20190830_DRFP_QnA.pdf

H9240819R0001

DRFP Questions Answers

Question # Reference Question Answer

1 Atch 1, PWS 3.6.2

Paragraph 3.6.2 states: “The Contractor shall integrate secondary payloads provided as GFP (T), Modular Payload compliant and non-Modular Payload compliant payloads (O).” What contract vehicle does the government intend on using to acquire the GFP secondary payloads?

Specific contract vehicles have not yet been established.

2 Atch 1, PWS 3.6.9

Paragraph 3.6.9 lists two kinds of potential secondary payloads: (1) “The US Government Furnished Property (GFP) Electronic Warfare (EW)/special mission payloads” and (2) “Additional industry-developed/provided payloads i.e. additive FMV sensors, synthetic aperture radar (SAR), and (if feasible) eject/leave behind payloads”. This text indicates the “EW/special mission payload” will be GFP, however the text makes no reference to the additive FMV, SAR or eject/leave behind payloads as being GFP. Does the government intend on providing EW/special mission payloads as well as additive FMV, SAR and eject/leave behind payloads as GFP?

Yes, the Government intends to provide additive FMV sensors, SAR, and (if feasible) eject/leave behind payloads, if any, may be either GFP or contractor furnished property, which will be specified at the task order level.

DRFP, Page 68, Paragraph L.2.2.5

Paragraph L.2.2.5 states the requirements for submitting the payload performance description.

Should the contractor assume that this sub-volume is to be used to describe only the performance of the baseline FMV payload, or should the contractor describe the performance of all payloads (including “Additional industry-developed/provided payloads” as described in PWS paragraph 3.6.9) in sub-volume 3?

No, the offeror should not address secondary payload in their proposals.

4 DRFP, L.2.2

This paragraph states “The offeror shall submit one complete and stand-alone Technical Volume for each platform proposed.” The inclusion of the word “platform” indicates the government is expecting to receive proposals related to fully mission-equipped (i.e. including baseline FMV) air vehicles. Will the government accept proposals related exclusively to “secondary payloads” as defined in PWS paragraph 3.6.9 (i.e. additive FMV, SAR and eject/leave behind payloads)?

No, the Government will not accept proposals related exclusively to secondary payloads.

5 DRFP, L.2.2.5

Shall the contractor describe the performance of all secondary payloads (as defined in PWS paragraph 3.6.9) in sub-volume 3 of the contractor’s proposal?

No, offerors should not address secondary payloads in their proposals.

Question # Reference Question Answer

DRFP, Section A, B.3, Section H, H-2 (aii), Section L, L.2.2, Section M, M.1.3.3

Please define a 'platform'. Will platform family configurations such as adding length to a fuselage or moving of the wing/tail on the fuselage to accommodate government payload requirements be permitted within the definition of one platform?

No. "Platform" is defined at "*UAS Baseline Platform Configuration" in PWS Section 3.4.

"Platform family configurations" will not be permitted because each separate platform configuration must undergo a Capabilities Demonstration as part of the award of the IDIQ contract, or in the course of an on-ramped after award, in order for a platform to be proposed at the task order level. This also applies to improvements made to approved platforms without a previously approved ECP.

7 Atch 4, Section 1

The Government anticipates that Task Order requirements will be above threshold. In the final RFP, will sample Task Order requirements be provided?

Please refer to Attachment 4, Appendix A.

8 Atch II

For a company proposing multiple platforms who meets the Preliminary Qualifying Criteria, will all platforms be invited to the Capabilities Demonstration?

Each platform of all proposals successful in Step 1 will be invited to the Capabilities Demonstration.

9 DRFP, L.1.2.1

This paragraph identifies that contractors are to submit Factor 2 Technical Volumes for each platform. Referencing Table L-1, please clarify which Volume is Factor 2. Are both Volume 2A and 2B required for each platform?

There is no Factor 2, please see correction in final draft. Both Volume 2A and 2B are required for each platform.

10 Atch 1, 3.4.3

If all lasers specified in the Objective requirement are offered except for the LRF, will the objective requirement be considered as being met if "the system" provides the range to target information?

