N66604-17-R-0350_CRM__081617RevB.pdf

Unmanned Undersea Vehicle Family of Systems

RFP N66604-17-R-0350

Comment Resolution Matrix

Page # Section / Paragraph Comment / Question Recommendation Gov't Response

1 Please extend due date for receipt of offers to XXXX 2017.

The Government will extend the deadline to Wednesday September 13, 2017.

Draft documents, including SOW, DD254, CDRLs, and Sections L&M were released on 7/1 with the Draft RFP. Those items were not included with the Final RFP which was released on 7/7. Are the draft documents that were posted on 7/1 the final documents for Sections L&M, SOW, DD254 and CDRLs? If not, request the government make those documents available as soon as possible.

See revised documents, posted 8 August 2017.

In reviewing Solicitation for Offer and Award N66604-17-R-0350, vendor would like to know approximately how many IDIQ awards the government expects to make in response to this solicitation?

The Government does not have a definitive number of the awards to be made.

Does the Government foresee the 12 functional areas and their requirements changing over the course of the contract and/or option years?

Any possibility for NEW functional areas to be added during the duration of this contract and/or option years?

At this time, it is expected all technologies would fit in one of the 12 functional areas.

Are there any limitations or restrictions for Primes in adding team members or utilizing new companies as subcontractors throughout the duration of the contract?

The Government will consider all requests to add subcontractors.

Are there other conditions which may entitle/allow a company to qualify for a functional area at a later time which they were initially not qualified for (i.e. acquisition of company with relevant capability/history, new functional areas added or requirements in existing functional areas redefined)?

Companies which are not initially qualified for a functional area may propose during on-ramp events. On-ramp events will have similar criteria to the initial solicitation.

Comment Resolution Matrix

Will the Government allow an awarded Offeror to prime its own contract, and be a subcontractor to other primes as well? If so, can they prime a particular functional area, and be a subcontractor to another Contractor within the same topic area as long as they firewall the respective individuals?

The teaming arrangements are at the contractor's discretion.

Will Canadian Companies be allowed to work on any portion of this contract or will export controls/ Distribution Statements not allow for non-US persons to work on this program?

All requests to use Foreign companies or persons must be approved by the Contracting Officer, and adhere to all US laws and regulations.

9 47 Section I, 52.215-17 Waiver of FCCOM

Request the replacement of the current clause with, 52.215-16 -- Facilities Capital Cost of Money

Recommend the government replace the current clause with 52.215-16. 52.215-16 is incorporated by reference in Section L

10 42 Section H, Clause H.2 paragraph C Is the contractor to assume that escalation max rate is year to year?

Recommend the government clarify the escalation max rate applicability. The escalation max rate is year to year.

11 41 Section H, Clause H.2 paragraph A

Does the Maximum Pass-Through Rate apply to all subcontract costs regardless of the percentage of subcontractor cost for the total Delivery/Task order cost? FAR clauses 52.215-22 and 52.215-23 limit applicability to contract, task order, or delivery order where more than 70% of the work will be subcontracted and allows added value direct costs. Should H.2 and the FAR clauses to be read together to provide definitions and thresholds?

Recommend the government confirm that the thresholds and definitions in the FAR clauses apply.

Maximum Pass-Through Rate of clause H.2 applies to all subcontract costs.

Comment Resolution Matrix

12 Will the Offeror be required to complete, sign and submit the SF33? Yes.

Can multiple proposals be submitted from companies that reside within one parent organization? Or must all proposal ideas be bundled up and submitted as one master proposal?

Proposals for functional areas shall be bundled together as described in UW L-2-0001, item no. 10.

Proposals shall be from a single offeror, together with all divisions, subsidiaries, and affiliates under common control.

14 General SOW/ L34

Section 3.1.1 of the Evaluation for Award document provides response requirements for each function. This question is related to the requirements to "Describe the steps required to develop a concept…" where it cites specific SOW paragraphs.

