N00421-20-R-0127-0002.pdf

1300838592

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

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.

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

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to:

1) Provide clarif ication to Responses to Industry Question 20 in Section A, Amendment;

2) Provide clarif ication to Responses to Industry Questions 13, 26, and 38 in Section A, Amendment;

3) Update the title in Section B-1, Table (b);

4) Add language to Section L, Part A, paragraph 2.2;

5) Provide clarif ication to Section L, Part B, paragraph 1.3.3.1, Small Business (SB) Utilization Strategy (c), in Section A, Amendment;

6) Update Section C, SOW, paragraph 2.0 Applicable documents table; and

7) Update Section C, SOW, paragraph 2.3 Other Government documents.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

S 1 76

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 27-Oct-2020

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N0042120R0127

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

02-Oct-2020

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

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

Offer 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 you 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 APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

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

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

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.

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

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

27-Oct-2020

CODE

NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER AD (PAX)

CODE 2.5.1.5

22473 MILLSTONE ROAD

BLDG 505

PATUXENT RIVER MD 20670

N00421 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N0042120R0127

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been modified:

AMENDMENT

Amendment 0002

Clarification to Responses to Industry Question 20:

The Government verifies that inclusion of hyperlinks within and across proposal volumes, with the exception of cost, is in compliance with RFP instructions. However, there shall be no links from any other volume into the Price Volume or into any other portion of the proposal that contains price information. The Offeror shall submit a Cross Reference Matrix (CRM) for the Technical Volume and cross-reference the proposal volumes and paragraphs to specific RFP requirements, as well as other parts of the proposal that contain relevant information.

Clarification to Responses to Industry Questions 13, 26, and 38:

Upon an Offeror’s request, copies of all of the Standard Work Packages (SWPs) will be provided via DoD

SAFE (https://safe.apps.mil/) link.

Clarification to Section L, Part B, paragraph 1.3.3.1, Small Business (SB) Utilization Strategy (c):

The intent is for the offeror to identify the planned subcontract effort as being low, medium, or high complexity and to provide a brief rational/explanation to the Government as to why the subcontractor is given its respective description.

Amendment 0001

Responses to Industry questions to RFP posted on 02-OCT-2020:

Question

Subject RFP

Page #

Section

(L,M,SOW,

etc.)

Question Answer

1 Past

Performance

134 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

2.1.4

Can the Government confirm that Contractor

Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR) are permitted to be used in lieu of submitting a

Performance Assessment Questionnaire

[Attachment P2] per RFP Section L.2.1.4?

Yes, Contractor Performance Assessment

Reports (CPAR) are permitted to be used in lieu of submitting a Performance Assessment

Questionnaire [Attachment P2]. Please see

L.2.14 which states " The primary source of past performance information will be PPIRS.

If a Contractor Performance Assessment

Report (CPAR) exists for multiple years for the same contract/order, all periods of performance within the recency period specified above, for that contract/order, will be used for evaluation. In the event a CPAR does not exist for a past performance reference, the Offeror shall submit a

Contractor Performance Assessment

Questionnaire (CPAQ), Attachment P2,......"

2 Past

Performance

133 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

2.1

RFP Section L.2.1 states that no classified information shall be submitted. May Offerors include classified contracts if only unclassified information is supplied with the proposal response?

The Offerors may not include classified contracts if only unclassified information is supplied with the proposal response. On page 128, 5.0 CLASSIFIED DATA, Section

5.1, the RFP states "All proposals must be

UNCLASSIFIED." Furthermore, on page

133, under 2.0 VOLUME 2: PAST

PERFORMANCE, Section 2.1 General, stated that "No classified information shall be submitted."

3 Past

Performance

134 Attachment

P1; Section

L Part B

Paragraph

2.1.3

Would the Government allow Offerors to convert

Attachment P1 to a Word Document so that all

Past Performance References can be easily contained within a single volume instead of having to submit multiple PDF files to meet this requirements?

Please see page 128 of the RFP where it is noted within Section 4.2.3. "The Offeror should provide one electronic file for each volume and annex, containing all information requested within the volume and annex. Offerors should not provide each section/paragraph as separate files.

4 Past

Performance

N/A Attachments Can the Government clarify whether completed

RFP Attachments need to be submitted in their original format?

Alternate formats are not acceptable.

5 Past

Performance

134 Annex 1 / 2;

Section L

Part B

Paragraph

2.1.3

The RFP states "...the Offeror shall provide one electronic copy of the Statement of

Work/Performance Work Statement/ Performance

Work Statement (PWS)/ Statement of Objectives

(SOO) for each contract reference as Annex 1 to this Past Performance Volume for the SOW paragraphs...". For classified contracts where a redacted SOW/PWS is not permitted, may

Offerors instead submit only a completed Cross

Reference Matrix (CRM)?

Please see question 2 for the answer.

6 Past

Performance

134 Annex 1;

Section L

Part B

Paragraph

2.1.3

Per the RFP instructions Offerors are to provide a copy of each past performance contract

SOW/PWS/SOO in Annex 1 of the proposal response. For those contracts whose

SOW/PWS/SOO does not define or provide all of the performance specifications and government-approved systems and software specifications may Offerors also include other Government documentation in addition to the SOW/PWS/SOO that substantiates their experience?

Please propose in accordance to the RFP.

