Air-4-11 ATC jpals shipboard integration MAC

**SEE AMENDMENT 1 TO THE SOLICITATION AND RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS **
1. Section I Pages 69 and 71 reference clauses 52.219-9, and 252.219-7003, respectively. Section l page 100 references 5252.219-9501. There are no instructions in Section L for including a SBSP submittal with the proposal, nor any associated evaluation criteria in Section M. Would the Government please confirm that a SBSP is not required at time of proposal submission, and that small business subcontracting requirements will be addressed after contract award?
Answer: Small Business Plan will be addressed at the Task order level

2. Section L, PART A, 3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES, Page 92, states that there is no page limit for Past Performance. Section L Pages 96 and 97 states "The Offeror(s) shall complete the Past Performance Information Form, Attachment P3, for each past performance reference performed within five years of the solicitation release date." The current form is 2 pages and provides a fixed text box (approximately 2/3 page) in which to enter Demonstrated Systemic improvement Information. Would the Government modify the format for Attachment P3 to allow the Demonstrated Systemic improvement Information to be entered without page limit.

Answer: Form will not be modified. See the RFP amendment changing the language and setting a page limit
3. Section L, PART A, 3.0 PROPOSAL CONTENT AND VOLUMES, Page 92, states that there is no page limit for Past Performance. Section L Pages 96 and 97 states "The Offeror(s) shall complete the Past Performance Information Form, Attachment P3, for each past performance reference performed within five years of the solicitation release date." Additionally, the section states "The Offeror(s) shall provide a narrative on each Past Performance Information form in the "Contract Effort Description" area that clearly describes how each contract reference has relevant work effort that matches the relevancy definitions specified in Section M of the solicitation." The current form is 2 pages and is limited to displaying or printing eight (8) lines of text of the Contract Effort Description. Would the Government modify the format for Attachment P3 to allow the Contract Effort Description to be entered without page limit.

Answer: Section L Part B: page 97 revised language from "The Offeror(s) shall provide a narrative in addition to each Past Performance Information Form in the "Contract Effort Description" area that clearly describes how each contract reference has relevant work effort that matches the relevancy definitions specified in Section M of the solicitation" to "The Offeror(s) shall provide a Volume 2 Past Performance narrative in addition to the Past Performance Information Form (Attachment P3) that clearly describes how each contract reference has relevant work effort that matches the relevancy definitions specified in Section M of the solicitation.

Page limit for Volume 2 is 3 pages per summary plus Attachment P3

4.Section H - Special Contract Requirements, H-1 5252.242-9515 RESTRICTION ON THE DIRECT CHARGING OF MATERIAL, NAVAIR (VARIATION)(JUL 2018), Page 50 states "The costs of general-purpose business expenses required for the conduct of the contractor's normal business operations will not be considered an allowable direct cost in the performance of the contract. General-purpose business expenses include, but are not limited to, the cost for items such as telephones and telephone charges, reproduction machines, word processing equipment, personal computers and other office equipment and office supplies." Would the Government confirm that if a contractor's documented accounting practice, accepted by DCAA, allows the contractor to direct charge any or all of these expenses, that they will be allowable direct charges on the contract?

Answer: Refer to Section C paragraph 8.2. These costs could be indirect cost but not allowed as a direct cost.

5. On page 94, #9 under Technical Sample Task request a breakdown of hours tied to the SOW. No SOW paragraph is provided for the sample task. Will the Government consider using the Sample Task WBS (#5) instead of the SOW?
Answer: Yes See amended RFP

6. On page 103, the dollar value for past performance is stated. For subcontractor past performance relevancy will the Government consider a lesser magnitude for a relevant contract?

Answer: for Subcontractors past performance a lesser magnitude may be considered
7. For PBSOW paragraphs 3.3. and 3.10 each of the sub paragraphs appear to be the same. Please advise.

Answer: Minor differences are contained within the SOW paragraphs to facilitate fiscal issues at the ordering level

8. On page 25, for the Program Manager Labor Category the educational requirement is an MA degree. Will the Government consider an MS degree in addition to the MA degree?

Answer: Yes. See amended RFP

9. On page 23, the standard education/experience is listed. Will the Government consider 4 years of experience as a substitution for AA/AS degree.

Answer: No

10. Can you please confirm that the Statement of Work (SOW) incorporated into N00421-18-R-0022 is correct, as it appears that the SOW paragraphs starting at 3.1 through 3.10.4.1 have the same exact wording as those contained in the recent Air Battle Management MAC solicitation, solicitation N00421-18-R-0032. Additionally, the current solicitation SOW differs significantly from the one that was included as a draft SOW in the Sources Sought released in January 2017.
Answer: SOW is correct

11. Section B of the solicitation contains CLIN 0002 ATC Shipboard FFP Labor, however, the Statement of Work in Section C does not list any SOW statements associated with this CLIN. Does this mean that the government does not intend to issue any FFP, CLIN 0002, task orders?

Answer: CLIN 0002 is included within the sub-paragraphs of SOW paragraphs 3.7-3.9. The Government's intent is to be able to issue a FFP order for these tasks, when appropriate, based on the requirement of the TO.

