SOJ RFP N00421-24-R-0002 QnA Govt Responses 11 01 23.pdf

Question # PBWS / CDRL Reference

(if applicable) RFP Reference Question Government Response

According to the instructions to offerors for this project, a significant portion of the responses require direct experience with this specific type of project management.

Question:

Could we leverage our subcontractor's experience in our responses?

No, an Offeror cannot leverage a subcontractor's experience in its response to the RFP.

Section L, Part A General Instructions states, "Throughout these instructions, the “Offeror” is the Prime Contractor with its Commercial and Government Entity (CAGE) code identified in Block 15A on Standard Form (SF)-33, Solicitation, Offer, and Award. For purposes of this evaluation, the

Prime Contractor is the Principal Entity. The Government will only use contract references from the Principal Entity in the Past Performance and Corporate Experience evaluations."

Additionally, as defined in Section M, III. Definitions, Principle Entities is defined as the, "Offeror/Prime". The definition further states, "The Government will only consider those entities that meet the definition of principal entity in the Past Performance or Corporate Experience evaluations."

Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices CLINs 0001 & 0002 Pg. 3 and Section L - Part B

5.1.1 CLIN 0001 &

0002 Capability Stand- Up Pg. 56

Elements of the draft RFP were discussed at Industry Day and the Govt indicated that it would remove the "NTE" cap on CLINs 1 and 2. In the final RFP these “NTE” caps remain. The capabilities that the government requests will cost what they cost and competition is the best way to achieve the lowest price. Contractors attempting to meet these NTE values may be placed in financial jeopardy by the NTE cap, thus jeopardizing program completion. Additionally, the economy is in a state of rapid inflation, and analysis indicates that the market research used to establish these NTE's may no longer be accurate. Furthermore, the final RFP contains additional design details and CFE items that were not previously available during the market research phase of the solicitation -further eroding the relevance of the NTE values. The inclusion of NTE values likely will result in several potential bidders declining to bid, thus increasing costs to the government overall due to reduced competition. They shift an undue amount of the risk onto the contractor.

Recommendation: Remove the “NTE” caps for CLINs 0001 and 0002.

The Government reviewed all feedback received on the draft and final solicitations. After careful consideration, the Government elected to keep the NTE values in place for CLINs 0001 and 0002. Offeror’s have the flexibility to price other CLINs as needed to support the SOJ efforts.

PBWS

3.3.4 NAVAIR IFC

Pg. 9 and

3.4 Aircraft Certification and

Maintenance Pg. 11

PBWS section 3.3.4 states that "A pre-condition for applying for a NAVAIR IFC is STC approval of the provisions for mission equipment and issuance of a new standard airworthiness certificate or a new special airworthiness certificate in the restricted category."

This statement is new content that did not appear in the draft PBWS, and seems to contradict sections 3.4.1.1 and 3.6.6 that allows demonstration of airworthiness through the FAA Form 8110 and Form 337 major alteration path. Mandating an STC to establish airworthiness greatly increases schedule and cost beyond the requirements of this solicitation - for example STCs of this complexity can take well over 2 years just to be processed by the FAA, causing that government dependency alone to exceed the standup timeline. Aircraft OEMs are not incentivized to cooperate with an STC process for only 2 aircraft that have no additional commercial benefit to the OEM. OEM dependencies increase both cost and schedule beyond the requirements of this program for no additional airworthiness value over the major alteration process. Neither NAVAIR policy, the attached Airworthiness Checklist, nor FAA requirements, require an STC for this work;

to mandate one via PBWS is substantially increasing cost and risk of this program. In fact, based on our experience, this program will not be executable if an STC is mandated.

Recommendation: remove the last sentence in paragraph 3.3.4 as cited above, thus allowing offerors to comply with the solicitation requirements through any of the FAA approved paths including 8110/337 field approval.

(Note, we are prepared to provide a proprietary annex to this question with relevant specific examples of STC schedule and expenses to assist the government in assessing this issue if the government requests additional information)

The Government has combined the requirements of Paragraphs 3.3.4 and 3.5.3, as defined within the initial version of the PBWS. Please see updated Attachment 1, PBWS where Paragraph 3.3.4 has been marked as "RESERVED", and Paragraph 3.5.3 has been revised. The revised Paragraph 3.5.3 specifically states, "A pre-condition for applying for a NAVAIR IFC is FAA approval of the provisions for mission equipment and issuance of a new standard airworthiness certificate or a new special airworthiness certificate in the restricted category." A revised PBWS version will be provided along with an RFP amendment.

