Q_and_A_MOD_-_5_Dec_13.pdf

1300333225

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

This amendment is issued to post the Past Performance Questionaire Form on Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) and to answ er questions from industry. The closing date of the solicitation is not extended.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 10

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Dec-2013

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 N64267-14-R-0008

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

15-Nov-2013

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 1 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

05-Dec-2013

CODE

NAVAL SURFACE WARFARE CENTER CORONA DIV

1999 FOURTH STREET BLDG 523

NORCO CA 92860

N64267 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N64267-14-R-0008

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The following industry questions and government response has been added by full text:

1. QUESTION:

The RFP states that the offeror is required to complete and track Past Performance Questionnaires for 3 references. Attachment 2 is referenced as the questionnaire, but this attachment is not posted with any of the other documentation. Could you please advise where to find this?

RESPONSE:

Past performance questionaire will be posted as an attachment on FBO, effective 5 December 2013.

2. QUESTION:

Is MESH capability between 2 or more vessels a requisite requirements?

Pease reference 2.1.7 in the attached specifications (Attachment 1), which states “The modem shall support star (hub to ship) and mesh (ship to ship) network.”

3. QUESTION:

What applications are going to be used across the satellite links?

Please reference the attached specifications (Attachment 1) 2.3.7. Management system shall provide QoS adjustable controls.

4. QUESTION:

The Past Performance instructions in Section L require that the Offer “Use the Past Performance

Questionaire (Attachment 2)” to supply Past Performance data. However, Attachment 2 is not provided as part of the released documents.

Kindly provide Attachment 2

The past performance questionaire (Attachment 2) will be included in this amendment.

5. QUESTION:

Section L indicates that the pricing information should be incorporated in Volume 4. However, no instructions are provided regarding the exact content and format of this Volume.

Kindly confirm that completing Section B of the RFP (Supplies or Services and Prices) is what is required for the Price Volume, and/or provide guidance if different or additional content is desired.

Please reference Section L 3.0 proposal content. A SF1449 must be completed as well as one copy of the

Price Posposal. Contractor format is acceptable.

6. QUESTION:

Section L requires that “The offeror should submit a complete, executed solicitation document (Standard

Form 1449)”.

a. It seems that only boxes 17a (name and address of Offeror) 30a, 30b, and 30c (signature boxes) need to be completed by the Offeror. Kindly indicate if additional information is needed on this form.

b. Should this completed form be separately submitted, or included with one of the defined

Volumes (e.g. Volume 4).

a. The SF 1449 must be completed in its entirety. This includes sections A-M of the solicitation as applicable.

b. Please see section L 3.0. A completed SF 1449 is required with volume 4.

7. QUESTION:

Section L requires that “contractor shall ensure that all certifications and representations required within

Section K of the solicitation have been accurately completed on ORCA at www.orca.bpn.gov”

The referenced ORCA website no longer exists. Kindly provide guidance as to how the certifications and representations required in Section K are to be provided.

Please see section L 3.0. of the solicitation which has been amended to remove www.orca.bpn.gov and updated to http://www.sam.gov.

8. QUESTION:

Specification paragraph 2.1.9.3 requires that “The antenna control port shall support either RS232 or

RS422 signals”. Other requirements in the Modem Specification require interoperability with a Seatel antenna, and support for open protocols such as ROAM.

The ROAM standard defines an Ethernet based antenna control port, and the Seatel antenna also supports such an interface. Hence mandating a serial based antenna control port seems inappropriate.

Can NAVO delete this requirement, or modify it to read:

“The antenna control port shall support either RS232 or RS422 or Ethernet signals” ?

The specifications (Attachment 1) section 2.1.9.3 has been amended to read “The antenna control port shall support either RS232, RS422, Ethernet signals, or any other method that uses existing ports that will not interfere with any other part of the Seatel antenna”

9. QUESTION:

http://www.orca.bpn.gov/ http://www.sam.gov/

Specification paragraph 2.2.41 requires that: “Frequency: The hub shall use Time Division Multiple Access

(TDMA).” This requirement conflicts with paragraph 2.1.3.1 which requires that “The modem shall utilize

Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA), Frequency Division Multiple Access (FDMA), or a combination of these two access schemes”.

We believe that it is NAVO’s intention that either TDMA, FDMA or a combination can be used to meet the requirements of this application.

Can NAVO delete 2.2.4.1, or modify it to be consistent with 2.1.3.1?

The specifications (Attachment 1) section 2.2.4 has been amended to read “The Hub and Remote modems should use Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA), Frequency Division Multiple Access (FDMA), or a combination of these two access schemes.”