7 Labor Hours 141-

Section L

Part B

Paragraph

3.6.3

The Government has three FTE listed for the

Network Engineer labor category family in the table under section L.3.6.3. However, in Section

4.3.7 Labor Qualities, the table has two Computer

Network Architects listed and only one Network

Engineer. Given that the Computer Network

Architect is also listed in the Section B-1(a) table and the section 3.4.6 Experience and Education

Level Definitions table, we ask that the

Government confirm that the table under L.3.6.3 should have two Computer Network Architects and only one Network Engineer. We ask that the

Government update the Section L.3.6.3 table accordingly.

Yes, the table in section 3.6.3 is updated to match section 3.4.7.17/19.

8 Section B

CLIN

Pricing

135 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

3.1.(b)

The Government states that the Cost Volume shall contain a copy of the Section B CLIN pricing with the total prices filled in using the estimated quantities in the solicitation. The section also states that Section B prices shall be provided as a separate document in MS Office

2016 Excel format. For the Section B CLIN pricing, can the Government confirm that only

Attachment P3 and Attachment P6 in the Excel format is required for providing prices by CLIN and the Section B-1 composite labor rate data and

The Government confirms that Attachments

P3, P6 data is not submitted in PDF.

that offerors are not required to submit the data in the PDF format?

9 Individual

Designator

Instru ctions

Tab

Attachment

P8

The Government states that there is a Position

Number in Attachment P6 that shall be used in

Attachment P8 as the Individual Designator.

There are no Position Numbers in Attachment P6.

Would the Government confirm that for the

Individual Designator column of Attachment P8 that the Employee Name column data from

Attachment P6 can be used and will be sufficient for the Government's purposes?

For each individual Contractor or

Subcontractor employee proposed; enter a different Identifying title in the form of

FTE## (e.g. FTE01, FTE02, etc.) for each individual to distinguish them from one another. Do not enter the individual's name into the template; rather, provide that information separately. Enter one FTE# for

EACH individual proposed. (The number of

FTE's must coordinate with the submitted P-

6 for evaluation purposes.)

10 Instructions Gover nment

Comp osite

Rate -

Term and

Contr actor

Comp osite

Rate -

Term

Tabs

Attachment

P3

The Attachment P3 instructions state that the fully burdened labor rate per hour shall be inclusive of fee on total cost. However, in Section L.3.3.2.1 of the RFP, the Government states that the composite rates provided in Attachment P3 "shall not include Prime fee on Prime labor" or "Prime fee on subcontractor labor". Will the Government please clarify if the rates included in Attachment

P3 are meant to be inclusive of fee or not?

The instructions should state exclusive of fee; the instructions in Attachment P3 have been updated.

11 Cover Letter 128 Section L-1

Part A

Paragraph

4.2.2

Section L.4.2.2 in the Draft RFP states in part, "...The Offeror shall certify, in its proposal cover letter, that all electronic proposal information delivered throughout the evaluation (e.g., original proposal submission, responses to evaluation notices, Final Proposal Revisions) has been or will be checked for viruses and certify that its files are/will be virus free...." The revised Section

L.4.2.2 in the final RFP makes no mention of this certification requirement or the submission of a cover letter. Please clarify the requirement for the inclusion of a cover letter in the proposal submission and if the "virus free" certification will be required. In addition, if a cover letter is required, where in the proposal documentation will the cover letter reside?

The final RFP is the version you should be proposing to, including any RFP amendments.

12 DIACAP vs.

RMF

19 2.1 DoD

Specificatio ns

2.1.22 DoDI 8510.01, "DoD Information

Assurance Certification and Accreditation Process

(DIACAP)," November 28, 2007

Given the transition from DIACAP to Risk

Management Framework (RMF). Will we need to support both standards, or if one, which?

The Contractor will only need to support

Risk Management Framework (RMF).

13 CyberSafe 19 2.1 DoD

Specificatio ns

Does the NAVAIRINST for Airworthiness and

CyberSafe apply to this work? It did not appear in the references.

Yes, the NAVAIRINST for Airworthiness and CyberSafe are included as indirect references in paragraph 2.3 via Standard

Work Package (SWP) 4940-026. A copy of that SWP can be provided if desired.

14 Deliverables 17

Section C

SOW

Paragraph

1.0 Scope

"Required reporting and analysis support services will include trade-off analysis reports, analysis reports of system design, test procedures to validate specification compliance and performance compliance, operational usability reports, interoperability reports to include

The required periodicity, format, etc. will be variable as defined by delivery orders/task orders. Also, some delivery orders/task orders may require some reports under the

CDRL Technical Report – A002, but many

Paragraph

3.1.3

Deliverables conducting actual operational analysis in the laboratory or aircraft environment."

Is a particular periodicity, format, etc. expected for delivery of these products? Are they all assumed to fall under "Technical Report –

A002"?

will be more informal with delivery by e-mail or placement on a project server.

15 Lab and

COMSEC

Custodian

Training and

Certification

40 Section C

SOW

Paragraph

3.3.15

" The Contractor shall maintain proper COMSEC custodian duties for all laboratories as directed by the security office by interfacing with the Naval

District Washington (NDW) COMSEC custodian as appointed at NAS Patuxent River to ensure the

SPF laboratories are following the COMSEC program and enforcing all rules and regulations directed by the program."