Some SOW paragraphs do not seem applicable to the function shown in Attachment 1 matrix. For example, the matrix indicates SOW 4.2.1 (Prototype Design and Development) is applicable to Hull and Structure, but 4.2.1.5 (Prototype Software and Firmware Implementation) doesn't seem applicable to Hull and Structures upon first glance.

Recommend the government review the Functions and SOW to verify applicability.

The Functional Area Matrix vs Requirements Matrix has been intentionally cross-referenced at a higher level for ease of use. Please use your best judgement on which subparagraphs may be applicable to your functional area for your proposals; if necessary list any assumptions you made. Future task orders may cite one or more subparagraphs of section 4.2.1 and 4.2.2, but most situations would not require all subparagraphs to be used simultaneously. In the example cited, most future task orders for the Hull and Structure would logically require mechanical design (4.2.1.2) but not likely software (4.2.1.3) or Software and Firmware implementation (4.2.1.5).

Comment Resolution Matrix

Clause 5252.216-9122 Level of Effort - Alternate I (MAY 2010)

(b) Of the total man-hours of direct labor set forth above, it is estimated that ___ (offeror to fill-in) man-hours are uncompensated effort.

In the absence of bidding actual tasks that use full cost and pricing data, we recommend for the Government to request that Clause 5252.216-9122 Level of Effort be TBD for this proposal, and filled in by the Offeror when bidding for a Task Order.

The Government will allow "TBD" for this clause.

The uncompensated effort will be evaluated at the task order level.

Clause 52.246-11 invokes ANSI/ISO/ASQ 9001, Quality Management Systems 2015 as the quality standard for this contract. Small businesses may have Quality Management Systems (QMS) in place to meet quality requirements but without the cost or resource burden of ISO 9001. Would the government accept a QMS in place of ISO 9001?

The Contractor shall establish, implement, document, and maintain a quality system that ensures conformance and meets the requirements of ANSI/ISO/ASQ 9001, Quality Management Systems.

The Government posted an amendment to the FBO announcement - but I don't see any new documents. What did the Gov't change? The Primary POC was changed.

HQ C-2-0037

Multiple questions regarding clause HQ C-2-0037 Organizational Conflict of Interest (NAVSEA) (JUL 2000):

This determination cannot be made at this time. OCI questions are fact specific and therefore cannot be answered until the specific facts are known.

Comment Resolution Matrix

HQ C-2-0037

ORGANIZATIONAL

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(NAVSEA) (JUL 2000) Subpart 9.5—Organizational and Consultant Conflicts of Interest

Please confirm that the work being contemplated under the resultant task orders is considered development work. Some tasking may be development work.

The Subject OCI in Paragraph (e) seems to restrict a company, subcontractors and consultants that performs in a resultant contract during the contract period of performance and for a period of 3 years after completion of contract period of performance from furnishing anything that was developed or provided on the contract or subcontract to any US Government agency. We are a small business and anticipated Subcontractor to one or more Prime bidders, the restriction as I read it could have an impact on our business as it limits the market place for our product. Is there an exemption or exception to this requirement for small business subcontractors?

No, there are no exemptions or exceptions.

21 19 HQ C-2-0037

We believe that this subparagraph (e) should be modified to apply only to SETA task orders and that if a contractor designs, develops, or delivers hardware or software they should not be prohibited from being eligible for subsequent development or delivery contracts outside of the IDIQ.

Recommend the government modify the subparagraph to apply only to SETA task orders. We will provide suggested language in a subsequent submission. Please define SETA.

22 38

2) If the Competitive Order Process is to be executed via the Seaport-e portal, as described on page 38 of the RFP, do the proposed subcontractors have to be an approved Seaport-e Teaming Partner of the offeror at the time of the MAC proposal?

Future orders will be through the Seaport-O portal.

Seaport-e and its requirements are not applicable to this procurement.

Comment Resolution Matrix

3) Is the 20% Small Business goal based on total contract value, total labor dollars or total subcontracted dollars?

Total Contract Value per functional area. This will be considered at the Order level.