The government will not determine whether an Objective has been met. Award will be made to each and all Qualifying Offerors, which only requires, inter alia, that all Thresholds be met.

Objectives are included to illuminate the potential for task order requirements that may exceed thresholds.

11 DRFP, H-2 (aii)

Paragraph (aii) describes on-ramp new platforms for existing MEUAS IV contractors. How often will this opportunity be made available during the period of execution?

An on-ramp event will occur at the contracting officer's discretion.

12 DRFP, M.2.2

The paragraph is titled "Volume 2A - Technical" but is included in Sub-factor 6 which is Volume 2B as described in Section L. Please clarify if Subfactor 6 should be evaluated under a paragraph titled Volume 2A.

See correction in final RFP.

13 DRFP, M.2

It appears evaluation criteria is not weighted. Does this imply if a supplier is deemed responsive and acceptable it will receive an IDIQ award?

Please see definition of a "Qualifying Offeror". All Qualifying Offerors will receive an IDIQ award.

14 DRFP, Section M Why is price not an evaluation factor for the IDIQ competition?

Please refer to DoD deviation 2018-O0006.

15 DRFP, Section M

Based on previous schedules (reference:

Solicitation H9240319F0004 Amendment 4 - 6 May 19), an oral presentation for logistics capability was required. Will an oral presentation be required and evaluated? If not, why was it dropped?

The government will have the option to require oral presentations at the task order level.

16 DRFP, Section M Are currently approved MEUAS III platform configurations pre-approved for MEUAS IV?

No.

Question # Reference Question Answer

17 DRFP, H-2(a) Will the government allow IDIQ awardees to request an On-ramp event to support adding a new UAS configuration?

An on-ramp event will occur at the contracting officer's discretion.

18 DRFP, Section I Would the Government consider also including FAR 52.215-21 Alternate IV?

No.

19 DRFP, Section I Would the Government consider removing 52.227- 3 as 52.227-1 as having both could be considered duplicative?

Both clauses have been removed.

20 DRFP, Section I Would the Government consider removing DFARS 225-7007

No.

DRFP, SOFARS

5652.237-9001

Will the government consider adding a requirement for an additional key person called MEUAS IV Transportation Manager located at the trans-shipment point to ensure proper transfer of offerors materials from commercial transportation to MIL transportation? Also allows how government can track evaluation of this key requirement to make the vendors responsible for transportation.

Additionally, request adding Mission Coordinators and Site Leads to the list of Key Personnel.

Please note the comment in SOFARS Clause 5652.237-9001 that the Government may add to the key personnel at the task order level.

22 DRFP. L.1.1

Please provide a nominal Task Order RFP schedule for initial Task Orders post IQIQ award.

Furthermore, will consideration be given to multiple sites requiring competitive TO's to be issued at the same time and will the Government consider staggered IOC dates for TO's competed at the same time?

The timing of the issuance of task order RFPs and their schedules are driven solely by operational requirements.

23 DRFP, L.2.1.1

"...access to the solicitation, attachments and any amendments are restricted to U.S. companies" Please clarify if this statement means that only U.S.

companies may participate in the MEUAS IV offerings. Will the GOV allow partnering with foreign companies and/or air vehicle platforms designed and manufactured in foreign countries?

No. Only companies meeting the requirements of the DD 254 (DoD Contract Security Classification Specification) and the National Industrial Security Program (NISP) for all aspects of the MEUAS IV contract and its task orders will be eligible for contract award.

24 DRFP, Table L-2

Update to reflect the correct Section L References in Final RFP:

Sub factor 2: should ref L2.2.4 Sub factor 3: should ref L2.2.5 Sub factor 4: should ref L2.2.6 Sub factor 5: should ref L2.2.7 Sub factor 6: should ref L2.2.8

See corrections in final RFP.

25 DRFP, L.2.2.8.2

Sixth bullet: “Organization Structure change History IAW paragraph L.2.3.5 below” There is no paragraph L.2.3.5, change to reference L.2.2.8.4.1

See corrections in final RFP.