As the training requirements associated with this duty are highly specific, and evolve over time, will COMSEC certification and training be provided to our staff? What other required security trainings to execute Laboratory

Custodian duties will be provided, and which will our company be responsible for providing? Will that training time be considered part of their normal duties?

Training to perform COMSEC custodian and other laboratory custodian duties will be provided by the Government to the contractor's staff. Such training will be considered part of their normal work duties.

16 Firmware 17 Section C

SOW

Paragraph

1.0 Scope

Firmware is mentioned twice in this section, but nowhere else. Will any specific skill in this area be required/expected for successful contract execution or should the offeror assume that personnel supporting software should have some basic familiarity with what firmware and how it works?

The offeror should assume that personnel who meet the requirements for supporting software will also have basic familiarity with firmware and how it works.

17 Staff

Education

Requirement s

45 Section C

SOW

Paragraph

3.4.7

For several positions it is stated that "neither an associate’s degree nor additional years of experience can be substituted for a Bachelor’s degree". Please confirm this applies for the Junior and Journeyman levels for the following labor categories : Software Engineer, Software

Developer, Systems Engineer, Test Engineer, and

Network Engineer. Given that many highly skilled, certified, cleared professionals who do not hold BS or BA degrees are currently performing tasks and working in these disciplines for

NAVAIR today, the degree requirement for these labor categories will significantly limit the talent pool for industry to draw from. Would the

Government consider allowing substitution of an associate's degree or additional years of experience for at least the Junior and Journeyman levels of the aforementioned categories?

Substitutions for the engineer labor categories will not be considered.

18 Proposal

Due Date

1 SF33 Box 9 Reference: SF33 box 9 – Proposal due date 2

NOV 2020 (30-day response time)

Question: Current environmental conditions

(COVID-19) have caused restriction on gathering and travel, adding complexity to the proposal development process. To provide enough time to generate a comprehensive response to this RFP, would the Government consider increasing the response time to 45 days?

The Government will not extend the response date for proposals.

19 252.228-

N/A Section I Reference: Section I Contract Clauses – DFAR

252.228-7001 Ground and Flight Risk

Question: Changes to Draft N00421-20-R-0127 included the addition of DFAR 252.228-7001

DFAR Clause 252.228-7001 Ground and

Flight Risk (JUN 2010) under Section I is removed from the FINAL RFP and it will not be included within this final solicitation.

Ground and Flight Risk (JUN 2010) to Section I

Contract Clauses. The DFAR clause does not appear to be included in the final solicitation.

Does the Government plan to include the DFAR clause in the solicitation?

20 General

Instructions

125 Section L

Part A

Reference: L-1, PART A – General Instructions

Question: Is cross-referencing of content across sections and volumes to reduce content redundancy allowable/compliant?

The Government will not allow cross-referencing of content across sections and volumes.

21 CRM &

Paragraph

Mapping

127 &

Section L

Part A

Paragraph

3.5 &

Section C

SOW

Paragraph

3.3

Reference: L PART A-3.5 page 127 “The Offeror shall submit a Cross Reference Matrix (CRM) for the Technical Volume, similar to the example below, to help ensure that all solicitation requirements are addressed and to facilitate the evaluators’ review of the Offeror’s proposal. The

CRM should be a single integrated matrix and cross-reference the proposal volumes and paragraphs to specific RFP requirements, as well as other parts of the proposal that contain relevant information. The Offeror’s CRM may be identical to the example below or revised such as to add columns to indicate the page number on which information may be found, identify where other relevant information in the proposal is located, or provide other comments. The CRM does not count against any of the proposal page limitations.”

Question A: Is the Technical CRM to be included as part of the Technical Volume?

Question B: Please clarify the Government’s requirement for mapping to all RFP subparagraphs. Specifically, the detailed support section (3.3) of the SOW contains 92 paragraphs and subparagraphs. Does the Government require that all 92 paragraphs and subparagraphs be addressed within the responses to the three technical sample tasks?

Question A: The Technical CRM is included as part of the Technical Volume.

Question B: No, all RFP subparagraphs are not required to be addressed within the responses to the sample tasks.

22 Work Force 130 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

1.2

Reference: L PART B - 1.2 Work Force page 130

“The Offeror shall propose personnel that meet all labor category requirements. The following definitions apply:

• “Contingent Hire” – An individual who has committed, under a signed letter of intent, to being employed by the Offeror with a stated salary, if the Offeror is awarded the contract.”

Question: If salaries are required in the letter of intent and there is a non-exclusive agreement between the subcontractor, then it puts competitor competition sensitive information at risk. Would the Government consider removing the salary requirement in the letter of intent?

It will be the discretion of the Offeror to redact sensitive information concerning

Contingent Hire salary.

23 Transition

Plan

132 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

1.3.2

Reference: L PART B-1.3.2. Transition Plan page

Question: There is no Transition Plan as defined in Section L-1.3.2.1 relating to Transition-In activities included in the SOW. In the SOW, there is only reference to A006 Phase-Out

Transition Plan, SOW 3.1.3.6 Phase-Out

Transition Plan and SOW 3.1.8 Transition out

Strategy. Will the Government be providing

The Government updated SOW Paragraph

3.1.8.1, Work Turnover/Transition Plan, in addition to adding the transition period.

Furthermore, Section M, paragraph 1.3

Management Approach incorporates language concerning the Work

Turnover/Transition Plan.

Transition-In requirements? What is the transition period?

24 Submittal

Package

135 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

3.1(c)

Reference: L PART B-3.1(c) page 135

“Subcontractors and JV Team Members shall provide the same information (including the Total

Compensation Plan), as that required for the

Prime Contractor unless otherwise noted herein.”

Question: In section L 1.5 a "principal subcontractor" is any subcontractor with 20% work share of the proposed price. In Section L

3.0 Volume 3 it states that all subcontractors will

provide the same information as the Prime unless otherwise noted. Is it the government's intent to want a full submittal package, P7 Cost Template and cost narrative from every sub regardless of the % of work?

Yes, P7 is required for all subs proposing on this RFP.

25 OCONUS

Travel

140 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

3.6.2.5

Reference: L-3.6.2.5 OCONUS Travel (page 140)

Question: Will the Government clarify the expected or historical percent of OCONUS travel anticipated and whether the travel into the AOR typically exceeds 30 days per trip?

OCONUS travel normally occurs on one platform and does not exceed two weeks.

This happens twice a year, 3 times a year at the most. This requirement could change but with COVID-19 it has actually been reduced.

26 Standard

Work

Packages

(SWPS)

18 Section C

SOW

Paragraph

2.0

Reference: SOW 2.0, page 18 Standard Work

Packages (SWPS) “A comprehensive list of Navy regulatory documents can be found at the

Department of the Navy (DON) Chief

Information Officer (CIO) Information

Technology (IT) Policy and Guidance website, http://www.doncio.navy.mil/.”

Question: We performed a search of the website provided as the source for these files

(http://www.doncio.navy.mil) and could not find them. Request the Government provide an alternate source for Standard Work Packages files.

The SWPs are not Navy documents but rather NAVAIR-specific documents and as such, are behind the NMCI firewall. Copies can be provided to prospective offerors.

27 Hardware and

Software

Technical

Plans

29 Section C

SOW

Paragraph

3.3.1.1

Reference: SOW 3.3.1.1 Hardware and Software

Technical Plans page 29 “The Contractor shall review and comment on the technical plans of hardware and software by writing or updating hardware and software technical plans based on

NAVAIR/NAWCAD provided information.”

Question: Several areas of the RFP seem to present mixed messages regarding the focus of required activities. The phrase “review and comment on the technical plans of hardware and software” seems to indicate a requirement to analyze existing technical plans while the phrase

“by writing or updating hardware and software technical plans” seems to indicate a requirement to generate or update technical plans. Which of these interpretations is correct?

The contractor will be required to both review, analyze and comment on existing technical plans as well as generate and update new technical plans.

28 Labor

Category

List

41;

13;

and

Section C

SOW

Sections

Paragraph

3.4.6 and

3.4.7;

Reference: SOW Sections 3.4.6 (page 41) and

3.4.7 (page 43), and on B-1 Table (a)(page13); L-

PART B-3.6.3 (page 141)

Question: The labor Category list differs from the

LCAT lists in section L-PART B-3.6.3 (Page

141). Please confirm that the list in 3.6.3 is

Yes, the table in section 3.6.3 is updated to match section 3.4.7.

Section B-1

Table (a);

Section L

Part B

Paragraph

3.6.3 correct per the instructions for pricing purposes.

Example. There is only a Sr. Network Engineer listed in SOW sections 3.4.6 and 3.4.7 but there is a Junior, Journeyman and Senior listed in section

L-PART B-3.6.3 with hours associated.

29 LABOR

TERM

Table

16 Section B-1

(3) (b)

Reference: Section B-1 (b) LABOR TERM table

Question: Please confirm that the table should be for Contractor Site Hours?

On the bottom of page 15, " (b) Hourly

Burdened Composite Labor Rates for

Contractor Site" is the label for the table for continuation page 16.

30 Compatibilit y

20 Section C

SOW

Section

Paragraph

3.1.1

Reference: Section 3.1.1 Compatibility, RFP Page

20.

The Government states that for compatibility, the internet access applications should be "Internet

Explorer, Google, and Firefox web browsers". We would like to clarify the following:

1) Is Internet Explorer intended to also include

Microsoft Edge?

2) Is Google intended to reference the Chrome browser provided by Google?

3) Given that Internet Explorer is referenced, does the Government anticipate older systems and equipment that will use Internet Explorer without the ability to access the Microsoft Edge browser?

Use of specific web browsers will be detailed in the tasks orders. For NMCI applications, the browsers could include

Explorer, Edge, Chrome and/or Firefox.

NAVAIR does not control NMCI, so we will need to follow suit, as NMCI adds, deletes and updates them periodically. As for non-

NMCI applications, specific programs will determine web browser requirements.

31 Staffing

Plan

131 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

1.2.1

Reference: Section 1.2.1 Staffing Plan, RFP Page

131.

The Government asks for number of personnel across all labor categories to perform the work.

For the purposes of responding to this requirement while also minimizing the risk of losing highly- qualified and experienced incumbent personnel, can the Government comment on the extent of the current incumbent workforce. Specifically, is the incumbent workforce deficient in terms of total staffing, skillsets, or capability to perform the work under the scope of this solicitation?

The Government will not provide information concerning the incumbent's workforce.

32 Labor

Qualities

43-45 Section C

SOW

Section

Paragraph

3.4.7

Reference: Section 3.4.7 Labor Qualities, RFP

Pages 43-45.