Will the government confirm that the Congressionally-mandated five percent (5%) goal for small disadvantaged business concerns is based on total subcontracted dollars? Total subcontract value.

The US Postal Service processes over 500 million pieces of mail every day, and while that is an incredible figure, there are occasions where pieces do get delayed or even lost. Having a late or missing delivery would be devastating to a contractor submitting a proposal to the government. Would the government consider allowing bidders to hand deliver their proposals to NUWC as they have done in the past?

Hand delivery is acceptable. Please use tracking and signature confirmation if concerned about delivery.

HQ C-2-0037

ORGANIZATIONAL

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

(NAVSEA) (JUL 2000)

2. Does the start of the three year prohibition start when the work under the individual Technical Instruction or Delivery Order is completed or the end of the IDIQ contract?

The specific task or work, unless there are subsequent tasks.

Does the information to be entered in block 15A on the SF33 (Offeror's name, address, code, facility) for N66604-17-R-0350 have to match an Offeror's current Seaport-e basic contract information or can the proposal be submitted under a corporate CAGE, which does not have a Seaport-e MAC?

Future orders will be through the Seaport-O portal.

Seaport-e and its requirements are not applicable to this procurement.

Comment Resolution Matrix

SOW 2.1/ Important Note/Page 5; Section H1 - Ordering Process, Subsection B - Competitive Ordering Process, paragraph (d)

How often does the Government plan to offer tasks which include multiple technical areas?

Determination cannot be made at this time.

Will questions be answered on the Seaport portal or is there a different site to post answers? Answers will be posted to FBO.gov

Questions – Page 81 – NOTES – Item 4 and 5 – these identify that the total amount of the award would be $794,530,000. The amounts for each CLIN 0001 – 0006 add up to $561,150,000. That is $10,000 less than the total contract award when added to the amounts for CLINs 0007 – 0011. Please clarify if the individual CLIN amounts are correct and the total contract award should be $794,520,000. Value of CLIN 0003 is updated.

SOW Reference: Page 18: In section 4.4.4, Post-Test Analysis, the deliverable is in accordance with CDRL A00D. However, the CDRLs provided with the RFP have no CDRL A00D. Please clarify

See revised documents, posted 8 August 2017.

33 41 Section H, Clause H.2 paragraph A

Maximum Pass-Through Rate is defined as the cumulative amount of 1) any and all indirect costs including, but not limited to, program management, subcontract management, invoice processing, Quality Assurance, overhead, material handling charges, G&A, burdens and mark-ups; and 2) any and all prime contractor profit or fee.

The definition of indirect costs includes costs that per our disclosure statement identifies as both indirect (overhead, material handling charges, G&A, burdens) and direct costs (program management, subcontract management, invoice processing and Quality Assurance).

Recommend the government clarify if it is intended to disclude costs that are billed in accordance with an approved disclosure statement and are allowable under the cost accounting standards and the

FAR.

Offerors shall propose in accordance with approved Disclosure Statements.

The Government indicated in answer to Question 4, that the Small Business Subcontracting Plan should be included in Volume 3, Management Approach.

Small Business Subcontracting Plans include dollar amounts and are restricted to the Cost volume for evaluation purposes. If included in Volume 3, should the offeror not include dollar amounts in the Plan but rather just percentages (%) for each socio-economic category?

See FAR 52.219-9.

Comment Resolution Matrix

DFAR 252.227-7014, Rights in Noncommercial Computer Software and Noncommercial Computer Software Documentation, Page 57 of the solicitation requires that the offeror identify (Page 63) any asserted restrictions on Computer Software. Would the Navy consider “TBD on individual task orders” for this fill in?

Yes.

DFAR 252.227.7017, Identification and Assertion of Use, Release or Disclosure Restrictions, Page 79 of the solicitation requires that the offeror identify (Page 80) any asserted restrictions for technical data or software.

Would the Navy consider “TBD on individual task orders” for this fill in?

Yes.