26 DRFP, L.2.2.8.2

First sentence refers to paragraph L.2.2.7.1. There is no paragraph L.2.2.7.1, change to reference L.2.2.8.1.

See corrections in final RFP.

27 PWS, 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 Will the “ USG designated transportation facilities” be CONUS or OCONUS? (For clarification only)

They could be either, but specific transportation facilities will be designated based on Government requirements at the task order level.

Question # Reference Question Answer

28 PWS, 3.1.2 and 3.1.3

Will the government arrange for Joint Inspections at cargo handoff? We think that a Joint Inspection should be mandatory and without such the requirements of 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 are impossible to meet. Based on our past experiences with MEUAS III, after the USG has received the shipment, cargo frustrations can only be solved by the USG.

Contractors have no access to internal USG logistics processes due to them being Inherently Governmental Functions.

Yes, the Government will arrange for Joint Inspection Handoff.

29 PWS, 3.10.2

Will the government provide a separate funding line for all IDIQ awardees to "Establish Forward Repair Activities, Supply Support Activities…"

No.

Industry Day Slides, Answer 30 & DRFP L.2.1.1

In the Industry Day Q&A, it was stated that having a TS FCL is not needed till contract award. The DRAFT RFP states a TS FCL is required at proposal submission. Due to the long lead times for DSS approval, would the Government accept the TS FCL as previously described in Industry Day Q&A, Answer 30?

Please note revised requirement that a Secret FCL is required at proposal submission.

31 DRFP, L.1.2.1

Do payloads that change or add a landing method of the UAS (e.g. carrying a VTOL kit) rise to the level of submitting an additional Factor 2:

Technical Volume?

Yes, a change in recovery method of the UAS shall require an additional Factor 1: Volume 2.

DRFP, L.2.2.2 &

M.2.2

The Volume 2 - Executive Summary's "concise summary of the offeror’s proposed approach" and "declaration statement" appear to be included in the page count for Volume 2A but not scored per Section M.2.2. If the Executive Summary is not scored, would the Government consider a separate page limit outside of Vol 2A's page count for the Executive Summary?

No.

33 PWS, 3.2.5

Will SOCOM use different guidelines for Task Orders that require different amount of hours per month(i.e. a 300 hr./month site vs 900 hr./month site)?

All task orders will be competed as described in Attachment 4.

34 PWS, 3.3.1

Does every possible launch and recovery method (including carrying optional payloads that provide a more accurate launch/recovery method, such as a VTOL kit) need to be demonstrated within the PWS 3.3.1 Recovery Area threshold standards during the Capability Demonstration of "Runway Independence" and for Volume 2 scoring, or, will only the most accurate available launch/recovery method need to be demonstrated inside the threshold Recovery Area and during Volume 2 scoring for a proposed platform to be considered acceptable?

All proposed launch/recovery methods will need to be demonstrated to meet the requirements of the PWS. Please note that different launch and recovery methods require a separate Volume 2.

35 PWS, 3.3.10

PWS 3.3.10 states, "The day and IR systems shall be separately controllable," is it acceptable for anti-collision lighting to have an "OFF, IR, Day" switch arrangement, or, do you want the ability to illuminate both at once?

It is acceptable for anti-collision lighting to have an "OFF, IR, Day" switch arrangement.

Question # Reference Question Answer

36 PWS, 3.4

Which IFF frequencies are required, U.S., international, or both?

Both U.S. and international IFF frequencies are required.

37 PWS, 3.4.5

Are the HDMI/HD-SDI (or NTSC if standard definition), KLV metadata stream over RS-232 cabling, and network stream (T/O) requirements simultaneous, or any one at a time?

Requirement must be met simultaneously

38 PWS, 3.5.1 & 3.6.6

3.5.1 and 3.6.6 appear to define FIPS 14-2 certification performance standards differently, is it a threshold (T) or objective (O) requirement?

The FIPS 140-2 certification is an objective requirement.

39 PWS, 3.5.1 & 3.6.6

Concerning the 256-bit encryption threshold and objective standards, PWS 3.5.1 and 3.6.6 might contradict one another, would the Government please clarify the 256-bit encryption threshold (T) and objective (O) are as described in 3.5.1?