The FAA approval requirement provides a level of risk reduction to the Government as far as being able to substantiate data and process for required

NAVAIR IFC.

PBWS

Appendix D Table 3 EA SOJ Aircraft Requirements Pg. 38

Weather Radar: The Weather radar requirements in Table 3 specifies an I-band radar, however most current airborne weather radars operate in the X-band. If an existing X band installation will suffice, retrofitting an aircraft with an I-Band radar adds additional expense and airworthiness burdens to the project. In typical mission use, the weather radar is normally secured so as to not interfere with the jamming mission; the prime use of the weather radar is for hazard avoidance during transit to the exercise area or for oceanic transits, thus the exact band of the weather radar should not impact the mission.

I-band runs between 8,000 – 10,000 Mhz X-band runs between 6,200 -10,900 Mhz

Question:

Will the government consider removing the requirement for an I-Band weather radar and allow any band of weather radar.

The Government has updated the PBWS, Appendix D, Table 3 to allow for any band of weather radar. A revised PBWS version will be provided along with an RFP amendment.

PBWS

Appendix D Table 3 EA SOJ Aircraft Requirements Pg. 38

SOJ Mission Computer: If the Govt does not plan to provide the Mission Computer(s) as GME, will the Govt please identify what Mission Computer the Govt itself is using on DoD SOJ missions today, so that Offerors can procure the correct item. Likewise, if the government has existing software for this mission, it would substantially reduce risk and cost to the program if mission software can be provided as GME.

The Government will not provide a Mission Computer as Government Furnished Property. Additionally, the Government cannot provide identification of the currently utilized Mission Computer software. Previous CAS providers have utilized FalconView, a GTRI developed software, on a Windows-based system. Based on an Offeror's technical approach in meeting the requirements of the SOJ Mission Computer, a Contractor's system should take inputs from aircraft TSPI data, TACAN, manually input target data, and be able to point the antennas at the specified target(s).

PBWS

Appendix D Table 3 EA SOJ Aircraft Requirements Pg. 38

SOJ Mission Computer: Will the Contractor provided Mission Computer(s) require an ATO for classified information handling?

No information processed by the Mission Computer will be classified.

PBWS

Appendix D Table 3 EA SOJ Aircraft Requirements Pg. 38

Internal Safe: Is the internally mounted GSA approved single-drawer security container considered GFE or CFE?

The Internal Safe requirement as defined within the PBWS, Appendix D is the responsibility of the contractor to provide as part of its aircraft configuration and is considered Contractor Furnished Equipment (CFE). A revised PBWS version, regarding the Safe requirement at Appendix D, Table

3, will be provided along with an RFP amendment.

Attachment 4 PBWS (Reference 1) Interface Reference Document Figure-3 Pg. 10

The newly provided IRD Figure 3 shows a simplified SOJ Signal Flow/Connection Diagram identifying the laptops as GME.

Question:

Would the Govt please delineate what additional equipment in Figure 3 is considered GME and what is considered CFE. This directly impacts the investment required by the Offeror and the final technical solution.

Government Furnished Property (GFP), Government Furnished Mission Equipment (GME), and Contractor Furnished Equipment (CFE) are all clearly defined within the PBWS, Attachment 1 and/or Attachment 4 IRD of the RFP.

PBWS

4.4 Technical Assistance Agreements

(TAA)

Pg. 28

In situations where no foreign parties are involved then a TAA will not be required but export/import authorizations may still be applicable. Recommend changing the title of this section from "Technical Assistance Agreements (TAA)" to "Export/Import Authorizations". Furthermore, depending on the situation, certain exemptions may be requested.

Recommendation: Amend the paragraph to read "The Contractor shall ensure that appropriate export and/or import authorizations are in place before conducting any activity under this PBWS, which require such approval and documentation. ITAR Exemption validations may be requested by the Contractor's Compliance Officer via ITAR-Exemption_Validations@navy.mil."