Request that the Government confirm acceptability of commercial past performance references.

Yes. Commercial past performance references are acceptable.

Does Section H.2 Maximum Pass Through Rates pertain to only true subcontracts that we would issue or does it also pertain to all vendor costs.

All.

Are we required to provide a cost/price for the CLINs based on the “hypothetical task”?

No.

Comment Resolution Matrix

Page # Section /

Paragraph Comment / Question Recommendation Gov't Response

1 Item 10

Section L. Item 10 of the subject solicitation states, "Only one contract will be awarded per successful Offeror inclusive of all divisions, subsidiaries, and affiliates under common control."

This approach seems to limit the ability of separate divisions under a common parent to be awarded separate MAC prime contracts. Is this your intent? If so it will add unnecessary additional indirect and direct costs to NUWC Task Orders when a performing division must use the single non-performing division's NUWC UUV FOS MAC contract and Task Order.

We suggest NUWC 1) reconsider this position, or 2) add a clause to the RFP to allow Task Orders to be bid by, and awarded directly to, the common parent's primary performing division/Cage Code.

Yes, this is the Government's intent.

2 Please delete Maximum Pass-Through Rate. No.

3 85

Page 85 of 89 of the RFP includes HQ L-2-0005 Notification of Potential Organizational Conflict(s) of Interest (NAVSEA) (JUN 1994). However, Section L does not indicate which volume the offeror's OCI Mitigation Plan should be included in or if it should be included with this proposal at all. Is an OCI Mitigation Plan required for at the IDIQ level to be submitted with this proposal or only at the individual Task Order level? If not required for this proposal, would the Government please remove the requirement?

If applicable, submit an OCI mitigation Plan as an enclosure to the Cover letter. OCI mitigation Plan is not subject to any page limits.

Comment Resolution Matrix

4 86

Page 86 of 89 of the RFP includes HQ L-2-0009 Small Business Subcontracting Plan (NAVSEA) (Jun 199) which requires the submittal of a written Small Business Subcontracting Plan (FAR 52.219-9) as part of the proposal. However, Section L 1.3(d) does not include a Small Business Subcontracting Plan as part of the proposal organization. If required, would the Government provide where in the proposal the Small Business Subcontracting Plan should be provided?

Submit as part of Volume 3.

Would the Government please confirm that a Cover Page and Table of Contents are not included in the page counts provided in Section L of the Solicitation?

The Cover Page and the TOC are not included in the page counts.

The table in section L 1.3(d) shows a page limit of 3 for Past Performance references in each Task Area. Section 3.1.4(1)(b) requires a maximum of three past performance references with a limit of two pages per reference. Please clarify that we are limited to three past performance references of two pages each for each functional area.

Each Past Performance reference shall not exceed one (1) page.

Comment Resolution Matrix

Section L 3.1.4(1)(a) states, "The Offeror shall identify if they are providing a single reference applicable to more than one functional area." However, it is not clear if that is the case, are offerors supposed to duplicate that past performance reference in Volume IV for each functional area it is applicable to, or should the offeror only include the reference once in Volume IV and just note which functional areas it is applicable to in the reference.

Would the Government please clarify how a single reference that is applicable to multiple functional areas is to be provided in the proposal? Should the reference be repeated in the section for each functional area response or will the Government allow an extra page at the beginning of the Past Performance volume to provide an applicability matrix for all the references as an introduction?

Submit for each functional area, specifically describing how it applies to the functional area for which it is submitted.

8 11

Page 11 of the Sections L&M document states “The government’s goal for Small business Participation percentage for each functional area is 20%.” Is it true that in order to be rated ‘Acceptable’ an offeror must include 20% small business participation for each and every functional area proposed?

The Government’s goal for Small Business Participation percentage is 20%. The Offeror is encouraged to propose a Small Business Participation objective percentage as high as is practicable, as long as the percentage is supported by the related Small Business participation approach.