10. QUESTION:

Please advise if CLIN 0003 Satellite Communications Management Kit on page 4 in the document

SATCOM_Modem_IDIQ_-_RFP_FINAL is the same that is described in section 2.3 Management on pages 2-4 and 2-5 in the document NAVO_Modem_Requirements_v1_1_WRW_rev[1]?

CLINs 0003 in the solicitation is the same description/reference as section 2.3. Management in the specifications (Attachment 1).

11. QUESTION:

Section 2.1.5.1. The modem shall support the following digital modulation schemes: BPSK, QPSK, 8PSK and 16QAM or 16APSK.

a. The requirement does not specify whether these modulation schemes need to be supported by both the modulator and the demodulator. Most TDMA systems support the modulation schemes outlined in the forward channel (Hub to remote) but in the return channel (remote to Hub) use either

OQPSK or QPSK. Will a solution that uses QPSK, 8PSK and 16QAM ro 16APSK in the forward channel

(per DVB-S2 spec) and OQPSK in the return channel be acceptable?

b. Will a TDMA solution that does not support BPSK, but supports all the other modulations and provides equivalent performance to BPSK (through signal spreading) be acceptable? We don't believe that at the required throughputs using BPSK is necessary since the close-in phase noise contribution is negligible and using other coding technology would be more spectrally efficient.

a. Please refer to the specifications (Attachment 1) section 2.1.5.1, the modem shall support

BPSK, QPSK, 8PSK, and 16QAM or 16APSK.

b. Please refer to the specifications (Attachment 1) section 2.1.5.1, the modem shall support

BPSK, QPSK, 8PSK, and 16QAM or 16APSK.

12. QUESTION:

Section 2.1.5.4. The modem shall be capable of transmitting speeds of 500 kbps to 1.5 Mbps to the hub.

a. Given that these ships will operate over C-Band and might have disadvantaged links, transmit signal spreading might be required to meet regulatory requirements. Do these throughputs take signal spreading into consideration?

a. The specifications (Attachment 1) section 2.1.5.4 has been amended to read “NAVO currently operates at 500-1.5. Mbps without spreading; spreading is not taken into consideration”

13. QUESTION:

Section 2.1.6.4. Antenna control port (for pointing of the satellite antenna) Location interface port (for ship latitude/longitude). If a port is not available for the unit the system shall be capable of monitoring and acting upon GPS coordinates through any other protocol with a SEATEL terminal.

a. Section 2.1.9.3 specifies an RS232 or RS422 interface for the antenna but this requirement above seems to imply that a port might not be available on the antenna control unit or that another protocol could be used. Do the SEATEL antennas have an Ethernet interface available and could it be used for antenna control and for the location interface?

a. The specifications (Attachment 1) section 2.1.6.4 has been amended to read “Antenna control should be on the Ethernet port”

14. QUESTION:

Section 2.2.1.4. The hub and all ancillary equipment shall be no greater than 15 rack units.

a. In Section 1.0, paragraph 4, it states: "The NAVO fleet consists of seven ships that dynamically transition between ocean regions as dictated by operational requirements. Seven ships, up to four of which can be co-located in the same ocean region at the same time, pass real-time data to and from NAVO HQ via the hub sites." For hub scaling purposes should we assume that the hub will need to support a maximum of 4 ships each operating at a maximum of 1.5 Mbps transmit and 2.5Mbps receive, for a hub aggregate capacity of 4x1.5=6 Mbps receive and 4x2.5 = 10Mbps transmit?

b. Given the expected link budget limitations at C-band (and without detailed information on the

SEATEL antennas being used), we recommend that the hub be scaled to receive 4 separate carriers, each bursting at 1.5 Mbps (instead of a single large 6 Mbps carrier) to support 4 ships operating at 1.5 Mbps of dedicated throughput each.

a. Please refer to the specifications (Attachment 1) section 2.2.1.4 , a hub aggregate capacity of

4x1.5=6 Mbps receive and 4x2.5 = 10Mbps transmit when 4 ships are in the same ocean.

b. Please refer to the specifications (Attachment 1), section 2.2.1.4 has been amended to read

“The hub and all ancillary equipment shall be no greater than 15 rack units”

15. QUESTION:

Per page 13 of SATCOM_Modem_IDIQ_-_RFP_FINAL a delivery date of 03MAR2014 is indicated in the special delivery instructions and that the first delivery order must be 60 days from contract award or sooner. To achieve this date the government would need to award contract and place first order by

31DEC2013. Is that the correct interpretation of the Government's intent?

