Bidders_Questions_Amendment_0003.pdf

N00024-19-R-5503 Question Submittal Form 11 April 2019

Attachment J-S2

Question Number: Question Source: (RFP, attachment #, GFI title, etc.) Page number and paragraph header from source: Question: Response:

1 RFP, Section L 106

RFP Section L 2.3, p. 106, 4th paragraph states “Any type contained within tables, graphs, etc. shall not be smaller than 8-point Times New Roman font”.

In complex graphics, it is often found that at the 8 pt size, a sans serif font such as Arial is much more legible. May the RFP language be correctly interpreted to also allow use of Arial font, no smaller than 8 point, for graphics and tables? It is understood the main body of text would be Times New Roman, no smaller than 12 point. Language in Section L has been changed to allow Arial in graphics and tables.

2 RFP, Section L 112 Section L 2.7.2, Factor 2, Management Approach, states the offeror shall provide a System Security Plan (SSP) that does not count towards the page limitations. It is assumed this plan may be delivered as an appendix to Volume II. Corrected, please see amendment.

3 RFP, Section F 59-60 Required Delivery Dates for CLINs 0101 and 0191 are only provided for qty 20 Systems, where pricing is required for a max of 21. What is the delivery schedule for the 21st system? Corrected, please see amendment.

4 RFP, Section B 2,4,5,7,8,10,11,13,14,15,16

It is stated that AN/SLQ-32(V)6 systems shall be provided with out Shelter Structure: MFR Part N/R 78439360G1 on a CLIN with the option of providing Shelter Structure MFR Part N/R 78439360G1 and Integration on another CLIN.

The drawing and parts list for 78439360G1 are not provided in the GFI TDP. Please provide the drawing. Part number has been corrected, please see amendment.

5 RFP, SOW, Section 3.5 27, 46

Section C SOW Section 3.5 states "Post Award Conference at the contractor’s facility no later than 45 days after award of the contract. " (page 27) but C-242-H002 (page 46) states "A post-award meeting with the successful offeror will be conducted within [60] days after award". Please clarify which the government desires, 45 or 60 days? Corrected, please see amendment.

6 RFP, Section L 107

Sec on L 2.4 , a.says to deliver MS project as .mmpx – possible error: either .mmp (normal project file), .mpx (ascii exchange file), or both since delivering to NAVSEA and NSWC (per L2.1) – Request clarification on project file required for delivery. Corrected, please see amendment.

7 RFP, Section I 81 Page 81 of the RFP lists the Latest Option Exercise Dates. CLIN 0401 appears twice, assume the second reference should be removed. Also, CLIN 9700 appears to have been omitted from the LOE date list. Corrected, please see amendment.

8 RFP, Section F 59

Ninth line from the top shows CLIN 0101 with a 15 month after option exercise date in between CLIN 0061 and 0091. Does this line belong lower in the list with the second CLIN 0101 to show the two first deliveries of CLIN 0101 with a 15 month delivery date. Corrected, please see amendment.

9 RFP, Section C SOW 5.0 30

Page 30, Section 5 of the RFP SOW states, "5.0 PROVISIONED ITEM ORDERS (CLINs 9800, 9801) See C-217-H001 PROVISIONED ITEMS ORDERS--BASIC (NAVSEA) (OCT 2018). For CLIN 9801, PIO orders will be placed using the parts listed in Attachment J-14. The Government will specify the subset of required parts from Attachment J-14 and at what quantities in each order. The price of each part shall not exceed the maximum part price specified in Attachment J-14. Prices may be downward adjusted as part of a negotiated order between the Contractor and Government." It is unclear what is to be delivered for CLIN 9800. CLIN 9801 should be priced using the attached J- 14 spares list. Both CLINs will be included in the TEP. What does the government desire for CLIN 9800?

CLIN 9800 has been deleted from Section M Total evaluated price calculation, please see amendment. No pricing is specified nor should be proposed for CLIN 9800.

10 RFP Attachments J-2 GFI (HGHS TDP) J-2 Document 77C734580G3 (Above Deck Electronic Assy) is called out in the HGHS TDP but the document was not provided in the bidder's library.

77C734580G3 should actually be 77C734580G2, which is available in the Bidder's Library. This will be corrected in the HGHS TDP.

11 RFP Section C SOW 4.0, Section L 1.17, Attachment J-3 GFPJ-3, 101-103

Page 30, Section 5 of the RFP SOW states, "The Contractor shall be provided with GFI and GFP for use in the performance of this contract." Section L describes the GFM/P/E to be used in costing in subsection 1.17 and references Attachment J-3. Attachment J-3 consists of 412 pages. only two items populated on page 1. Please provide an update to J-3 GFP List, eliminating the blank pages and consolidating GFM/GFP that will be available for performance on this contract. An updated J-3 has been provided. Please see amendment.

12 RFP, Section I, Section L, 109, 121, 76

Section L page 109 states, "For all large businesses, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan called for in the provision [L-219-H001 ] shall be submitted with Volume I. Page 121 states offerors shall submit a subcontracting plan in accordance with the clause "Small Business Subcontracting Plan" (FAR 52.219-9) (Deviation 2018-O0018) in accordance with the congressionally mandated goals for each small business concern type. DFARS 252.219-7004 is also requested in addition 252.219-7003 and FAR 52.219-9 for all large businesses. Requested clause has been added, please see amendment.

13 RFP Pages 2-22, Section B

Would the Navy consider a separate yearly CLIN for level-of-effort time based support functions (e.g. System Engineering Program Management (SEPM)) in order avoid paying for redundant costs in the case that multiple CLINS are awarded in a given Fiscal Year?

The Navy does not intend to include any LOE CLINS in this RFP. Section F addresses options exercised resulting in concurrent deliveries.

7 Sept 17 1 of 1