9 L34X

The solicitation includes FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. In meeting the requirement for a Small Business subcontracting goal of 20%, would the Government please clarify how the goal will be determined for dollar values? Will the 20% Goal be based on Total Contract Value, or Total Subcontracted Value?

FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan is separate and distinct from the Small Business Participation goal.

The Small Business Participation goal is based on Total Contract Value. This will be considered at the Order level.

Comment Resolution Matrix

10 L34X

Section L34X 1.3(d) [Pages 2-6 of 19] provides page limitations for each volume. For Volume I, each Functional Area Hypothetical Task has varying page limits, ranging from 2 to 5 pages. However the instructions for each Hypothetical Task require offerors to describe approaches to the same SOW areas, and in some cases includes additional material offerors are to provide. In some cases offerors are asked to describe an approach to seven SOW Task Areas and four or five additional topics in just 2 pages. Would the government consider increasing the page count for the Hypothetical Task response for all Functional Areas to 5 pages?

The Page limits will remain the same. The Additional material requested (Labor Matrix and Resume) are provided a separate two

(2) pages each.

11 Multiple Hypothetical task questions.

The hypothetical tasks are intended to be broad to allow for a diversity of offerors to propose. Please list any assumptions made which were required to estimate complexity, material and labor hours.

Please do not submit Classified information.

12 45 L34X, 5252.237-

In L34X TECHNICAL PROPOSAL - COMPLEX ITEM (FEB 2012) attachment to the solicitation there is a requirement to submit a resume for a lead person for each functional area proposed. There is also one requested for the Senior Technical Representative (STR). The STR is the only person designated as a key person.

Please confirm that the STR is the only person that would be deemed a key person under 5252.237-

9106 SUBSTITUTION OF

PERSONNEL (SEP 1990)

The STR is the only person deemed a key person. Lead Personnel for functional areas are for proposal review purposes only.

Comment Resolution Matrix

L34X

L34XTECHNICAL_PROPOSAL_M32X_EVALUATION_FOR_A

WARD, Section 1.2(b), page 1 requires that offerors submit electronic copies of proposals on CD-ROM. Is it acceptable to consolidate electronic copies of the Technical Proposal, Volumes I through IV on a single CD- ROM OR do you want each volume on a separate CD-

ROM?

Volumes I through IV may be on a single CD, as long as the files for Volumes I through IV are separated.

14 L34X

L34XTECHNICAL_PROPOSAL_M32X_EVALUATION_FOR_A

WARD, Section 1.3(a), page 2 states “…Every paragraph, figure, and table shall be numbered. …” Please clarify whether each and every paragraph must be numbered with a unique identifier, similar to how you have the “(a)”, “(b)”, “(c)”, “(d)”, “(e)”, and “(f)” identifiers on this section 1.3, or if section and subsections can be numbered appropriately per the offeror’s best judgement.

Paragraphs shall be numbered in accordance with the table in Section L Paragraph 1.3 (d). Any subsections in addition to those listed may be numbered per the offeror's best judgement.

Comment Resolution Matrix

15 L34X

L34XTECHNICAL_PROPOSAL_M32X_EVALUATION_FOR_A

WARD, Section 1.3(c), page 2 states “…For hard copy submissions, the Technical Volumes may be organized in one binder, with volumes clearly separated. …”

(a) Should the 2-page Cover Letter be separately bound OR can it be included with either the consolidated Technical Proposal (Volumes I-IV) or the Cost/Price Proposal (Volume V)?

(b) If it can be included with another part of the proposal, does the government have a preference whether it be included with the Technical Proposal or Cost/Price Proposal?

Can the electronic copy of the Cover Letter be included with the electronic copy of either the Technical volumes or the Cost/Price Volume?

(a) Either are acceptable.

(b)Technical Proposal.

(c) Yes

Section L34x 3.1.2.1 Facilities does not reference internal and external facilities. Section M32x 3.2.1 Facilities identifies internal and external facilities as evaluation criteria. How are internal and external facilities defined?

Internal is defined as interior or inside i.e., Test Tank Facility, Manufacturing facility.