Please see correction in PWS Paragraph 3.6.6.

40 CDP, 3.6.6

Would the Government elaborate on how data rates will be measured during the Capability Demonstration?

Data rates will not be evaluated at the demonstration and will be evaluated based on the technical volume.

41 CDP, 1.1

The Capabilities Demonstration Plan states, "Additional range access information and detailed demonstration schedule and plan will be provided to the offeror with the invitation to the demonstration," will offerors have a chance to send an advanced team to the capability demo site and perform a PDSS (Pre-Deployment Site Survey) per operating procedures during contract execution?

No. The invitation to Capabilities Demonstration will include as much information as is available about the site.

42 CDP, 1.2

Will the White Sands demo site have any personnel restrictions (i.e. Foreign persons)

Yes, additional information will be provided with the demonstration invitation.

DRFP M1.3.3

PWS 3.1.9, 3.3.11

If the contractor's proposed AISR system is not currently on a U.S. Government contract, they will be prevented from procuring SAASM cards or possession of the proper COMSEC accounts. Will SASSM be required for the demonstration?

No, SASSM will not be required for demonstration.

44 Atch 4, 1.b.(3)

The Industry Day presentation indicated that contract awards would be made on a Best Value basis IAW FAR Subpart 15.3 whereas Attachment 4 states that "...The Government intends to award primarily utilizing a Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) process..." Has the Government changed its acquisition strategy from Best Value to

LPTA?

Task orders will be competed in accordance with Attachment 4, which does not follow FAR part 15, except as explicitly required by FAR 16.505.

Please see 1.b.(1) of Attachment 4 and FAR 16.505(b)(1)(ii).

DRFP, M.2.2, Table M-2

Under Subfactor 2, Unmanned Air Vehicle Performance, Table M-2 lists the PWS cross references as paragraphs 3.2 - 3.3. We believe that the correct PWS references for Subfactor 2 should be PWS paragraphs 3.2 - 3.5. Please provide clarification.

Please see Final RFP.

DRFP,M.2.2, Table M-

Under Subfactor 3, Payload Performance, Table M- 2 lists the PWS cross references as paragraphs 3.4 -

3.6. We believe that the correct PWS references for

Subfactor 3 should be PWS paragraphs 3.6. Please provide clarification.

Please see Final RFP.

Question # Reference Question Answer

DRFP,M.2.2, Table M-

Under Subfactor 5, Program Management, Table M- 2 lists the PWS cross references as paragraphs 3.1,

3.7 - 3.9, 3.11. We believe that the correct PWS references for Subfactor 5 should be PWS paragraphs 3.8, 3.9, 3.11. Please provide clarification.

Please see Final RFP.

48 DRFP,L.1.4.3.f

The DRFP states: "For tables, charts, graphs, and figures, the text shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 10 point font size." We recommend that the requirement for the font face to be Times New Roman be changed to allow either Times New Roman or Arial as the font face for tables, charts, graphs, and figures.

Please see changes in final RFP.

49 DRFP,L.2.2.8.4

The DRFP states: "Relevancy will be evaluated IAW Section M.2.2.5.2." We believe that the correct reference should be M.2.2.6.3 vs. M.2.2.5.2.

Please provide clarification.

Please corrections in final RFP.

50 DRFP,M.1.3.3

The DRFP states: "…(MEUAS) IV Capabilities Demonstration Plan provided as Section J, Attachment III…" We believe that the correct reference should be Attachment II vs. Attachment III. Please provide clarification.

Please corrections in final RFP.

51 DRFP,L.1.4.3

Section L.1.4.3 allocates 31 pages for subfactors 1-

5. Considering that the PWS is 54 pages long, 31 pages is inadequate to demonstrate compliance to 100% of the requirements. We recommend increasing Technical page limit to 75 pages.

Please see changes in final RFP.

DRFP,L.1.4.3, Table L-1

Table L-1 does not include a page limit for key personnel résumés. Are we correct in assuming that key personnel résumés are excluded from page count?