The table shows Project Managers as Key

Personnel; however, the total FTEs for these key personnel is 2.5. The Government has asked in

Section 1.2.1 on page 131 of the RFP for 3 key personnel resumes in this labor category. Can the

Government please clarify expectations regarding a key person who would be proposed for this effort but only needed for half-time support? Is the Government's intent to fully engage all three key persons or does the Government only expect a total of 2.5 FTEs of access and support from the three Key Personnel Project Managers?

The table provides estimates of projected staffing under this contract. Task orders will provide specific personnel and tasking requirements. Should a delivery/task order require only .5 time of a project manager, we envision that the other half of a project manager's time would be in one of the other labor categories on the contract, i.e., half-time managing the work and half-time actually doing the work.

33 Overtime 24 Section C

SOW

Section

Paragraph

3.1.4.1.5

Reference: Section 3.1.4.1.5 Overtime, RFP page

24.

Can the Government clarify the definition of

"overtime" for this contract? For example, if employees were to work more than 40hrs per week uncompensated, would this violate the intent of this SOW section? Alternatively, if employees were to work more than 40hrs but be compensated at their normal rate of pay (within labor allowances for a given task order), would

The Government intends to have no overtime authorized and employees who were to work more than 40 hrs per week uncompensated, will violate the intent of the SOW Section

Paragraph 3.1.4.1.5.

this violate the intent of this SOW section?

Historically, the disallowance of overtime can be interpreted to only apply to hours compensated at an additional rate and not explicitly to additional hours either uncompensated or compensated at normal rate of pay.

34 Installation

Closure

23 Section C

SOW

Section

Paragraph

3.1.4.1.3

Reference: Section 3.1.4.1.3 Installation Closure, RFP Page 23.

The clause states: "When Federal facilities are closed by the Government, or when Federal employees are officially excused from work...Contractor personnel assigned to work at that facility in support of such Federal employees shall follow their parent company's policies".

Two questions arise from this section:

1) Since some employees will work offsite in a contractor facility, this clause would never apply to them (they are not "assigned to work at that facility in support of such Federal employees"). Is that the intent of this SOW element?

2) The clause regarding following "parent company policies" could result in different rules for different subcontractors on the same contract.

Is that the intent of this SOW element?

If the employee is working on Contractor facility the clause will not be applicable to them (this is reference to Government Site

Only). Subcontractors must report to the

Prime who will decide what is applicable.

35 Technical

Direction

Letters

(TDLs)

25 Section C

SOW

Section

Paragraph

3.1.11

Reference: Section 3.1.11 Technical Direction

Letters (TDLs), RFP Page 25.

Can the Government provide historical records of

TDLs provided for the past 6 or 12 months? The nature of TDLs could be a necessary part of understanding the contract execution for non-incumbent offerors. We recognize that TDLs do not alter the scope of the contract, but they could be needed to fully understand the interaction between contractor and Government for the execution of this requirement.

There are no known historicals of TDLs for this effort. It has not been part of this contract.

36 Citizenship

Requirement s

26 Section C

SOW

Section

Paragraph

3.2.1

Reference: Section 3.2.1 Citizenship

Requirements, RFP Page 26.

Has the Government granted a citizenship waiver for the execution of these contract requirements in the past 12-24 months? In our experience, this is a rare clause for a contract scope such as this one and understanding the impact of this clause is necessary to adequately evaluate staffing and compensation requirements for this effort.

No.

37 Maintain

On-Site

Software

Build

Library

35 Section C

SOW

Section

Paragraph

3.3.5.6

Reference: Section 3.3.5.6, Maintain On-Site

Software Build Library, RFP Page 35.

What is the approximate number of software builds maintained in the on-site software build library? This information is needed to fully evaluate and ensure adequate support and expertise for support of this requirement. Further, does the software build library need to maintain older systems and equipment (including old disk media) to maintain this library?

The number of software builds in the software build library, as well as the age of systems and equipment, will vary between delivery orders and tasks orders. The contractor will have the opportunity to evaluate those items to ensure adequate support when the delivery orders and tasks orders are generated after contract award.

38 Other

Government documents:

(e.g.

NAVAIR

Documents)

19 Section C

Section C

SOW

Paragraph

2.3

Reference: Section 2.3, Other Government documents: (e.g. NAVAIR Documents):, RFP

Page 19.

Reference is made to NAWC Software

Engineering SWPs and specifically SWP-4940-

001 through SWP-4940-0029. Can the

Government provide copies of these processes so

Yes, we can provide copies of the SWPs.

that non-incumbent offerors have equal access to process documentation and can adequately respond to software development tasks in the

RFP?

39 Drafter / CD

Operator I

(Non-Key)

(Secret)

(SCA

30061)

(SOC 17-

3012)

54 Section C

SOW

Paragraph

3.4.7.17

Reference: Section 3.4.7.17 Drafter / CD

Operator I (Non-Key) (Secret) (SCA 30061)

(SOC 17-3012), RFP Page 54.

We strongly recommend that multiple levels be established for the Drafter/CAD Operator position. If the contract only provides the potential for Level I support in this labor category, development for employees in this category will be limited within the contract and this will likely drive attrition rates. Strongly recommend adding labor categories similar to the

Engineering Technician labor category in section

3.4.7.1.

Since the Drafter/CAD operator is a niche labor category (only .5 MY across the entire contract), we don't think this is necessary.

We can live with attrition in this category.