External is defined as exterior or outside, i.e., Outdoor Range or Bay.

HQ L-2-0009

Small Business Subcontractin g Plan

(NAVSEA)

(JUN 1999)

Will the Government accept submission of an Offeror's approved DoD Comprehensive Subcontracting Plan to satisfy the HQ L-2-0009 Small Business Subcontracting Plan clause?

DFARS 252.219-7004 is added.

Comment Resolution Matrix

Note 8: The Government currently anticipates implementing ramp-on procedures at year three and, if the option period is exercised, again at year six.

Request the Government identify the process for ramp-on at year three and year six.

Will these procedures allow either new primes to bid or existing primes to add or change subcontractors?

Will an initial awardee that did not receive an award in a specific functional area be able to compete for that area under a subsequent ramp-on?

Procedures for On-Ramp at year three and year six are subject to change. Primes may propose to Functional Areas which they were not previously awarded at this time.

New offerors may propose to any Functional Areas.

3.1.1 #7.

Software

Request the Government define System Oriented Architecutre (SOA). Should we assume that the intent was to address a Services Oriented Architecture?

Yes; System Oriented Architecture is updated to Services Oriented Architecture.

Comment Resolution Matrix

HQ L-2-0017

SOFTWARE

DEVELOPMEN

T AND CMMI

OR

EQUIVALENT

EXPERIENCE

(NAVSEA)

(DEC 2006)

(see attached email for solicitation reference)

1. Does the ten (10) page restriction cited in subparagraph

(b) apply to the requirements of both subparagraphs (a) and (b)?

2. The technical proposal page limitation cited in subparagraph (c} does not appear to be addressed in Section L. Should the 10-page document cited above and the 5-page Software Development Rationale be included in the Factor 3 Management Approach before the Software Development Plan?”

Include the SDP Rationale in Volume 3 Section 1.2 with the SDP. Please limit the Rationale to 5 pages as stated in the provision, HQ L-2-0016. HQ L-2-0017

SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND CMMI OR

EQUIVALENT EXPERIENCE should also be submitted Volume 3 Section 1.2 with the SDP. Please limit the Experience to 10 pages as stated in the provision. As not all offerors will submit a SDP (dependent on Functional Area), it is included with the "No Limit" page count of the SDP.

HQ L-2-

0016/HQ L-2-

Section L3.1.3 states “the Offeror shall provide an initial Software Development Plan, in accordance with NAVSEA provision HQ L-2-0016 and a description of relevant Software Development experience, in accordance with NAVSEA provision HQ L-2-0017.” The referenced provisions provided on page 86 of 89 of the solicitation require an SDP rationale (not to exceed five pages), a description of previous relevant experience, and a description of relevant CMMI appraisals (not to exceed ten pages). Would the Government please confirm that these three sections should be submitted as part of Volume III, Section 1.2?

Include the SDP Rationale in Volume 3 Section 1.2 with the SDP. Please limit the Rationale to 5 pages as stated in the provision, HQ L-2-0016. HQ L-2-0017

SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND CMMI OR

EQUIVALENT EXPERIENCE should also be submitted Volume 3 Section 1.2 with the SDP. Please limit the Experience to 10 pages as stated in the provision. As not all offerors will submit a SDP (dependent on Functional Area), it is included with the "No Limit" page count of the SDP.

Comment Resolution Matrix

Hypothetical Task clarification;

SoW vs Section L

Does the first statement in each of the functions in Section L (pg. 8-10) constitute the “hypothetical task” that offerors should respond to?

Yes. First sentence is the tasking, followed by requirements and then correlation to the SOW.

Intended structure of Future RFPs to be issued under NUWC’s IDIQ

MAC

The RFP indicates that Companies can respond to just individual functions/tasks without needing to respond to all 12 functions/tasks. However the above Section 2.1 of the SOW implies that NUWC might solicit multiple functional areas (tasks) in a single TO/DO, and if you have not proposed for all tasks/functional areas included in the DO/TO you will not be able to respond/bid/compete at all. Does NUWC mean to drive companies to respond to all 12 tasks in order to be able to receive an award in a smaller subset of functions/tasks that they may have expertise in?