Please reference section F – Deliveries or Performance under Special Delivery Instruction which states

“The first delivery order must be 60 days from contract award or sooner.”

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS AND NOTICES TO BIDDERS

The following have been modified:

www.orca.bpn.gov has been changed to www.sam.gov in section L 3.0 of the solicitation.

PART A GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1.0 GENERAL

Offerors are required to submit sufficient information concerning the following areas to enable Government personnel to fully ascertain capabilities of the offeror to perform the requirements. The proposal must be sufficient in detail and scope to permit evaluation and provide the evaluators a clear understanding of the offeror’s approach, expertise, experience and capability as required by the solicitation. All proposals must clearly and convincingly demonstrate that the offeror has a thorough understanding of the requirements and associated risks, and is able, willing and competent to devote the resources necessary to meet the requirements and has valid and practical solutions for all requirements and potential risk areas. Respond to all requirements of the solicitation. Do not alter or rearrange the solicitation. The burden of proof for all the evaluation factors identified in this solicitation rests with the offeror. The offerors are advised that the Government may incorporate into the final contract enhancing features included in the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government. With the exception of the Price volume, no cost or pricing information should appear in any other volume. Alternate proposals are not acceptable.

In presenting material in the proposal, the offeror is advised that quality of information is more important than quantity. Clarity, brevity, and logical organization should be emphasized during proposal preparation. It is the responsibility of the offeror to present enough information to allow the various work efforts, support, and proposing a product, management approaches, as well as price, to be meaningfully evaluated without discussions. Statements that an offeror understands without supporting information may merit a rating of Unacceptable, but statements do not render a rating. For the purpose of this acquisition, relevance is defined as something that has a logical connection with the matter under consideration.

The offeror must include any data necessary to illustrate the adequacy of the various assumptions, approaches, and solutions to problems. Failure to clearly and positively address a specific factor or sub-factor may be considered a deficiency. There is no need to repeat information in more than one volume if an overlap exists; the detailed information must be included in the most logical place and summarized and referenced in other areas.

Unnecessarily elaborate brochures or other presentation materials beyond that sufficient to present a complete and effective proposal is neither necessary nor desired.

http://www.sam.gov/

Offerors are expected to comply with all requirements of the RFP. The Government advises offerors that taking exception or deviating from any term or condition of the RFP may make an offer unacceptable, and the offeror ineligible for award, unless the RFP expressly authorizes such an exception or deviation with regard to that specific term or condition. The Government may consider any exception or deviation to any term or condition of the RFP that is not expressly authorized by the RFP to be a deficiency, as defined in FAR 15.001.

2.0 PROPOSAL FORMAT

Written proposals must be formatted using a Times New Roman 12 pt normal font (no reduction permitted), single-spaced with 1-inch margins all around, and formatted for standard 8.5 x 11 inch paper. All pages should be numbered with section and page numbers. When foldout pages are used they must not exceed 11 x 17 inches and will be counted as 1 page. Drawings may be provided separately and may be any size but should be folded to approximately 8.5 x 11 inch standard size and will count as 1 page. Graphs shall be presented in no smaller than a

10 pt font and should contain a grid, which allows values to be read directly from the graph to the same accuracy that a 10 x 10 to the ½ inch grid provides. Graphic resolution should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented.

The offeror will provide one complete copy of the written proposal to the PCO as electronic files fully compatible with Microsoft Office.

3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES

Each volume of the proposal shall be submitted as one original in electronic format as specified in the table below. Submission of all volumes of the Original proposal to the email address provided in section 4.0 will determine timeliness of receipt. Page limitations for each volume if any, are also specified in the table below as follows (title and table of contents pages do not count towards page limit). Proposal pages beyond a specified maximum limit, if any, will not be reviewed as part of the evaluation.

Volume Number Volume Title Written Page Limit Copies Required

1 TECHNICAL 15 1 Original

2 LEAD TIME 2 1 Original

3 PAST PERFORMANCE 15 1 Original

4 PRICE ** 1 Original

** The offeror should submit a complete, executed solicitation document (Standard Form 1449). One original copy of the Price Proposal should be provided. That contractor shall ensure that all certifications and representations required within Section K of the solicitation have been accurately completed at www.sam.gov.

Each volume must contain the following information:

Cover and title page

Title of proposal and proposal number as applicable

Offeror’s name, address and POC

RFP number

Proposal volume/book number

Copy

Table of Contents (The table of contents must provide sufficient detail to enable easy location of important elements)

Include CAGE or DUNS

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.