The Government will make the change to update the PBWS Paragraph 4.4 to state, "The Contractor shall ensure that appropriate export and/or import authorizations are in place before conducting any activity under this PBWS, which require such approval and documentation. ITAR Exemption validations may be requested by the Contractor's Compliance Officer via ITAR-Exemption_Validations@navy.mil." A revised PBWS version will be provided along with an RFP amendment.

Section L Part A General Instructions

2.0 Proposal Format

and Submission Pg. 44

Are 11”x17” sized pages permitted for use for graphics and tables in our response? Yes, 11”x17” sized pages are permitted for use for graphics and tables in an offeror response.

Section L Part A General Instructions

2.0 Proposal Format

and Submission Pg. 44

For easier reading of graphics, would the Govt permit the use of both Arial and Arial Narrow instead of Times New Roman for graphics?

Yes, The Government will permit the use of both Arial and Arial Narrow instead of Times New Roman for graphics as long as no smaller than a 10-point Times New Roman font.

Section L Part A General Instructions

2.0 Proposal Format

and Submission Pg. 44

The solicitation states “The Offeror shall number all pages with volume, paragraph, and page numbers.”

Question:

Is it the Government’s intent that all paragraphs of text be individually and consecutively numbered throughout the response, or is the Government merely requesting that all Sections/Headings are numbered and that response titles correspond to the section numbers and titles of Section L?

The Government's intent here is for offeror to properly annotate on each page of each volume the volume number, volume page numbers, and appropriate volume paragraph references. This is typically done in section/headings. Additional instruction is noted in Section 3.Proposal Content and Volumes (Part

A. General Instructions) of Section L for further guidance.

Section L Part A General Instructions

6.0 Technical Library

Pg. 47

The solicitation refers to a Technical Library available to Offerors under PIEE however no Technical Library (Attachment L-TL) nor associated files appear in PIEE.

Offerors will find it very difficult to analyze best value technical solutions without first viewing the contents of the Technical Library.

Question: Would the Govt verify that the files associated with the Technical Library are available under PIEE or provide them through other means. Please also confirm that the Reference Documents listed in Attachment 4 (PBWS Reference 1) Interface Reference Documents, paragraph 2.1, are included in the Technical Library.

The Technical Library documents are available upon request by submitting a request for access to the points of contact identified in Section A of this solicitation. This will be updated in Section 6.0 Technical Library (Part A. General Instructions) of Section L.

Section L Part B Specific Instructions

4.0 Volume 4 –

Technical Pg. 54

Regarding Attachment L-6 Volume 4 Table T-2 Cross Reference Matrix (CRM), the solicitation states ". . .the Offeror’s CRM may cross-reference its proposal volumes, paragraph numbers, and pages to specific solicitation requirements identified within the table, as well as other parts of the proposal that contain relevant information. Include the Table T-2 Cross Reference Matrix at the beginning of Volume 4 Technical.”

Question(s):

Does the Government prefer a complete CRM to include all proposal volumes and sections of our response, or is the CRM only intended to contain information pertaining to the Technical Volume?

If the Government wants all proposal volumes and content provided within the CRM, will the Government consider increasing the allotted page count from 2 pages to "As needed"?

Regarding placement of the CRM in our response, does the Government prefer placement immediately prior to any discussion within Volume 4 (i.e.., following the TOC) or may an offeror place the CRM after our introduction and Proposed Features/Benefits Matrix in order to follow the Section L layout?

No, the Government does not desire a complete proposal CRM. The Attachment L-6, Vol. 4 Table T-2 CRM requirement only applies to the Volume 4 - Technical and is only intended for the Technical Volume proposal submission.

Section L Part B Specific Instructions

4.0 Volume 4 –

Technical Pg. 55 and Table G-1 Offeror File Naming and Proposal Structure Pg. 46

The instructions state "The Offeror shall submit a proposed IMS using Microsoft Project .mpp format for completion of all stand-up requirements, including the date that they will be able to provide full performance of services under CLIN 0003 including availability of all aircraft for tasking."

However, Table G-1 Offeror File Naming and Proposal Structure does not include any reference to a .mpp file.