The Government's structure was to maximize competition within each functional area.

Would the Government consider expanding their definition of recent relevant experience to contracts having been performed within the last five (5) years?

Recency is limited to 3 years.

1.

Electro nic Proposa l Format - Section L34X,

1.3 (b), 3.1.1:

Section L34X states: “All view graphs shall be compatible with Microsoft PowerPoint 2010. All spreadsheets or mathematical computations shall be compatible with Microsoft Excel 2010 format and shall be working versions, including formulas and computations.”

a. Will the Government accept labor matrices with any necessary simple addition/subtraction in a table format within the proposal submission instead of a separate Excel worksheet?

No.

Comment Resolution Matrix

a. Will the Government please clarify where the use of view graphs is required?

View Graphs are not required. If used they shall be in the format specified.

1. Past Performance Page Limitations - Section L34X,

1.3 (d), 3.1.4

(1) a & b:

Section L34X states in the proposal organizational table that past performance references for each functional area is limited to only 3 pages. On page 12 in 3.1.4 (a), it requests a minimum of one (1) with a maximum of three

(3) past performance references per functional area proposed. In 3.1.4 (b), it limits each past performance reference to two (2) pages each. With the current limitations within the organizational table of only 3 pages for this section, this would only allow Offerors to provide one reference using the maximum space provided, not three.

a. Will the Government confirm that the past performance references are allowed up to two (2) pages each, with a maximum of three

(3) references provided per functional area proposed – for a total of 6 pages maximum, and update the proposal organizational table located at

1.3 (d)?

Each Past Performance reference shall not exceed one (1) page.

The threshold and objective values for payload weight and power appear to be the same values as in the original LDUUV solicitation with threshold and objective values reversed. Is that intentional or a mistake?

Any similarity to previous LDUUV requirements is coincidental. The LDUUV had a specific payload planned for it's requirements. This UUV FoS Hypothetical task is open to a wide variety of payloads in order to obtain proposals from a wide diversity of offerors.

1. Post Award Conference

(PAC)

Participation

– Section C-2- 005, C11X

• Discussion: Instructions for the PAC state: “any travel incurred for the PAC is not an authorized cost, and is solely the responsibility of the Contractor and will not be reimbursed of paid by the Government under any circumstances.”

a. Is the intent of this clause to make PAC-related travel costs unallowable as direct charges to this contract or not allowable regardless of how similar charges are handled under a contractor’s approved disclosure statement and accounting practice?

The PAC represents the Minimum Guarantee, and is a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLIN of $2,500.

Comment Resolution Matrix

a. Are there limitations on the number of contractor participants attending in person?

Limits will be determined at time of award.

The amounts in Section L, Pages 81-82 for each CLIN appear to be total amounts including fee. Should the offeror reduce the total amount for each CLIN in Section L by the fee amount proposed therefore Section B will reflect Cost, Fixed Fee and Total Cost + Fee?

No, fill in Section B with the with the total value.

A Subcontracting Plan is required per HQ L-2-0009, Page 86 of the solicitation. Should the offeror use the total amounts in Section L to develop the subcontracting plan?

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall meet the requirements of HQ L-2- 0009.

Are US University-based laboratories with facility clearances, which are not companies, eligible for award under this Solicitation?

Yes. Not prohibited by law but may be restricted through prior agreements.

Comment Resolution Matrix

Does the vehicle described in attachment “L34X” fall under the LDUUV or XLUUV size designation?

The vehicle described is a large displacement unmanned undersea vehicle.

However this contract is intended to support all classes of UUVs.

Is it allowable to submit past performance from a subcontractor as a part of Volume IV?

No.

RFP Reference Section K and L34X: There are several Representations and Certifications that require completion in additional to the SAM representations and certifications. Instructions in L34X s only require completion of Clause H.2. Is an Offeror not required to provide the applicable representations and certifications?

The Offeror must submit all required forms.

RFP Reference: Page 86: This page calls for a small business subcontracting plan, a Software Development Plan Rationale, and Software Development and CMMI or Equivalent experience. However, Section L doesn’t tell us where in what volume to add these sections. Can you please clarify these requirements?

See Section L table in 1.3 (d), as well as M

3.3. These should all be located in Volume

3.

38 1(c ) of L34X

Section 1(c) of the L34X Technical Proposal instructs Offeror to provide a Cost/Price proposal.

Conversely, Section 4 instructs Offeror not to provide a Cost/Price volume, rather request Offeror to fill in information of Clause H.2 regarding pass-through costs, escalation, and fixed fee limits.

Is it acceptable to include the fill in information of Clause H.2 in the cover letter?

The Offeror shall submit the fill-in information of Clause H.2 as an enclosure to the cover letter.

Comment Resolution Matrix

Notes to Offerors: 10. Only one contract will be awarded per successful Offeror inclusive of all divisions, subsidiaries, and affiliates under common control.

If a Prime Offeror Corporation receives an award in one or more of the functional areas, does that mean that the Prime Offeror Corporation can propose in a subsequent Task Order utilizing any organization within that Corporation to provide the most efficient solution to the Government?

No, the CAGE of the prime at the MAC level must match the CAGE of the prime at the task/delivery order level.

Clause HQ L-2- 0009 Small Business Subcontractin g Plan

(NAVSEA)

(JUN 1999)

As prescribed in FAR Subpart 219.708, paragraph (b)(1)(B)(1), this contractor respectfully requests inclusion of DFARS Clause 252.219-7004, Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Test Program) to allow contractors who have a DoD Comprehensive Small Business Subcontracting Plan to utilize their comprehensive plan in lieu of a new Small Business Subcontracting Plan (as described in FAR 52.219-9).

DFARS 252.219-7004 is added.

L34XTECHNICAL_PROPOSAL_M32X_EVALUATION_FOR_A

WARD directs that the only submission requirement for Factor 5 – COST/PRICE are the fill-ins for Clause H.2.

Document N6660417R0350, section L states under the government estimate of cost that “**IN SECTION B, OFFERORS ARE TO FILL IN THESE AMOUNTS IN THE

RESPECTIVE CLINs”. Would the government please clarify if a completed section B is a submission requirement?

The Offeror shall submit the fill-in information of Clause H.2 as an enclosure to the cover letter. Yes; Section B is a required fill-in.

Comment Resolution Matrix

Request the Government confirm that the labor matrix will identify the labor hours required by labor category at the Hypothetical Task summmary level.

Yes

For Hypothetical Task Functional Area 6, Vehicle Controller, the Government has requested that the Offeror describe a concept for a vehicle controller for a 54” diameter UUV. The parameters provided in L34X were unclear. Is the intent for this task to apply to only the vehicle controller or the entire vehicle control system? May we assume the vehicle controller itself is intended to support all drivers and handlers for all the boat systems?

The SOW defines the vehicle controller as "The vehicle controller manages the hardware to enable the basic operation on the vehicle. The vehicle controller includes the computers, sensors and logic software/hardware required to manage basic vehicle functions and respond to autonomous control requests."

Comment Resolution Matrix

For this solicitation response, Teams have been formed with carefully selected major subcontractors in order to provide the Navy with a full breadth of end-to-end capabilities. This enhances the Navy’s ability to source large, complex delivery orders to teams possessing comprehensive capabilities. Answer #36 was “No” in response to the bidder question addressing inclusion of subcontractor past performance citations. This adversely impacts the ability of the Government to identify and select offers with full capabilities. Will the Government please reconsider allowing the use of a subcontractor’s past performance as part of the UUV FoS Volume IV proposal response, as they could be performing critical aspects of taskings within that given functional area.

Yes; the Government has reconsidered and will allow the submission as part of Volume

IV.