3GEN FLIR DCB LRIP - Government Responses to Sections L_M.pdf

Page Section Reference Comment Response

4 L-2.b Proposal Submission Instructions

Is it correct to assume we can use 11x17 for some graphics including complex schedule graphics and that it will count as 1 page?

Comment accepted. Section L has been updated to reflect certain exemptions to the volume page limitations.

4 L-2.c Tech Vol Page Limits

Can the Government confirm that it is acceptable to provide normalized data in the unclassified volume and only provide conversion factors and test conditions as needed in the Classified Annex?

Comment accepted. Section L has been updated to reflect certain exemptions to the volume page limitations.

4 L-2.c Tech Vol Page Limits

Is it correct to assume that all Test Data or supporting data being provided should be put in an Appendix of the Tech Volume and it is not page limited? And if there is classified supporting data, can this also go into an Appendix that is not page limited.

Comment accepted. Section L has been updated to reflect certain exemptions to the volume page limitations.

4 L-2.d Tech Vol Page Limits

Could the USG provide additional clarification of the type(s) of supporting documents/data appendices that are desired? Are vendor Qualification Test Reports and/or USG approval of these Test Reports considered acceptable and desired? Vendor wants to provide appropriate verification documentation that serves the intended purpose without adding excessive material for review.

Comment accepted. Section L has been updated to reflect certain exemptions to the volume page limitations.

5 L-2.d Volume I Please clarify: The PWS 3.1.6.1 references the full AI&T whereas the pricing table only appears to request LLM for that PWS.

PWS Section 3.1.6.1 addresses requirements for Base Procurement of Long Lead Materials (LLM) in support of a subsequent option exercise for either Lot 1 or Lot 2 Abrams Procurement of remaining hardware (as well as production and delivery of those DCB's), which is consistent with the "Base Procurement/Award" entries shown in the Price Model, Hardware tab, rows 5 and 6. No change required to Section L.

6 L-Vol I, SF2-a Volume I

Is it correct to assume that the Technical Volume should include a Requirements Compliance Matrix as an Appendix that is not counted against the pages?

Comment accepted. Section L has been updated to reflect certain exemptions to the volume page limitations.

6 L-Vol I, SF2-a Volume I Are brief claims about compliance that point to supporting appendices or reference CDRLs submitted in EMD sufficient for the RCM comments?

References in one part of the proposal to information located in another part of the proposal are acceptable. No change required to Section L.

Industry Comments to DCB LRIP Sections L&M Government Response

6 L-Vol I, SF2-a Volume I

Please confirm the required Requirements Compliance Matrix (RCM) may be provided as appendix which would not count against the 50 page limit, rather than it being required in the main body of the Technical Volume. If the RCM is to be included in the Technical Volume, will it count against the 50 page limit?

Comment accepted. Section L has been updated to reflect certain exemptions to the volume page limitations.

6 L-Vol I, SF2-b Volume I

Please confirm the required supporting evidence (test data) for the requested criteria may be provided as an appendix which would not count against the 50 page limit, rather than it being required in the main body of the Technical Volume. If the supporting evidence (test data) is to be included in the Technical Volume, will it count against the 50 page limit?

Comment accepted. Section L has been updated to reflect certain exemptions to the volume page limitations.

6 L-Vol I, SF2-c Volume I

This requirement appears to have significant overlap with Subfactor 1, paragraph D and even Subfactor 3. Is it acceptable for the vendor to respond to all requirements in the same portion of the proposal document as long as both risk activities and how they are being implemented in the delivery plan are included? No Government response.

6 L-Vol I, SF3-a Volume I Compared to the EMD design?

The Section L, Sub-Factor 3 wording is correct: "a. The Offeror shall provide a technical narrative that describes the proposed DCB design enhancement change(s) identifying the specific DCB performance improvements and/or manufacturing yield compared to the baseline LRIP DCB design." The Offeror shall describe the potential enhancement(s) relative to the DCB design proposed in response to the Government's LRIP solicitation. No change required to Section L.

