20220627_JLTV-FoV_RFP_QAs.pdf

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A: Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

Solicitation W56HZV-20-R-0072, Questions & Answers

ID Subject/RFP Reference

Question Government Response

125 DFARS 252.209-7008

and DFARS 252.209-

Offeror understands that the scope of this contract would encompass some systems engineering effort, and that it will also involve some technical assistance effort.

However, there does not appear to be any scope of work for formal Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (“SETA”) scope as it is defined by DFARS 209.571-7 “Systems engineering and technical assistance contracts” (a.k.a., “SETA”). For example, the scope does not engage the contractor in efforts to support agency acquisition planning and execution such as framing system requirements for subsequent procurements.

Does the Government consider any of the scope under this contract as formal “SETA” work? If not, will the Government remove the subject DFARS clauses?

DFARS 209.571-8 “Solicitation provision and contract clause” indicates to use the subject clauses *IF* this contract will be a SETA contract (as SETA is defined in

DFARS 209.571-7).

Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) as defined in DFARS and the associated DFARS clause is not required in the contract. Therefore, the contractor is not expected to bid SETA. With respect to the systems engineering effort, the contract does outline the required systems engineering processes and systems engineering reviews required in support of contract execution.

145 Section L 4.3.2 (c Attachment 0177

An inconsistency exists within W56HZV20R0072, Volumes III and IV, that pertains to the calculation of Small Business goals, and seeks clarification and confirmation of the instructions set forth within Section L.

Section L 4.3.2 (c) (as amended) requires the offeror to complete the Small Business Participation Factor Workbook (Attachment 0177) to include the dollars for prime contractor participation and subcontractor participation that are part of a Total Contract Amount.

The Total Contract Amount is defined as “[T]he proposed amounts for all of the Basic CLINs and all of the Option CLINs. (See Cross Reference in Attachment 0170 Pricing Matrix, Tab “Contract Cost Price Summary”, Cell N56”.)”

IAW L.4.3.2(c), " When filling in the Workbook, the offeror shall include the dollars for prime contractor participation and subcontractor participation that are a part of the “Total Contract Amount”. The “Total Contract Amount” for the purposes of this Factor is defined as: The proposed amounts for all of the Basic CLINs and all of the Option CLINs. (See Cross Reference in Attachment 0170

– Pricing Matrix, Tab “Contract Cost Price Summary”, Cell “N56”.)" Attachment 0175 - VATEP Adjustment Calculator shall not be utilized to complete Attachment 0177 - SB Participation Factor WB.

L.4.5.4 provides examples of the "dollars for the Factor Submittal."

L.4.5.4 requires offerors to follow those same instructions in developing the Small Business Subcontracting Plan dollars (L.4.3.2), to ensure consistency with the Small Business Participation Factor.

This Cell N56 value is reflective of the total contract value based upon VATEP calculations. To be compliant with Section L 4.3.2(c), as it is currently written, an offeror must complete Attachment 0177 using VATEP pricing for subcontract values.

Section L 4.5 sets forth the requirements for completion of a Small Business Subcontracting Plan (SBP) for offerors who are “Other than Small Businesses”. Section 4.5.1 requires completion of the SBP in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 and its ALT II and DFARS 252.219-7003. FAR 52.219-9(b) defines total contract dollars as “the final anticipated dollar value, including the dollar value of all options”. FAR 52.219-9(d)(1) requires the establishment of separate goals expressed in terms of total dollars subcontracted, and must include all subcontracts that contribute to contract performance. Accordingly, to be compliant with FAR 52.219-9, an offeror must consider actual subcontract values that reflect anticipated performance; not VATEP pricing.

Would the Government please confirm their intent for Attachment 177 to be based upon VATEP subcontract values using weighted averages as opposed to the actual, anticipated subcontract values that form the basis of a FAR 52.219-9 compliant SBP?

Absent such confirmation, would the Government please amend paragraph L.4.3.2(c) so it requires offerors to complete Attachment 0177 using actual subcontract values and a total contract price (Attachment 0170 tab and cell to be identified by the Government) that is consistent with FAR 52.219-9 requirements?

Would the Government please confirm their intent for Attachment 177 to be based upon VATEP subcontract values using weighted averages as opposed to the actual, anticipated subcontract values that form the basis of a FAR 52.219-9 compliant SBP?

Absent such confirmation, would the Government please amend paragraph L.4.3.2(c) so it requires offerors to complete Attachment 0177 using actual subcontract values and a total contract price (Attachment 0170 tab and cell to be identified by the Government) that is consistent with FAR 52.219-9 requirements?

150 Attachment 0112 After review of the TDP callouts for required software it appears there is still missing software in the CSP.

1. Is there missing content in the TDP and CSP that is not reflected to be able to reproduce all the software for the

JLTV?

2. Additionally, are there any other software build scripts not in the TDP/CSP that are used in build of the JLTV FoV?

3. Finally, is there any other software build documentation not in the TDP that is used in the JLTV FoV?

1. The JPO JLTV is not aware of any missing content not addressed in prior responses.

2. The JPO JLTV is not aware of any other software build scripts not addressed in prior responses.

3. The JPO JLTV is not aware of any other software build documentation not addressed in prior responses.

151 Attachment 0112 Q/A Government Response #93 states the Government's ability to reproduce the FoV software is limited. Is it the Government's contention that the TDP contains everything required aside from commercial or open source software to make changes to the source code and update the A2 FoV software or is there something else missing in the TDP/CSP for the USG to be able to reproduce/modify the software?

To clarify the response to #93 - the JLTV TDP and CSP includes everything required to reproduce all of the Non-Commercial executables from the Non-Commercial Source Code. As noted in response to Q#270, the TDP does not include Model Files. The current RFP requires the delivery of Model files.