40 CRM &

Technical

Volume

127 Section L

Part A 3.5

L.3.5 on page 127 states that a CRM is required for the technical volume, but later states that the

CRM should, "cross-reference the proposal volumes (plural) and paragraphs to specific RFP requirements".

Please confirm the

CRM is only required for Volume 1 – Technical.

CRM is required for Volume 1 - Technical and for Past Performance under Past

Performance Cross Reference Matrix (CRM)

Annex 2.

41 Security

Clearance

132 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

1.3.1.1.4

The final RFP included a new requirement on page 132 (L.1.3.1.1.4 Security Clearance), which requires written certification of a Top Secret

Facility Clearance. Will the government consider allowing Offeror’s to provide the written certification as an appendix to Volume 1 outside of the 15-page limit of the management plan?

The Government has increased the page count to 10 for the written certification of a

Top Secret Facility Clearance portion which will be included within the Technical

Volume 1.

42 Security

Clearance

132 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

1.3.1.1.4

The final RFP included a new requirement on page 132 (L.1.3.1.1.4 Security Clearance), which requires plans for meeting personnel security requirements within 60 days of award. Given

L.1.3.2.1.(e) requires a transition plan that considers, “Security Requirement to include

OPSEC, facility clearances, and base access,” will the government consider removing the new requirement under L.1.3.1.1.4?

The Government will not remove the new requirement. Personnel performing these duties must meet the requisite security clearance requirements in order to be able to perform their duties. The appropriate clearance must be in place for the personnel to perform these functions.

43 Past

Performance

126 &

Section L

Part A

Paragraph

3.1, 3.3 and

3.4; Section

L Part B

Paragraph

2.1.2

The table under L.3.3 states that the past performance volume is one electronic file and

L.2.1.2 states that the

Offeror shall complete the Past Performance

Information Form, Attachment P1, for each past performance reference. However, L.3.1 on page

126 states that, "Proposal information must be structured such that its Volume/paragraph number matches the Proposal Instructions

Volume/paragraph number provided in section

“Part B Specific Instructions” to which it is responding..." Further, L.3.4 states that each volume shall contain a cover page and table of contents. Attachment P1 does not allow an

Offeror to comply with the requirements outlined in L.3.1 and L.3.4. Will the government consider increasing the number of files to be submitted for the past performance volume - One file to comply with L.3.1 and L.3.4 and one file for each P-1 form?

4.2.4 DoD SAFE specific limitations per

drop-off: one package per drop-off, the maximum file size per package is eight (8) gigabytes and the maximum file upload per package is 25 files. The Government will provide one drop-off request to the Offeror and one drop-off request to each proposed subcontractor. This language is added to the

RFP under Section L paragraph 4.2.4.

44 Past

Performance

132 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

2.1.2

L.2.1.2 states that the Offeror shall complete the

Past Performance Information Form, Attachment

P1, for each past performance reference. Graphics and/or tables cannot be entered into the Contract

Effort Description box within Attachment P1. For ease of evaluation, will the Government allow

Offerors to insert PDF pages into the P1 to organize content in tables/graphics to clearly and succinctly demonstrate relevancy?

On page 125, under 2.0 ELECTRONIC

PROPOSAL FORMAT, Section 2.1

"Drawings that are not imbedded within the text and submitted separately will be counted as one page. Graphic resolution, including such data as tables, charts, or drawings, should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented. 2.2 Files shall not be embedded in PDF documents.

45 Drop-Off

Request

Code

126 Section L

Part A

Paragraph

2.2

Page 126 (Para. L.2.2) states that, "The Prime and

Subcontractor points of contact will receive an email that contains their unique “Drop-Off

Request Code” no less than 3 days prior to the proposal due date." With the proposal being due on a Monday, this provides limited time to confirm the Drop-Off Request Code has been received and mitigate any potential uploading issues within the DoD system. Will the government consider providing the Drop-Off

Request Code at least one week before the proposal due date?

No changes will be made concerning Drop-

Off Request Code.

46 Staffing

Plan

131 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

1.2.1

L.1.2.1 on page 131 requires a staffing plan that addresses items such as proposed subcontractor, consultant, or teaming arrangements; availability of personnel; and conformance with Section L, Paragraph 3.6.3, but Section M does not provide evaluation criteria for these requirements. How does the government intend to evaluate the requirements of L.1.2.1?

The Government will assess the clarity and thoroughness of the staffing plan, including the degree to which the proposed allocation of personnel resources demonstrates the

Offeror’s ability to meet the requirements of the SOW. The Offeror’s proposal will be evaluated to ensure that it complies with the

Government estimated labor mix and level of effort mandated by Section L, Part B, paragraph 3.6.3. This statement is added in

Section M under workforce.

47 Small

Business

(SB)

Utilization

Strategy

133 Section L

Part B

Paragraph

1.3.3

On page 133, the Small Business (SB) Utilization

Strategy requires evidence of enforceable commitments. In an effort to avoid potential file size issues when uploading into the DoD SAFE site, can Offerors provide the enforceable commitment documentation as a separate Annex

3 file?

Please see question 44.

48 LABOR

TERM

(Governmen t Site Hours)

16 Section B-1

(3)(b)

On page 16, Paragraph B1(b) states, "LABOR

TERM (Government Site Hours). Was it the

Government's intention to label this table as

LABOR TERM (Contractor Site Hours)?