6 L-Vol I, SF3-a Volume I

If a vendor wants to propose an upgrade to a DROIC during LRIP, there isn’t an ICD for the B-Kit that will allow it to be utilized unless it complies to the current interface/modes. Are there any USG plans to implement an upgrade of the B-Kit/DCB ICDs during LRIP?

The Government has completed all Configuration Control Board (CCB) activities necessary for the DCB LRIP solicitation, and the correct drawing and specification nomenclature will be provided in the final RFP. The Government has no plans at this time to change the B-Kit ICD during the course of the LRIP contract. However, if the Offeror proposes a Design Enhancement under Sub-Factor 3, the Offeror should also address in their discussion all the associated impacts of such a design change, including those necessary to DCB reference documents through the standard Configuration Management processes, including Engineering Change Proposals (ECP) and CCB actions. No change required to Section L.

6 L-Vol I, SF3-a Volume I

Is it correct to assume that these design enhancements are things that will be implemented either during LRIP or after LRIP (i.e., these are not confined to only items that will be accomplished during LRIP)?

As stated in Section L, Sub-Factor 3: "This subfactor evaluates the Offeror's enhancement potential for their DCB LRIP design to accommodate new capabilities … in relation to the LRIP Period of Performance (PoP)." There will be no consideration of potential future changes beyond the LRIP time frame. No change required to Section L.

7 L-Vol II, c Volume II

PARAPHRASED BY THE GOVERNMENT: Are all NRE and design changes identified in Subfactor 1 covered under the CPFF CLINS, including those associated with achieving first article test, delivery, and success?

Any NRE associated with a DCB design change or manufacturing improvement to the EMD baseline described under Sub-Factor 1, implemented to increase Focal Plane Array (FPA) yields, should be incorporated into the Offeror's proposed unit cost. CLIN 0004 will only be used after contract award to fund any CPFF activities described under the Services section of the DCB PWS (e.g., studies, redesigns, and upgrades to improve DCB performance or reduce costs; execution of First Article Test (FAT)). If a Design Enhancement proposed under Sub-Factor 3 were to be agreed to by the Government and incorporated into the DCB baseline following contract award, then costs associated with studying and implementing the upgraded design may be paid under CLIN 0004, as would the subsequent FAT execution (as a separate Services task). Design changes implemented prior to the DCB LRIP contract award are not eligible for retroactive funding from CLIN 0004. No change required to Section L.

7 L-Vol II, c Volume II

IS it correct to assume that a contractor formatted WBS can be used for all CPFF CLINS? If not, can the Government provide the WBS for the CPFF CLINS as soon as possible?

The Government will not provide a Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) for the Services (CPFF) portion of the contract. The Offeror may or may not provide a contractor-formatted WBS as part of their proposal; if included it will be evaluated along with any other supporting material provided, and if not included will not be held against the Offeror's proposal. No change required to Section L.

7 L-Vol II, c Volume II In the event the vendor is providing its own substrates and FPA materials, can these be added to the LLM list (make items versus buy items)?

If the vendor's delivery schedule for an item (e.g., " its own substrates and FPA materials") meets the definition of Long Lead Materials (LLM) as "… those subassemblies and/or components that will require significant lead time from order date to delivery date without which initial DCB deliveries will be at risk of not meeting contract schedule requirements," then that vendor's item(s) may be procured as LLM, regardless of make versus buy considerations. No change required to Section L.

9 L-Vol IV Volume IV

Is the Government asking for a Small Business Subcontracting Plan in accordance with FAR 52.219.9 as stated in Section M? If so, we assume it is excluded from the 15 page limit.

If the Offeror is a "large business" then a Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall be provided in Volume IV of the Offeror's proposal in accordance with FAR 52.219-9. However, as indicated in Section L, paragraph 2.d, there is no page limitation for either the Small Business Participation Plan or the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. No changes required to Section L or M.

9 L-Vol IV Volume IV

Is it correct to assume these ISRs should be for programs that are provided in the Past Performance Volume and since each ISR is 2-3 pages, are excluded from the 15 page limit?