Recommendation: include the .mpp file and naming convention in the relevant section of Table G-1.

The Government has updated the RFP, Table G-1 of Section L Part A. General Instructions to include the .mpp file requirement for the IMS as a submittal.

Section L Part B Specific Instructions Sections 2.0 and 3.0 Pgs. 49 -53

The Corporate Experience and Past Performance Volumes limit submitted material to the CAGE code of the Prime. Although the Prime's Corporate Experience and Past Performance is of utmost importance, this solicitation requires some very specific technical disciplines, some of which may be best performed by subcontractors experienced in highly-specialized performance areas. Information on critical subcontractors would greatly increase the government's ability to evaluate performance and risk.

Question:

Will the government broaden the scope of the Corporate Experience and Past Performance volumes to allow for the inclusion of material for critical subcontractors, like the previous Navy Fleet Fighter Jets Services (FJS) RFP and most other Navy RFP Past Performance volumes?

No. The Government will not modify its approach to Relevancy and/or its plan to only consider the Past Performance and Corporate Experience of Principal Entities as defined defined in Definitions, Section M of the RFP.

Section L Part B Specific Instructions

5.0 Volume 5 -

Cost/Price Proposal Pg. 56

The solicitation states "The Offeror shall provide a narrative for all priced CLINs describing the build-up of the proposed unit price, assumptions used for each CLIN, and the basis of estimate for the unit price proposed showing build-up calculations of the unit sell price."

Table G-1 does not show a .docx file as required for Volume 5.

Question: Please clarify the file "Vol 5 Cost-Price#.xlsx" should be "Vol 5 Cost-i # d "

The Government has revised Table G-1 to specify Vol 5 Cost-Price Narrative as a .docx file.

Section H - Special Contract Requirements Clause 5252.227-9511 Pg. 27

Independent Service Contractor. The Govt is requesting that the prime contractor allow an independent service contractor (ISC) to gain access to the prime contractor’s proprietary information to conduct reviews, evaluations, or independent verification and validation.

In order to fulfill the requirement of ensuring that the ISC is given appropriate access to information and timely delivery of information or access it may need, would the Govt provide the prime contractor a 30 day notice that identifies the ISC, thus allowing time to prepare for its audit?

It is not a requirement of the clause to provide prior notification.

SF-33

Pg. 1 Section L Clause 52.211-14 Pg. 58

DPAS. The Govt has incorporated DPAS into this solicitation. Will the Govt provide the following to the Contractor after contract award: priority rating, required delivery date, signature, and certification?

The resultant Contract will incorporate a DPAS rating of DO-A1. The Government, as required during Contract execution on an as-needed basis, will provide formal letter of priority rating, required delivery date(s), signature, and/or certification.

Economic Price Adjustment. Given the economic environment due to COVID and post- COVID, the pace of inflation has been persistently high over the past two years. Indeed, overall prices are 13% higher than they were two years ago.

Question:

Given this current environment, is the Govt entertaining the idea of inserting the Economic Price Adjustment (52.216-4) clause to combat inflation costs which seems to steadily increase over the course of the contract?

The Government is not entertaining the idea of inserting the Economic Price Adjustment (52.216-4) clause for this requirement.

Section I - Contract Clauses 252.204-7020 Pg. 32

Will the government delete the inclusion of DFARS 252.204-7020 as the Govt has yet to implement the correct measures/standards making it impossible for offerors to meet the requirements.

The Government will not delete this clause as it is required by the DFARS prescription.

PBWS 1.3.1.3 1. 3.1.3 requires a safe and refers to the aircraft capability Attachment 1 for requirements

– As written it infers that the onboard safe is intended to store encryption keys/loaders and/or other classified information up to SECRET. Please confirm that this is the Navy’s intention and whether the Navy will approved this use while on military airfields.

The onboard safe is intended to store encryption keys/loaders and/or other classified information up to SECRET while the aircraft is in transit.

Operations with classified information or equipment will not be conducted at civilian airfields. The onboard safe shall not be used to store SECRET information or equipment overnight or while the Contractor aircrew member(s) holding the SECRET or higher clearance are not with the aircraft, even on military installations. A secure military facility with approved GSA safe must be used for storage of classified information or equipment while overnight on detachment (The Government Scheduling Officer will assist with coordination for obtaining safe storage aboard military installations).