Please see changes in final RFP.

DRFP,5152.225-5910

(a)

Is it the Government’s intent for the contractor to provide repair services to government furnished employee living quarters?

The contractor will not be required to provide repairs to government furnished employee's living quarters. This is a CENTCOM required clause.

PWS para. 3.0, 3.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.10, 4.1.2

PWS Para 3.0 and para 3.1 state that it is the responsibility of the contractor to be in place and ready to start within 90 days of tasking. PWS Para 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.10 and 4.1.2 require the Contractor to ship material to a Government designated transportation facility, move personnel to an AOR entry point, and inserts a 30-day lead time for Government processing at the transportation facility. Who is responsible for getting the personnel and equipment from the government designated transportation facility to the operational site?

There is no 30 day lead time for Government processing at the transportation facility. The contractor is responsible for ensuring proper arrangements are made in advance to ensure personnel and equipment from the government designated transportation facility arrive in a timely manner to the operational site.

Question # Reference Question Answer

PWS para. 3.0, 3.1, 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.10, 4.1.2

PWS Para 3.0 and para 3.1 state that it is the responsibility of the contractor to be in place and ready to start within 90 days of tasking. PWS Para 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.10 and 4.1.2 require the Contractor to ship material to a Government designated transportation facility, move personnel to an AOR entry point, and inserts a 30-day lead time for Government processing at the transportation facility. If the shipping time from the government transportation facility to the operational site takes longer than 30 days, is the government responsible for the delay?

There is no 30-day lead time for government processing at the transporation facility. The Government will be responsible for delays caused by the Government. The Contractor will be responsible for delays caused by the Contractor.

56 DD254, 13

Will DMD or iApp be used for disseminating

COMSEC?

DMD will be used for disseminating COMSEC.

DRFP L.2.1.1 &

DD254

Section l.2.1.1 states that "The prime offeror shall meet all requirements of the Contract Security Classification Specification (DD Form 254). The draft DD254 requires a COMSEC Account and Storage . Will the Government require that the Contractor have the COMSEC and Storage capabilities existing and approved at the time of proposal submission or will the Government provide assistance with this requirement at the time of contract award or prior to an active task order?

COMSEC Account and Storage is required prior to task award.

58 DRFP L.1.4.3.f What is the page count assigned to an 11X17 page size?

Fold out will be counted as two pages, see section L.

59 Attach II, 4.7.3

Table 2 lists the PWS reference for Endurance as section 3.3.3. We believe that the correct PWS reference is section 3.3.2. Please provide clarification.

Please see correction in final RFP.

60 Attach II,4.7.3

Table 2 lists the PWS reference for Transit Speed as section 3.3.4. We believe that the correct PWS reference is section 3.3.3. Please provide clarification.

Please see correction in final RFP.

61 Attach II,4.7.3

Table 2 lists the PWS reference for Operational Ceiling as section 3.3.6. We believe that the correct PWS reference is section 3.3.5. Please provide clarification.

Please see correction in final RFP.

62 Attach II,4.7.3

Table 2 lists the PWS reference for Acoustic Signature as section 3.3.9. We believe that the correct PWS reference is section 3.3.8. Please provide clarification.

Please see correction in final RFP.

63 DRFP, L.1.4.3

The Instructions to Offerors does not provide a provision for a compliance matrix. Will the government please consider allowing offerors to provide a compliance matrix that is excluded from page count?

A compliance matrix will be included in page count. Please note increased page count for Volume 2.

64 DRFP, L.1.4.3.a

The DRFP states: "…Microsoft Office 2013, presentation and spreadsheet products are preferred…" Will the government please allow offerors to submit electronic files in Adobe Acrobat PDF format for documents that are not presentations or spreadsheets?

Please see correction in Final RFP.

Question # Reference Question Answer

65 DRFP, L and M

The DRFP did not have a small business requirement. Will the final DRFP have a submission requirement for a Small Business Subcontracting Plan per FAR 52.219-9?

Small Business Subcontracting Plans are not required per FAR 19-702(b)(3).