N00024-16-R-2449_Amendment_0004.docx

DOCX document 31 KB Posted

Attached to
Landing Craft, Utility (LCU) 1700 Design Studies and Analysis
Solicitation number
N00024-16-R-2449
Issued by

About this file

N00024-16-R-2449 Amendment 0004

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
N00024-16-R-2449_Amendment_0005.docx DOCX document
N00024-16-R-2449_Amendment_0003.docx DOCX document
N00024-16-R-2449_Amendment_0002.docx DOCX document
N00024-16-R-2449_Amendment_0001.docx DOCX document
N00024-16-R-2449.docx DOCX document
N00024-16-R-2449_J-4_Question_Submittal_Form.docx DOCX document
N00024-16-R-2449_J-2a_CDRL_Instructions.docx DOCX document
N00024-16-R-2449_J-3_PMS377_IDE_Service_Center.docx DOCX document
N00024-16-R-2449_J-2b_CDRLs__Exhibit_A.pdf PDF

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Text version

N00024-16-R-2449

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

REVISED SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The purposes of this amendment to solicitation N00024-16-R-2449 are to:

a) Respond to questions submitted by potential Offerors; and,

b) Incorporate changes into the subject solicitation.

1. The following questions were submitted by potential Offerors. The Government’s response follows the question. Questions and Answers 001 through 007 were provided in previous amendments. Questions and Answers 008 to 011 are provided in this Amendment 0004.

Question 008: Since the Landing Craft, Utility, (LCU) 1700 program is currently not a Major Defense Program, is DFARS 252.209-7009 applicable?

Answer 008: For the purposes of this solicitation, DFARS 252.209-7009 is not applicable and has been deleted from Section I – Contract Clauses By Reference. Modifications to the solicitation are shown in Section 2 of this Amendment.

Question 009: Could the Government please confirm if design studies and analyses of the LCU 1700 Indicative Design outlined in Section C.1 of the RFP are classified as “systems engineering and technical assistance for a major defense acquisition program” as defined in DFARS 209.571-1(3)?

Answer 009: No, the statement of work described in Section C.1 does not meet the definition of DFARS 209.571-1(3).

Question 010: Do the OCI exceptions provided in FAR 9.5 apply?

Answer 010: FAR 9.505 states, in part, “Each individual contracting situation should be examined on the basis of its particular facts and the nature of the proposed contract.” If an Offeror believes they have a potential Organizational Conflict of Interest in accordance with FAR 9.5, they should contact the Contracting Officer.

Question 011: Section L, Page 39, Paragraph L.3.1.4 identifies Attachment J-1 as LCU 1700 “System Specification”, however the listing of Attachment J-1 is titled LCU 1700 “Indicative Design.” Please clarify.

Answer 011: Section L, Page 39, Paragraph L.3.1.4, Attachment J-1 LCU 1700 “System Specification” is a typographical error. “System Specification” should read “Indicative Design.” Modifications to the solicitation are shown in Section 2 of this Amendment.

2. The following changes are hereby incorporated into the subject solicitation:

a. Section I – Contract Clauses By Reference, is hereby modified:

Delete: “DFARS 252.209-7009, Organizational Conflict of Interest—Major Defense Acquisition
Program, OCT 2015”

b. Under Section L, Instructions, Conditions and Notices to Bidders, the following is hereby modified:

Paragraph L.3.1.4, is hereby modified as follows:

Delete: “System Specification” Insert: “Indicative Design”

3. The receipt date for proposals is not extended.

image1.wmf

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .