Amendment_0001.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

1. CONTRACT ID CODE

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICAITON NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicble)

7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE

STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

FACILITY CODE

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICIATION NO.

9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offers is extended, is not extended.

Offers must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods:

(a)By completing items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment your desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPIRATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO MODIFICATION OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

CHECK ONE A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT ORDER

NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15C. DATE SIGNED

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

PAGE OF PAGES

6. ISSUED BY CODE

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., street, county, State and ZIP Code) (X)

CODE

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070

Previous edition unusable

Solicitation Number: N00173-15-R-SE05 Amendment 0001

The purpose of this amendment is to answer questions received from potential offerors.

Question 1: Cost or Pricing Data – The RFP calls for pricing to be TINA compliant even though it is clear from other statements in the RFP that the procurement is anticipated to be competitive. Paragraph L-4 (FAR 52.215-50) is typically invoked by the contracting officer if it is “…reasonably certain that certified cost or pricing data…will be required.” Given FAR 15.403-1(b)(1), please explain the need for cost or pricing data under a competitive solicitation (and incorporation of attendant TINA clausing) and/or share with us why your are reasonably certain that adequate competition will not be achieved.

Answer: Paragraph L-4 FAR 52.215-20 is hereby deleted from the RFP.

Question 2: G-6 Incremental Funding – If full funding will not be made available upon award, please provide insight into the anticipated funding increments. For example, can the contractor expect significant funding increments (enough to cover, say, 6 months of performance) or small, frequent increments (say, monthly)?

Answer: It is not possible to predict an exact funding schedule but 2 to 3 increments per year are likely, with the first coming shortly after the fiscal year, the second early in the calendar year, and the third in early summer.

Question 3: Intellectual Property Rights – Contractors may desire to propose the use of noncommercial computer software and noncommercial technical data previously developed exclusively at private expense to minimize the NRE component of the proposal, resulting in a lower cost to the USG and reduced development risk. Per “Scope” on page 2 of Attachment 1, the USG articulates its clear preference for Government Purpose Rights, at a minimum, be provided with such deliverables and, in CDRL 009, USG requires delivery of Contractor’s Source Code.

3.1 In view of the above, please explain how does the above-referenced statement in Attachment 1 reconcile with USG policy articulated in DFARS 227.7103-1(c) and DFARS 227.7203-1(c)?

Answer: This requirement includes maintenance (ongoing upgrades), installation and integration with SPECCs hardware and software. As such:

227.7103-1(c) states:

(c) Offerors shall not be required, either as a condition of being responsive to a solicitation or as a condition for award, to sell or otherwise relinquish to the Government any rights in technical data related to items, components or processes developed at private expense except for the data identified at 227.7103-5(a)(2) and (a)(4) through (9).

Exceptions underlined below are the basis for the requested rights in order to facilitate establishment and maintenance of the modular open architecture approach articulated in the RFP.

227.7103-5 Government Rights.

The standard license rights that a licensor grants to the Government are unlimited rights, government purpose rights, or limited rights. Those rights are defined in the clause at 252.227-7013, Rights in Technical Data—Noncommercial Items. In unusual situations, the standard rights may not satisfy the Government's needs or the Government may be willing to accept lesser rights in data in return for other http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/dfars/html/current/227_71.htm#227.7103-5 http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/dars/dfars/html/current/252227.htm#252.227-7013 consideration. In those cases, a special license may be negotiated. However, the licensor is not obligated to provide the Government greater rights and the contracting officer is not required to accept lesser rights than the rights provided in the standard grant of license. The situations under which a particular grant of license applies are enumerated in paragraphs (a) through (d) of this subsection.

(a) Unlimited rights. The Government obtains unlimited rights in technical data that are—

(1) Data pertaining to an item, component, or process which has been or will be developed exclusively with Government funds;

(2) Studies, analyses, test data, or similar data produced in the performance of a contract when the study, analysis, test, or similar work was specified as an element of performance;

(3) Created exclusively with Government funds in the performance of a contract that does not require the development, manufacture, construction, or production of items, components, or processes;

(4) Form, fit, and function data;

(5) Necessary for installation, operation, maintenance, or training purposes (other than detailed manufacturing or process data);

(6) Corrections or changes to technical data furnished to the contractor by the Government;

(7) Publicly available or have been released or disclosed by the contractor or subcontractor without restrictions on further use, release or disclosure other than a release or disclosure resulting from the sale, transfer, or other assignment of interest in the software to another party or the sale or transfer of some or all of a business entity or its assets to another party;

(8) Data in which the Government has obtained unlimited rights under another Government contract or as a result of negotiations; or

(9) Data furnished to the Government, under a Government contract or subcontract thereunder, with—

(i) Government purpose license rights or limited rights and the restrictive condition(s) has/have expired; or

(ii) Government purpose rights and the contractor's exclusive right to use such data for commercial purposes has expired.

(b) Government purpose rights.

(1) The Government obtains government purpose rights in technical data—

(i) That pertain to items, components, or processes developed with mixed funding except when the Government is entitled to unlimited rights as provided in paragraphs (a)(2) and (a)(4) through (9) of this subsection; or

(ii) Created with mixed funding in the performance of a contract that does not require the development, manufacture, construction, or production of items, components, or processes.

3.2 In view of the above, would a proposal that proposed to deliver certain technical data and software with other than Government Purpose Rights (or Unlimited Rights) cause the proposal, or any section of same, to be rated as “Unacceptable” (RED)?

Answer: No, such a proposal would still be acceptable.