PBWS Appendix D has been revised to clarify the Safe requirements.

PBWS 6.2 West Coast Basing – within 150 NM of San Clemente Island.

Question:

Will the Government consider providing a government facility at NZY?

The Government has confirmed that the requirement for basing as defined in Section 6.0, inclusive of all subparagraphs, represents the Government's current requirement for permanent basing on the West Coast IAW Para. 6.2 and East Coast IAW Para. 6.3. of the PBWS. Government provided facilities on the western coast of the United States, for execution of this specific contract, is not anticipated at this time.

IRD Figure 3 IRD Figure 3 shows an AIS input into the mission computer; however, there is no stated requirement in the PBWS for AIS.

Question:

Can the government please clarify whether AIS is required.

The Government has removed the reference to AIS within the IRD, Figure 3. Please see updated version of Attachment 4, IRD as posted along with Amendment .

Section C -- Descriptions & Specifications -- CLINs 0001 & 0002

States Contractor shall NOT include aircraft acquisition or aircraft leasing costs on these CLINs. Also is silent on the other fixed costs normally contained in CLINs 0004 & 0005, i.e. pilots, mechanics, insurance, facilities, PM, etc. prior to FOC where these CLINs are only for 42 & 36 months, respectively.

Question(s):

1) Where are these costs supposed to be charged?

2) How is the Contractor suppose to recoup these costs if FOC is obtained sooner that the maximum 18 or 24 months allowed, respectively?

The Government, as part of Amendment to the RFP, has revised the Section C CLIN Descriptions for CLIN 0001 and 0002, removing the following sentence, "The contractor shall not include aircraft acquisition and aircraft leasing costs on this CLIN".

Also, Offeror’s have the flexibility to price other CLINs as needed to support the SOJ efforts.

PBWS Appendix D Over water operations 250 NM from nearest land, in mission configuration with two (2) AST-9 pods in mission configuration.

Question:

Can the government please clarify what the aircraft range is from departure to destination, i.e. will the aircraft be required to transit to Hawaii?

As defined within the PBWS, Appendix D, Table 3, a resultant Contractor's aircraft supporting EA Stand-Off Jamming (SOJ) missions in term of Range, must be capable of executing over water operations 250 NM from nearest land, in mission configuration with two (2) AST-9 pods in mission configuration.

Additionally, each aircraft must be capable of the required minimum take-off to landing time of Five (5) hours in slick (without EW pods) configuration from take-off to landing.

PBWS Appendix D Aircraft shall be capable of simultaneously supporting four (4) different channels of EA Jamming IAW the IRD (PBWS Reference 1):

a. 1 C-band;

b. 2 E/F-band;

c. 1 I-band Additionally, at least two (2) hardpoints (one (1) left wing/one (1) right wing) that will each include four (4) RF cabling support to meet mission requirements for GFP/GME.

Question:

Can the government confirm that only one I band is required and no B band requirement.

The Government has confirmed that the requirements as stated within Appendix D, Table 3, EA Operations that Aircraft shall be capable of simultaneously supporting four (4) different channels of EA Jamming, with one (1) of those channels being I-band. B-band mission requirements will be supported utilizing a Government furnished pod.

PBWS Appendix D Four (4) CFE 19-inch standard industry electronic racks, up to 50 inches high (for the equipment), with seating for at least one operator per rack, in addition to racks for CFE equipment. The layout configuration must meet FAA Human Factors, Structural and aircraft Electrical Wiring requirements per

FAA 8300.16 CHG 1.

Question:

Can the government clarify the list of GFE equipment to be provided and installed (temporarily or permanently) in the racks?

Any government property listed within the PBWS and/or IRD, issued in performance of the EA SOJ CAS services, could be provided by the Government for any required, temporary or permanent, length of time. The length of time required, will be determined by the Government.

PBWS Appendix D Requires four RF cables to each wing hardpoint.

Question:

Can the government clarify the requirement for four RF cables to each hardpoint and the intended use.

The RF cabling is required for known, planned pod carriage capability as well as future expansion.

PBWS Appendix D Radome Requirement. Less than 1 dB loss.