EXAMPLE OF A CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX (CRM)

Proposal

Instructions Government PWS/SOW

Evaluation

Factor Offeror’s Proposal Reference

CLIN

Reference

Volume 2

Technical

Example: Para 3.1

Note: This column shall address all paragraphs in Sections xx and xy of the Performance

Specification

2.A Provide reference to your Proposal

Volume I – Technical. Example:

Refer to appropriate page number in your written proposal

4.0 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION:

Clearly mark all packages with the solicitation number. The submission date for all Volumes, shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 8 of Standard Form 1449.

Proposals shall be submitted via email to Blaine A. White at blaine.white@navy.mil

5.0 CLASSIFIED DATA

All proposals must be UNCLASSIFIED

VOLUMES

The solicitation requires the evaluation of the following factors:

Factor 1– Technical Capability or Approach of the item(s) offered to meet the Government’s requirement.

Factor 2 - Lead Time

Factor 3 - Past Performance

Evaluated Price

Basis of Evaluation and Submittal Requirements for Each Factor.

1.0 VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL APPROACH:

1.1 The offeror shall provide all information and data required to conduct a thorough and complete technical evaluation. The offeror shall address the following in the proposal: Note: This volume shall not contain any reference to cost or price aspects of the offer.

Technical Description - Include overall dimensions, salient characteristics, major component identification, required options and accessories, material used in construction, and a sample of the proposed commercial equipment technical manual(s)/data sheet(s). Identify all software and system components that meet specification in Section C requirements. A cross reference matrix (CRM) is required that links to each Navy technical specification element to the proposed hardware that will fill the requirement. Reference information is required in the CRM that shows where in the proposal literature the information can be found that demonstrates compliance for each technical element.

Elaborate on and discuss warranties, technical certifications, calibration/certificate of conformance and any specialized equipment used to test and calibrate. Provide any additional information required to service, support and calibration all system components, adapters, cables and/or kits. Identify those items (sub-assemblies, circuit cards) that are uniquely recommended for return to vendor (service, repair or calibration). NOTE: The intent is for the Navy to be able to service this equipment to the maximum extent possible.

2.0 VOLUME 2: LEAD TIME

Certification that the items will be delivered based on the delivery schedule (See Section F) of the solicitation.

3.0 VOLUME 3: PAST PERFORMANCE:

Past performance data submitted must have a logical connection to the requirement set forth in the Statement of

Work/Specification. Offerors shall submit the following information as part of their proposal for both the offeror and proposed major subcontractors. List performance data on three (3) most recently completed current Federal government contracts (not to have exceeded 3 years since completion) for similar equipment. If offerors do not have three Federal contracts, State, local or commercial contracts can be used to complete this requirement. Offerors that are newly formed without prior contracts should list contracts and subcontracts as required above for all personnel with significant roles in contract performance. Use the Past Performance Questionaire (Attachment 2) to supply data.

The Past Performance Questionaire information shall be completed by the offeror in its entirety for each contract.

The evaluators will look for the following in their evaluation of past performance:

• Quality

• Timeliness

• Customer Satisfaction

The offeror shall send out and track completion of the Present/Past Performance Evaluation Form to each of the offerors relevant past performance contracts Point of Contacts (POCs). The responsibility to send out and track the completion of the Present/Past Performance Questionnaires rests solely with the offeror. The offeror shall exert its best efforts to ensure that at least one POC, per relevant contract, submits a completed Present/Past Performance

Evaluation Form to the Government after the same time the solicitation closes. Each form shall contain the contract number, POC and phone number. Each offerors POC shall email its completed Present/Past Performance

Questionnaire directly to Blaine A White. The Government reserves the right to verify/confirm all form information.

Failure to submit the data sheet, with the proposal, shall be considered certification (by signature on the proposal) that the contractor has no past performance for similar items. The Government reserves the right to use past performance information obtained from these sources or from sources other than those identified by the offeror, such as the Navy’s Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), Product Data Reporting and

Evaluation Program (PDREP), and Past Performance Information Retreival System (PPIRS). Since the Government may not necessarily interview all sources provided by the offeror, it is incumbent upon the offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided. The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information remains with the offeror. If you are aware of any situation that may negatively impact your past performance rating please discuss the situation and how it was remedied.

The Government may award a contract on the basis of initial offers received, without discussions. Therefore, each initial offer should contain the offerors best terms from a price and technical standpoint. However, if considered necessary by the Contracting Officer, discussions will be conducted with only those offerors determined necessary to ensure efficient competition.

EVALUATED PRICE

If a proposal has been determined acceptable under each of the non-price factors listed above, the Government will evaluate each proposal on a lowest price basis.

(End of Summary of Changes)