3.3 In view of the above, would proposing to deliver technical data and software with other than Government Purpose Rights (or Unlimited Rights) result in an unfavorable rating under Subfactor 3 of Factor 1 as set forth in M-2-1 on that basis ?

Answer: A proprosal with data rights restrictions that were inconsistent with or less amenable to the requested modular open architecture concepts described in the RFP would be rated lower than proposals that were fully compliant with the requested data rights.

Question 4: CDRLs – Data Item A009 (Computer Software Source Code) calls out DID DI-IPSC- 8144A, which we have been unsuccessful locating. Please supply or point us to where we can retrieve it.

Moreover, there are two CDRL deliverables with the same A009 Data Item Number.

Answer: The correct one is DID DI-IPSC-81488. Page 5 & 6 of Exhibit A are hereby deleted and replaced with the attached Exhibit A - Page 5 and 6.

Question 5: I-4 (FAR 52.217-8), provides the USG the option to extend the contract by 6 months “…within the limits and at the rates specified in the contract.” There is also a SOW requirement for the contractor to “…provide consulting support to the government team responsible for integration of this product with the SPECSS hardware. Please provide guidance on the scope of work required for the 6 month option and aforementioned SOW consulting support under CPFF and open-ended conditions.

Answer: FAR clause 52.217-8 is hereby deleted from the RFP.

Question 6: I see the RFP contains both DFARS 252.219-7013 and 252.219-7004. Will our Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plan be acceptable in lieu of a requirement for an individual Small Business Subcontracting Plan (i.e., deleting 252.219-7003 and retaining 252.219-7004)?

Answer: Yes. DFAR 252.219-7003 is hereby deleted from the RFP.

Question 7: H-4 (Organizational Conflict of Interest) claims that the contractor may be ineligible for any future procurements where the contractor has previously performed or will be performing SOW tasking described in FAR 9.505-1 through 9.505-4 that establishes or affects future requirements or may affect the future competition. Since we do not foresee performing SETA services, preparing specifications and work statements, providing evaluation services or obtaining access to third-party proprietary information in the performance of the SOW, would you agree that our performance on any contract ensuing from this proposal creates no organizational conflicts of interest that would preclude us from participating in subsequent related contracts?

Answer: Yes, provided the contractor does not:

(1) Merely provide systems engineering and design, but has overall responsibility responsibility for the system's development, its integration, assembly, and checkout (FAR § 9.505-1 (providing systems engineering and technical direction);

(2) Prepare complete specifications for nondevelopmental items to be used in a competitive acquisition (FAR § 9.505-2 (preparing specifications or work statements);

(3) Provide evaluation services on a competitive procurement (FAR § 9.505-3 (providing evaluation services); or,

(4) Obtain access to another vendor's proprietary information (which may give the contractor a competitive advantage) (FAR § 9.505-4 (obtaining access to proprietary information);

The vendor must rely upon the full text (and not the mere summary, above) of the foregoing cited clauses from the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) in evaluating its own position vis-a-vis potential organizational conflict of interest (OCI). The initial response of, "Yes," was because the Government does not intend to put the contractor in a position to incur an organization conflict of interest during the performance cycle of the contract.

Question 8: The Technical Volume shall not exceed 25 pages. Do the Past Performance write-ups and Key Personnel, including key personnel resumes, count in the 25 page limit?

Answer: No. Past Performance write-ups and resumes do not count in the 25 Page limit.

Question 9: The RFP cites FAR 52.219-9 and 252.219-7004. If a contractor has an approved Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 252.219-7004, do they still need to complete the requirements of L-12 Volume II – Business Proposal Paragraph (2)(b) as the comprehensive small business plan would take precedent?

Answer: Yes. L-12 Paragraph (2)(b) is still required to be filled out.

Question 10: Given our understanding of the overall CESARS FNC funding, the cost of providing a full 360Deg SPECSS Sensor suite will require a significant amount of the budget for multiple instantiations of the same hardware which would be better used for technology maturation of focal planes, MTBF improvements, etc. Could an offer that is designed to meet the full field of view but which initially delivers a subset of the full system be selected or would the offer be rejected as non-compliant?

Answer: The offer must deliver a system that meets the full field of view requirement. Anything less would be rejected as non-compliant.

Question 11: We understand the environmental conditions the system needs to be designed to, however, please clarify what are the environmental conditions under which the Sensor (Product 1) deliverables are going to be tested and need to survive.

Answer: The system will be tested on a Navy research ship, the exact nature of which has not yet been determined. As such it will need to survive in the shipboard maritime environment; with the caveat that some additional protection measures might be taken to avoid exposure to the harshest conditions should there be concern about some aspect of system survivability. At a minimum the system would be expected to operate under and survive “nominal” shipboard conditions with respect to exposure to salt spray, precipitation, wind, humidity, and vibration. Clarification on any environmental limitations of the proposed solution in the proposal would be welcomed.

Question 12: On SPECSS, much of our legacy software/algorithms and performance are considered collateral secret. Will it be possible to provide evidence to that regard in our RFP response at the collateral secret level? If so would an addendum be recommended? If not will the end program support transfer of these capabilities at collateral secret, as doing so will reduce costs and improve system performance?

Answer: The inclusion of collateral secret material as part of this activity is not acceptable. A classified addendum concerning collateral secret software would not be recommended. The end program will not support transfer of these capabilities at the collateral secret level.

Naval Research Laboratory - SSC Department of the Navy Stennis Space Center, MS 39529-5004

See Page 2