Question:

Can the government confirm that this requirement is only for the upper radome?

Yes, this requirement is only for the upper radome. Loss of lower radome is specified by the Measured RF Power Density specification in the IRD.

PBWS Appendix D Transmit radome is computed into the ERP measurement which will be measured through the radome.

Question:

Can the government clarify any material specifications, if any?

No, the Government cannot specify material specifications required by an Offerors technical approach.

PBWS 3.7.4 The Contractor shall provide a Mission Commander (MC) and a Special Mission Operator (SMO) as aircrew for all SOJ missions. The Special Mission Operator (SMO) may be provided by the Government for any SOJ mission.

Question:

In what circumstances will the government provide a SMO?

The Government may decide to provide a SMO whenever it determines need or necessary, any or all flights, based on mission and/or exercise requirements. There is a perspective that once the resultant contractor becomes proficient with any Government Furnished Property provided to utilize in performance of the required CAS services.

PBWS 4.1 For the purposes of FAR Clause 52.245-1 Alternate 1, Government issued GME is considered GFP. Alternate I (Apr 2012). As prescribed in 45.107 (a)(2), substitute the following for paragraph (h)(1) of the basic clause:

(h)(1) The Contractor assumes the risk of, and shall be responsible for, any loss of Government property upon its delivery to the Contractor as Government-furnished property. However, the Contractor is not responsible for reasonable wear and tear to Government property or for Government property properly consumed in performing this contract.

Government issues GME is defined separately from GFP in the current contract. What documentation transmits this liability to the contractor?

All Government property that a resultant contractor utilizes in performance of the PBWS requirements, regardless of subcategorization, is subject to the clause 52.245-1, Alt 1. The resultant Contractor assumes the risk of, and shall be responsible for, any loss of Government property upon its delivery to the

Contractor as Government-furnished property. The basic clause defines “government property” and “government-furnished property” as follow:

Government-furnished property means property in the possession of, or directly acquired by, the Government and subsequently furnished to the Contractor for performance of a contract. Government-furnished property includes, but is not limited to, spares and property furnished for repair, maintenance, overhaul, or modification. Government-furnished property also includes contractor-acquired property if the contractor-acquired property is a deliverable under a cost contract when accepted by the Government for continued use under the contract.

Government property means all property owned or leased by the Government. Government property includes both Government- furnished and Contractor-acquired property. Government property includes material, equipment, special tooling, special test equipment, and real property.

Government property does not include intellectual property and software.

Loss of Government property means unintended, unforeseen or accidental loss, damage or destruction to Government property that reduces the Government’s expected economic benefits of the property.

Paragraph (b)(2) of the basic clause further provides:

The Contractor’s responsibility extends from the initial acquisition and receipt of property, through stewardship, custody, and use until formally relieved of responsibility by authorized means, including delivery, consumption, expending, sale (as surplus property), or other disposition, or via a completed investigation, evaluation, and final determination for lost property. This requirement applies to all Government property under the Contractor’s accountability, stewardship, possession or control, including its vendors or subcontractors (see paragraph (f)(1)(v) of this clause).

Various Definition of IOC and FOC. IOC and FOC are defined in terms of quantities.

What methodologies of IFC and STC are considered to meet the intent of IOC and FOC?

IOC and FOC are both tied to a Contractor's ability to provide the services required by the PBWS. The first SOJ aircraft on the East Coast, and the 2nd aircraft on the West Coast. There is a quantity aspect in meeting aircraft availability, in addition to being tied to schedule requirements. This RFP also provides for meeting both IOC and FOC sooner than the max schedule dates based on the resultant awardees technical approach to the RFP.

PBWS 3.3.4 A pre-condition for applying for a NAVAIR IFC is STC approval of the provisions for mission equipment and issuance of a new standard airworthiness certificate or new special airworthiness certificate in restricted category.

Can NAVAIR IFC be received with other types of FAA approval to include 337, and/or FAA ACO approval?

See Government Response to Question 3 above related to revisions to Paragraph 3.3.4 and 3.5.3.

Cost/Price Section L Volume V.

There are instructions for all of the CLINs EXCEPT CLIN 0005.