There is no relationship between programs identified in Volume III (Past Performance) and the recent contracts for which Individual Subcontracting Reports (ISR) might be provided in the Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

However, as indicated in Section L, paragraph 2.d, there is no page limitation for either the Small Business Subcontracting Plan or the Small Business Participation Plan. No changes required to Section L or M.

14 M-C.3.b Volume III Is it correct to assume that Magnitude will only apply to production program citations and not to development program citations?

As indicated in Section M, paragraph C.3.b: "Magnitude is defined as any production contract valued at least $20 million dollars", and will not be applied to development programs referenced in the Offeror's Past Performance volume. No change required to Section M.

15 M-C.4 Volume IV

PARAPHRASED BY THE GOVERNMENT: The Minimum Quantitative Requirement(s) (MQRs) relative to the total contract value are a concern.

Also as a result of the current industry climate, many traditional small businesses have recently been purchased by Large Businesses and no longer qualify to satisfy the MQR's, making these targets difficult to achieve with current vendors. Will the Government reduce the small business goals, or change the specific small business participation goals to a percentage of subcontracted dollars versus total dollars?

The Small Business (SB) Minimum Quantitative Requirements (MQR) are established by the Small Business Office in each locality, and are not subject to change for this solicitation. However, as indicated in Section M, paragraph 4, "As part of the source selection evaluation, and in order to receive a rating of Acceptable (see table below), an Offeror’s Small Business Participation Plan (SBPP) must demonstrate a feasible approach in meeting the aforementioned small business goals or provide an explanation as to why any of the specific goals cannot be achieved." Such explanations, if presented by an Offeror, will be evaluated by the Government in the context of both the SB MQR as well as any unique circumstances posed by the DCB solicitation. No change required to Section M.

"Summary" Tab Price Model

There appear to be two total price calculations, one for a single award scenario and one for a multiple award scenario, however, Section M indicates that a single evaluated price will be calculated by the summing all the hardware CLINs and the Services CLIN. Please clarify.

Comment accepted. Price Model has been updated to change tab 1 to show a roll-up, single Total Evaluated Price (TEP) value to be consistent with Section M.

"Hardware" Tab Price Model

Is it correct to assume that all Program implementation costs (Program Management, Engineering support, Quality support, etc.) need to be amortized across the Unit Production Costs?

Correct, all costs associated with producing the required number of DCB's for each lot need to be factored into the proposed Unit Production Cost.

No change required to Price Model.

"Hardware" Tab Price Model Should [cell e10 (Abrams Prod, Lot 2 Qty, 212)] be 106 to match the SOW or should it stay to match Sect L&M and the SOW should be modified?

All required quantities are now reflected only in the LRIP PWS and Section L of the RFP. No further changes required to Price Model.

"Hardware" Tab Price Model Should [cell e13 (Abrams Prod, Lot 3 Qty, 124)] be 123 to match the SOW?

All required quantities are now reflected only in the LRIP PWS and Section L of the RFP. No further changes required to Price Model.

"Services Labor" Tab Price Model

PARAPHRASED BY THE GOVERNMENT: Will the Government specify a minimum number of Services Labor hours that must be reflected in the proposal that can applied against the various labor categories and tasks? No Government response.

"Services Labor" Tab Price Model

Assumption (3): The Engineering effort assumptions indicate that hardware fabrication may be included. Is there an assumption on what part of the system would be fabricated or would it be an entire DCB?

Further, where would the costs for the hardware be proposed?

Comment accepted. Price Model has been updated to change tab 5 to read "Repair-Fabrication Material".

"Services Labor" Tab Price Model

Assumption (9): Please confirm the number of field services reps required per event.

Comment accepted. The Government assumes one (1) event over the course of the LRIP PoP, requiring the use of two (2) FSR's (one (1) month duration, each). Price Model, Services Labor tab, Assumption 9 has been updated to clarify.

"Services Labor" Tab Price Model

Can the Government clarify if design enhancements in the future will use the Labor Rates provided under the Services tab?

The labor rates supplied by the Offeror in Volume II and the Price Model, following Government agreement and contract award, are intended to be used for all Services tasks to be performed under CLIN 0004 over the contract's PoP. No changes required to Section L or the Price Model.