On the bottom of page 15, " (b) Hourly

Burdened Composite Labor Rates for

Contractor Site" is the label for the table on page 16.

49 Labor

Categories

43 &

Section C

SOW

Paragraph

3.4.7 and

Section L

Part B

Paragraph

3.6.3

Section C Paragraph 3.4.7 lists Computer

Network Architect, Junior & Computer Network

Architect, Journey while Paragraph 3.6.3 lists

Network Engineer, Junior & Network Engineer, Journey. Would the Government please confirm that 3.4.7 reflects the labor categories to be used in this solicitation and correct?

Yes, as previously mentioned, section 3.4.7 is correct and table 3.6.3 has been updated to match 3.4.7.

50 Electronic

File

126 Section L

Part A

Paragraph

3.3

Section L, Paragraph 3.3 states that one electronic file is required for the cost volume. Would the

Government please confirm the expectation is for four (4) separate electronic files total, to include the

Attachments P3, P6/P7, P8, and the Cost/Price Narrative for

Volume III?

The Government confirms that one electronic file is needed for P6, P3, P8 and the cost narrative. Each subcontractor will have to submit P7.

51 Labor

Qualities

47 Section C

SOW

Paragraph

3.4.7;

Attachments

P3, P6, P7, & P8

The attachments P3, P6, P7, and P8 templates do not include Computer Network Architect, Junior or Computer Network Architect, Journey as presented in the Table found in Section C, Paragraph 3.4.7. Will the government please confirm that the labor categories found in Section

C are the intended labor categories for Offerors to bid.

Section 3.4.7 is correct. The Government has updated Attachments P3, P6, P7 & P8.

52 Past

Performance

148 Section M

Part A

Paragraph

2.3

Page 148 Paragraph M.2.3 states, “more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the

Performance Confidence Assessment Rating.”

Paragraph 3.0 on page 152 defines a “relevant” rating as, “Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.”

By deleting the “very relevant” element from the ratings scheme, the government has conflated

“same” and “similar” performance. If, indeed, “more relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of success,” why would the government not credit an Offeror’s Past

Performance involving essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities over an

Offeror’s Past Performance that merely includes a similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities?

FAR PART 15.304 guidance is to ensure the evaluation factors and significant subfactors represent key areas of importance to be considered in the source selection decision, and that those factors and subfactors support meaningful comparison and discrimination between and among competing proposals.

Would the government consider including the

“Very Relevant” rating found in most solicitations

(and contained within the original draft) that typically include a Past Performance Relevancy

Rating of four levels, to properly credit an

Offeror’s Past Performance involving essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities over an Offeror’s Past Performance that merely includes a similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities to support a more meaningful comparison and discrimination between and among the competing proposals?

Government will not revise or make any changes to Section M Part A Paragraph 2.3

SECTION B - SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES

B-1

Task Orders (TOs) that include CPFF Labor Term CLINs will be issued under this contract using the following streamlined ordering procedures:

(1) For each proposed order that includes CPFF Labor Term CLINs, the contracting officer will provide the

Contractor a TO and an Independent Government Cost Estimate (IGCE). The IGCE is an estimate of labor hours by labor category utilizing the Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates provided in table(s) below, to calculate the total estimated cost for the proposed CLINs and/or TO.

i. The TO fixed fee is calculated using Section G Clause 5252.232-9510 PAYMENT OF FIXED FEE

(NAVAIR).

ii. Ceiling for ODCs will be priced in accordance with the Government estimate.

iii. TOs crossing multiple years will be estimated by the Government using the Hourly Burdened

Composite Labor Rates for each year in proportion to the Period of Performance (PoP) of the TO.

(2) Within three (3) working days of receipt of the TO and IGCE, the Contractor shall respond:

i. If the Contractor agrees that it can perform the TO within the parameters of the IGCE, they will sign and return the DD 1155 to the contracting officer. If the requirement remains valid, a priced order will be issued to the

Contractor; or

ii. If the Contractor does not agree with the TO and/or IGCE, the Contractor shall acknowledge its disagreement within three (3) working days. Additionally, a proposal shall be submitted to the contracting officer within five (5) working days of receipt of the TO and IGCE, addressing only the specific areas of difference in labor categories and/or hours in the IGCE. Once the differences are resolved between the contracting officer and the

Contractor, and the requirement remains valid, a priced order will be issued to the Contractor.

(3) Rate Tables

(a) Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates for Government Site

LABOR TERM (Government Site Hours)

Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates (Regardless of Clearance or if Key)

Contract Labor Category

Government Site Hours

Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V

Air Crew Member (P-8), 55-3011, Journey (PAX)

Air Crew Member (E-2), 55-3011, Air Crew Member (E-6), 55-3011, Air Crew Member (Unmanned

Systems), 55-3011, Journey (PAX)

Air Crew Member (H-1), 55-3011, Air Crew Member (H-60), 55-3011, Air Crew Member (E-2), 55-3011, Sr

(PAX)

Air Crew Member (E-6), 55-3011, Sr

Air Crew Member (Unmanned

Systems), 55-3011, Sr (PAX)

Air Crew Member (H-1), 55-3011, Sr (PAX)

Air Crew Member (H-60), 55-3011, Sr (PAX)

Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates (Regardless of Clearance or if Key)

Contract Labor Category

Government Site Hours

Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V

Air Crew Member (P-8), 55-3011, Sr

(JACKSONVILLE, FL)