Question:

Can the government confirm that was on purpose, or if it was left out intentionally?

Section L, Paragraph 5.1.3 of the RFP provides instructions for both CLIN 0004 and 0005 combined.

Small Business Volume In the Small Business Volume, I do not see Attachment L-10 in the RFP. Please check to see if you have it, if no one has it, we need to ask about it.

The RFP will be revised to reflect reference Attachment L-9 for the Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD).

Section L, Part B, Vol 4 Technical, 4.3.2 NAVAIR Airworthiness

"The Offeror shall identify any aircraft modification required to meet the performance requirements of PBWS Appendix D where civil operating rules, limitations, or restrictions, will restrict FAA certification for captive carriage only ."

Please clarify the intent of this instruction, and that this is the only content required under 4.3.2 NAVAIR Airworthiness.

The Government's intent of this instruction is for an Offeror to correlate its response to the first question of the Airworthiness Checklist where it states, "“Describe where civil operating rules, limitations, or restrictions conflict with the requirements of contracted missions. Note: An IFC may not be required if the contracted mission is conducted within the boundaries of the National Airspace System and is operated under the entirety of 14 CFR (i.e., no extension of DoN PAO). The operating rules governing PAO aircraft operations trace to contract requirements, the applicable portions of DCMA-

INST 8210.1, and OPNAV 3710.7. Contracted air operations conducted on a joint air operation center’s air tasking order (ATO) require an IFC.”

To provide clarity, the RFP, Section L, Part B, Vol 4 Technical, 4.3.2 NAVAIR Airworthiness has been amended/updated as follows: "The Offeror shall identify any aircraft modification necessary to meet the performance requirements of PBWS Appendix D that cannot be fully approved for operation by the FAA, under a standard airworthiness certificate, because civil operating rules, limitations, or restrictions conflict with the requirements of contracted missions."

Section L, Part B, Vol 5 Cost/Price Proposal, 5.1 Contract Prices

Does the Govt intend to require Offerors to submit both "a copy of Section B of the solicitation populated with the CLIN unit prices and CLIN total prices ..." AND the Pricing Sheet (Attachment L-8)? It is noted that Atch L-8, sheet CP-1 provides the exact same content as "a copy of Section B", only much more efficiently presented.

Recommendation: delete the requirement to submit "a copy of Section B populated....", along with other references to "pricing in Section B", and only require the submittal of Pricing Sheet (Attachment L-8) populated with pricing for each CLIN.

The Government requires the offeror to submit both Section B and the Attachment L-8 pricing sheet as instructed in Section L of this solicitation.

Section L, Part B, Vol 5 Cost/Price Proposal,

5.1.2 CLIN 0003 SOJ

Services

Final sentence: "It shall include costs for flying the aircraft, landing fees…..and all other equipment not specified as GFP or GME in PBWS section 3.1.4, as well any travel costs incurred for these meetings ."

The final clause of this sentence seems to be out of place. Recommend clarification, or deletion of the final clause.

The Government has removed this sentence as it is not applicable to CLIN 0003

Section L, Part B, Vol 6 Small Business, 6.1

SBPCD

First sentence of 6.1 makes reference to "Attachment L-10 SB-1 SBPCD".

Recommmend confirming this is meant to state "Attachment L-9 SB-1 SBPCD"

Correct. Attachment L-10 should be Attachment L-9. The Government has updated Section L Part B Volume 6 to reflect change.

Section L - Part B Specific Instructions

6.0 Volume 6 - Small

Business Section L - Part B Specific Instructions

1.0 Volume 1 - Contract

Administration

Instructions for Vol 6 indicate the Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) shall be submitted as part of Volume 1 Contract Administration. However, the instructions for Volume 1, Contract Administration makes no mention of it.

Does the Govt want the SBPCD submitted as part of Volume 1, or as part of Volume 6?

Furthermore, the SBPCD commitment value is stated in the RFP as 5%, whereas Attachment L-9 states 10%. Would the Govt please clarify the correct commitment value.

The Government has validated that a minimum 10% Small Business Participation is required for this solicitation. The offeror shall submit SBPCD as part of Volume 6 - Small Business. The Government has updated solicitation to reflect SBPCD submission requirement.

GOV Responses