Loren Data's SAM Daily™

fbodaily.com
Home Today's SAM Search Archives Numbered Notes CBD Archives Subscribe
FBO DAILY - FEDBIZOPPS ISSUE OF SEPTEMBER 18, 2014 FBO #4681
MODIFICATION

58 -- Rapid Technology Insertion (RTI)

Notice Date
9/16/2014
 
Notice Type
Modification/Amendment
 
NAICS
334511 — Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System and Instrument Manufacturing
 
Contracting Office
Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command, NUWC Division Newport, Simonpietri Drive, Newport, Rhode Island, 02841-1708
 
ZIP Code
02841-1708
 
Solicitation Number
N66604-14-R-1120rev1
 
Archive Date
10/29/2014
 
Point of Contact
Melissa Ardis, , Andrew Nagelhout,
 
E-Mail Address
melissa.ardis@navy.mil, andrew.c.nagelhout@navy.mil
(melissa.ardis@navy.mil, andrew.c.nagelhout@navy.mil)
 
Small Business Set-Aside
N/A
 
Description
Two additional Questions and Answers are provided as follows: Question 1 Reference Section L 1.1 Question: Section L 1.1 Identifies the cover letter, SF 33, RFP Sections A through J, RFP Section K, All RFP Fill-ins, and Small Business Subcontracting plan separately from Proposal Volumes I, II and III. Section L 3. Identifies RFP Sections A through J, RFP Section K, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Offeror's Statement as part 1.1 through 1.4 of the Cost proposal. Please clarify whether RFP Sections A-J, RFP Section K, and the small business subcontracting plan should be stand-alone from, or part of the Cost volume. Also please clarify if the letter containing the offeror's statement of compliance to the RFP terms is separate from, or the same as the cover letter. ANSWER 1: INCLUDE IN VOLUME III. THE OFFEROR'S STATEMENT SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE COVER LETTER. Question 2 Reference Section L 2.6, L 2.6.1, L 2.6.2 Question: Please confirm the "...previous contract efforts..." described in 2.6.1 and "...self-assessment of performance under each contract identified." described in 2.6.2 refer to the same "past performance references" described in 2.6. Also, please confirm the information in 2.6.1 and 2.6.2 do not count against the 75 page Technical Proposal limit. ANSWER 2: 2.6.1 AND 2.6.2 REFER TO THE SAME PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCES IN 2.6. RESPONSES TO 2.6.1 AND 2.6.2 DO COUNT TOWARDS THE 75 PAGE LIMIT.
 
Web Link
FBO.gov Permalink
(https://www.fbo.gov/spg/DON/NAVSEA/N66604/N66604-14-R-1120rev1/listing.html)
 
Record
SN03513958-W 20140918/140917000243-14fa7ce65f3e1998a28f0a3a8b3dea73 (fbodaily.com)
 
Source
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)

FSG Index  |  This Issue's Index  |  Today's FBO Daily Index Page |
ECGrid: EDI VAN Interconnect ECGridOS: EDI Web Services Interconnect API Government Data Publications CBDDisk Subscribers
 Privacy Policy  Jenny in Wanderland!  © 1994-2024, Loren Data Corp.