

32. QUESTION: 1. 5.2.1.g instructs to provide the following information as the first page of the proposal for the Prime and Each Subcontractor, "amount proposed for each option". Should the sentence read "amount proposed for each task order"?

ANSWER: Yes. See amendment 1 to the FA9453-11-R-0287 solicitation.

33. Reference Task Order 0006, Paragraph 3.2.1 - Should the reference in this paragraph to

"processing algorithms from 2.1.2" be changed to "processing algorithms from 3.1.2"?

ANSWER: Yes, this paragraph should reference 3.1.2, and not 2.1.2. See amendment 1 to the FA9453-11-R-0287 solicitation.

34. Reference Task Order 0003, Section 6.0 - The deliverables requirement includes Status Report and Contractor Funds Status Report, as well as Contractor Performance Report. We are generally used to seeing only one of these reports required in a project. We are also somewhat surprised by the inclusion of CDRLs A007, A008 and A009 in what appears to be primarily a hardware-oriented task. Please clarify which deliverables are applicable to this task order.

ANSWERS:

1) Status Report and Contractor Funds Status Report will be both useful for the Program

Manager in managing the contract. The Contractor Performance Report is removed from

Task Order 0003. See amendment 1 to the FA9453-11-R-0287 solicitation.

2) CDRLs A007, A008 and A009 were included in Task Order 0003 in the event that a technical approach is proposed that involves software development. If the proposed technical approach does not merit CDRLs A007, A008 and A009, these deliverables are not required in the proposal. These CDRLS are only required if software development is part of the Offeror's technical approach.

35. Section 2.0 of each task order refers to the list of Compliance Documents and Reference

Documents appended to the basic SVAT SOW. Are all Compliance Documents and Reference

Documents applicable to each task order?

ANSWER: Compliance and Reference Documents are applicable if they are in some way tied to the proposed approach for a task order. For example, if the proposed approach involves lasers, then the Compliance Document - AFOSHSTD 48-139 Laser Radiation

Protection Program, will apply.

36. Reference SVAT SOW Exhibit 1 - We are having difficulty locating some of the Compliance documents at http://www.e-publishing.af.mil. Specifically, we have not been able to find the following documents:

- AFRP 91-3 Occupational Safety and Health

- AFRLI 99-103, AFRL Test Program

- AFRLPAM 99-103, AFRL Test Guide

- AFI 91-301 AF Occupational & Environmental Safety, Fire Protection, & Health

- AFI 10-1101 Operations Security (OPSEC)

- AFI 33-204 Information Protection Security Awareness, Training and Education

- PRS OI 21-101 Tool and Equipment Management, Latest Version

- PRS OI 91-101, Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health

- PRS OI 36-12, Contract Personnel In/Out Processing Procedures

Can you please provide access to these documents?

ANSWER:

The documents will be posted to fbo.gov ASAP with the exception of PRS OI 91-101, Environment, Safety, and Occupational Health and PRS 36-12, Contracting Personnel

In/Out Processing Procedures. These two documents have limited distribution. The

Government will provide the two PRS OI documents to those Offerors that submit a request to the Contract Specialist POC, Wayne Zitzka (505-846-4987, wayne.zitzka@kirtland.af.mil). The Government must determine the requestor is eligible to receive these documents, which have limited distribution, prior to providing them to the requestor.

Last, the following compliance documents are deleted from the Basic SOW:

- AFRLI 91-101 Laboratory System Safety Program

- AFMCP 23-202 Logistics Material Control Activity Operating Pamphlet

- AFI 33-211 Communications Security (COMSEC) User Requirements

- PLR 125-1 Designation of Controlled Areas and Access

- PRS OI 23-201 Information Technology Equipment Accountability

37. Attachment 9 Base of Support. Are there software and/or RF communications lab capabilities included in the current lab space identified?

ANSWER: Attachment 9, Base Support, is updated (see amendment 1) to include the following:

RADIO FREQUENCY COMMUNICATIONS

http://www.e-publishing.af.mil/

No Vector Network Analyzer (VNA)

Two Rosendale linear polarized horns with focusing lenses for 12 and 24" (8-18GHz)

Mechanical Test Machine (MTS) loading frame for applying strain to sample.

Thermal oven for load frame to test sample +/- 100 C

Fabry Perot Resonator (8-12GHz, 12-18GHz)

Comsol multiphysics