Computer Systems Analysts, 15-

1211, Jr (PAX)

1211, Journey (PAX)

1211, Sr (PAX)

Configuration Management Analyst, 13-1111, Journey (PAX)

Configuration Management Analyst, 13-1111, Sr (PAX)

Information Systems Security

Officer, 15-1122, Jr (PAX)

Officer, 15-1122, Journey (PAX)

Officer, 15-1122, Sr (PAX)

Computer Network Architect, 15-

1241, Jr (PAX)

Computer Network Architect, 15-

1241, Journey (PAX)

Network Engineer, 15-1143, Sr

Program Analyst, 13-1111, Jr (PAX)

Program Analyst, 13-1111, Journey

Program Analyst, 13-1111, Sr (PAX)

Project Manager, 11-1021, Journey

Project Manager, 11-1021, Sr (PAX)

Security Specialist, 13-1111, Jr

Security Specialist, 13-1111, Journey

Contract Labor Category

Government Site Hours

Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V

Security Specialist, 13-1111, Sr

Software Developer, 15-1252, Jr

Software Developer, 15-1252, Software Developer, 15-1252, Sr

Software Engineer, 17-2199, Jr

Software Engineer, 17-2199, Journey

Software Engineer, 17-2199, Journey

Software Engineer, 17-2199, Sr

(SAN DIEGO)

System Administrator, 15-1142, Jr

System Administrator, 15-1142, System Administrator, 15-1142, Sr

Systems Engineer , 17-2199, Jr

Systems Engineer , 17-2199, Journey

Systems Engineer , 17-2199, Sr

Systems Engineer, 17-2199, Sr

(INDIANAPOLIS)

Test Engineer, 17-2199, Journey

Test Engineer, 17-2199, Journey

Contract Labor Category

Government Site Hours

Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V

Test Engineer, 17-2199, Sr (PAX)

Test Engineer, 17-2199, Sr (SAN

DIEGO)

Training and Development Manager, 11-3131 Journey (PAX)

Drafter/CAD Operator I, 17-3012

Engineering Technician IV, 17-3029

Engineering Technician V, 17-3029

Engineering Technician VI, 17-3029

Administrative Assistant, 43-6014

Technical Writer II, 27-3042 (PAX)

Technical Writer III, 27-3042 (PAX)

Technical Writer III, 27-3042

(b) Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates for Contractor Site

LABOR TERM (Site Hours)

Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates (Regardless of Clearance or if Key)

Contract Labor Category

Government Site Hours

Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V

(SEATTLE, WA)

Project Manager, 11-1021, Sr (PAX)

LABOR TERM (Site Hours)

Contract Labor Category

Government Site Hours

Year I Year II Year III Year IV Year V

Engineering Technician IV, 17-3029

Administrative Assistant, 43-6014

Technical Writer III, 27-3042

B-2 LABOR FEE:

CPFF Labor Term - Fixed fee will be calculated based on fee per hour and in accordance with 5252.232-9510

Payment of Fixed Fee (NAVAIR)(OCT 2005). The fee per hour is the total fee proposed for all periods divided by the total number of hours for all years (1,860,000). The CPFF Labor Term fee per hour is $ [To be determined at contract award]. Applicable to CLINs 0001 through 0006 and CLINs 0014-0019.

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS

STATEMENT OF WORK

STATEMENT OF WORK (SOW) for

THE SOFTWARE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT SERVICES

1.0 Scope:

This Statement of Work (SOW) defines the scope required in support of Software Engineering Department and

Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) Program Managers Air (PMAs) for the following activities: Software sustainment in Software Support Activities (SSAs), Software Systems Engineering, Systems and Software

Integration and Software Development, Test, Software Acquisition, Integration and Laboratory Engineering, Systems/Subsystems Integration, Avionics/Software/Air Vehicle Technology Insertion, Platform Simulation, Configuration Management, and Program Performance Assessment Analysis and Planning. This includes direct software systems engineering support services throughout the full life cycle of a weapon system from concept development through disposal, and applies to Naval Aircraft weapons and support systems.

This SOW further defines the requirement for the development and integration of aircraft systems, mission systems, and support systems including Software and mission system and laboratory hardware. The scope will include software program generation and software and hardware integration, along with the development of test devices and systems which support system test and integration such as weapon system simulators and trainers. Such test devices and systems may include non-intrusive hardware/interface monitoring devices and the software/systems that analyze the data extracted/generated.

This SOW addresses all functional areas for the development of operational systems requirements and integration, which includes conducting operational and functional systems testing and fleet introduction. The overarching areas of support consist of product development that includes hardware, firmware, trade analysis documentation, cost reporting, financial tracking, test plans, test procedure documentation, test report documentation, training materials including computer-based training as well as training documentation, operator user guides and operational concept documentation.

This SOW addresses all functional areas for software upgrades required due to hardware obsolescence non-recurring engineering and retrofit programs. This effort would include supporting software requirements impacts, design impacts, implementation, integration, testing, and fielding of software upgrades required for hardware obsolescence programs. This effort would include conducting software assessment for firmware and/or software upgrades, as well as assisting the Government in acquiring these upgrades required due to hardware obsolescence. Software upgrades due to software obsolescence, including re-hosting, legacy migration, and software modernization will also be required and require using industry best practices to evaluate current system/software architectures.