12. Section L, Part B Specific Instructions for Volume 2, Past Performance states that Attachment 3, Past Performance Information Form (PPIF) should be completed for each past performance reference. Section L, 3.0 Proposal Content and Volumes states that there is no page limit for Volume 2 Past Performance. Attachment 3, PPIF, provides limited space when printed for summary information to address Section M criteria. Should the narrative response in the PPIF for the Contract Effort Description and Demonstrated Systematic Improvement be the same as what is included in the Past Performance, Volume 2 regardless of length?

Answer: Section L Part B: page 97 revised language from "The Offeror(s) shall provide a narrative in addition to each Past Performance Information Form in the "Contract Effort Description" area that clearly describes how each contract reference has relevant work effort that matches the relevancy definitions specified in Section M of the solicitation" to "The Offeror(s) shall provide a Volume 2 Past Performance narrative in addition to the Past Performance Information Form(Attachment P3) that clearly describes how each contract reference has relevant work effort that matches the relevancy definitions specified in Section M of the solicitation. See Amended RFP with page limits for Volume 2

13. The solicitation includes FAR Clause 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontract Plan (Section I, Page 69) and FAR Clause 5252.215-9501, Less Than Five Percent Small Business Disadvantage Business Subcontracting Goal (Section L, Page 100). However, the solicitation's Proposal instructions do not include a Small Business Subcontract Plan within the Volumes. Is a Small Business Plan required with the IDIQ proposal? If so, should the SBP total contract value be based on the value of listed on page 2, $98,625,565?

Answer: Small Business Plan will be addressed at the Task order level

14. Section L, Volume 2, Past Performance on page 96 states, "The Offeror shall submit no more than five Past Performance Information Forms as the Prime Contractor, no more than two forms for each principal subcontractor, and no more than two forms for each JV team member." Section L, 1.0 General, on Page 91 states, "Throughout these instructions, a "principal subcontractor" is defined as a subcontractor who provides at least 20% of the proposed LOE, for the contract or provides one or more Key Personnel." Since the solicitation does not require a cost volume nor any key resumes, are we able to submit past performance forms from our teammates?

Answer: Yes. Teammates or Principal subcontractors can submit past performance.

15. Section M, Part A. General Information. Should the paragraph GENERAL have a 1.0 in front of it for numbering to be consistent with the remainder of the Section M numbering.

Answer: Numbering changed in RFP. See amended RFP

16. 5252.228-9501 Aircraft Public and Passenger Liability Insurance: Will this clause be applied at the Task Order level, on an as needed basis, depending on tasking?
Answer: At this time, the Government intends to include this clause in all TOs issued under this MAC.
17. On page 86, the FAR clause 252.204-7007 does not specify a NAICS code. Given the tasking described in 1.0 Introduction of Section C--"AD-4.11.7 is tasked to fabricate, test, integrate and evaluate ATC & LS equipment into aircraft and ship platforms," is 334511 the NAICS for this RFP?

Answer: The NAICS for this RFP is 334511-See amended RFP

18. Several labor categories within paragraph 10.0 of the SOW require an Associate's Degree and there does not appear to be any substitution allowance for this type of degree. Would the Government consider adding a substitution for an AA degree?
Answer: NO

19. Section L.2.0 Proposal Format on page 91 does not provide a specific font size limit for graphics or tables (only for graphs). Will the Government please confirm that 10-point font is acceptable for graphics and tables?

Answer: Graphic resolution, including such data as tables or charts, should be consistent with the purpose of the data presented and shall be no smaller than 10 pt. font. See amended RFP

20. Section L.3.0 Proposal Content and Volumes beginning on page 92 does not mention glossaries. Will the Government allow offerors to provide a glossary with the technical volume and exclude it from the page limits of the volume?

Answer: Pages contained within a glossary submitted with the technical volume will be included in any applicable page limitations

.

*** This is a Request for Proposal***

The sources sought for this effort was posted on January 20, 2017 as JPALS SHIPBOARD INTEGRATION - N00421-17-R-0023. This announcement is a modification of that earlier FBO posting.
The Air Traffic Control (ATC) Systems Division, Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division (NAWCAD) Patuxent River Code 4.11.7, located at St. Inigoes, MD is the In-Service Engineering Agent (ISEA) and Software Support Activity (SSA) for Air Traffic Control and Landing Systems (ATC & LS). The ATC Division provides systems engineering support to developmental programs such as the Joint Precision Approach and Landing System (JPALS), Navy Unmanned Combat Air System (N-UCAS) and various unmanned programs. The JPALS program is developing the next generation air traffic control and landing system. Satisfactory performance of the system will depend on both aircraft and shipboard algorithms that can adequately integrate Global Positioning System (GPS) and inertial sensor outputs through a robust data link.

This is a re-compete of a Multiple Award Contract (MAC) issued under solicitation N00421-10-R-1063. The follow-on contract is anticipated to be a competitively awarded MAC contract with a five year ordering period.
Proposals are due on December 04, 2018 by 2:00PM EST

.