B08_Consolidated NGLD-M DRFP2 comment matrix.pdf

SNC Internal Information

Item Document Section RFP Change Customer Question/Concern Response

A02_NGLD-

M_Program +Manageme nt+SOW_DR AFT_29+Sep t+2020.doc

6.1.9.1 IDIQ PWS Section 6.1.16 PPIP states that a contractor has 30 days for countermeasures Implementation Plan submittal upon identification of any countermeasures. PM SOW Section 6.1.9.1 PPIP states that contractor has 60 days for PPIP submittal upon receipt of countermeasures.

Please provide clarification on CDRL submittal due date requirements for

PPIP.

The PM SOW was changed to 30 days.

A02+NGLD-

M+IDIQ+PW

S_DRAFT_29

+Sept+2020.

doc

10.1.3

Fixed Price Incentive (FPI) Successive Target:

The Government will institute a FPI Successive Target contract for the Production Phase which shall provide a 60/40 incentive share line in the contract. This means the Govern-meant pays 60 cents and contractor pays 40 cents of every dollar of cost above the established target cost of the production portion of the contract. For every dollar of cost under target cost, the Government saves 60 cents and the contractor earns an additional 40 cents over and above the target profit or fee. The precise dollar amounts of compensation adjustment are determined by this formula after each option period is completed as interim incentive payments.

An initial target cost and initial target profit will be established at contract award as there is not enough reliable in-formation to establish a firm fixed price or firm targets.

FPI(S) CLINs will have a maximum Ceiling Price = 20% of the Initial Target Cost. .Thirty (30) days after the receipt of NSA certification for the NGLD-M, the Government may transition to a Fixed-Price Incentive (Firm Target) contract for production if the production costs are deter-mined with high level of confidence.

Please confirm the intent to establish the initial target cost at contract award, although there will likely be insufficient information on the design at that time. What will this target be based on? Will all Suppliers have the same target?

The Government has clarified that the FPI ST only applies to single bid production delivery orders.

B08_Draft+R

FP_NGLD+M

_+Pricing+Te mplate+Spre adsheet_Rev ised+v5_29+ Sep+2020.xl sx

CLIN

Summar y

Base period is one year, year 2 is option 2, and year 3 is option 2. Base, option 1 and option 2 are on separate CLINs

Can the Offeror propose their own period of performance for the base and two option periods?

No, the period of performance has been set by the Government

B08_Draft+R

FP_NGLD+M

_+Pricing+Te mplate+Spre adsheet_Rev ised+v5_29+ Sep+2020.xl sx

CLIN

Summar y

CLIN Structure does not following PWS, all engineering development under one CLIN

Please confirm that all subcontract costs fall under engineering development (CPFF).

The Government confirms the CLIN structure for the engineering development is

CPFF

B08_W15P7 T-20-R- 0011_v5_29 +Sept+2020.

pdf

Summar y of Post Award Procedu res

The developmental task order will consist of a base contract for the system development and engineering through Preliminary Design Review including up to 30 days for the Government PDR evaluation; followed by development option 1 for system development and engineering through the Critical Design Review including up to 30 days for the Government CDR evaluation; followed by development option 2 to complete the development to achieve NSA certification for the NGLD-M. The Government decision to award the development option 1 will be based on the following criteria: 1) All PDR entrance and exit criteria is met as defined in the NGLD- M Engineering and Development PWS paragraph 6.2.2; 2) Government acceptance of the design. The Government decision to award development option 2 will be based on the following criteria: 1) All CDR criteria is met as defined in the NGLD-M Engineering and Development PWS paragraph 6.2.3; 2) Government acceptance of the design. If NSA certification is received, the Government has the option to award the LRIP production.

When exercising an LRIP production option, the Government will order a minimum of 5,000 LRIP units per awardee. However, the

Do tasks that follow NSA certification (such as ATO acceptance, OTTR support, PRR, TDP delivery and LRIP FAT) fall under Option 2?

This is dependent the Offeror's proposal but from the proposed schedule provided in the RFP document then the identified tasks such as ATO acceptance, OTTR support, PRR, TDP delivery and LRIP FAT would fall under option 2.

T-20-R- 0011_v5_29 +Sept+2020.

pdf

Off Rampin g Decision s

The Government reserves the right to conduct an off ramp decision of a single contractor from the NGLD-M MAC during the development phase. The term off ramp is defined in this context to mean discontinuing further development with that contractor and removal from the MAC IDIQ. The Governments intent of the off ramp decision is to review the development status of each MAC participants design and off ramp the contractor in which funding the remaining development would not provide good value to the Government. Unless there is a default by the contractor, the Government would only exercise an off ramp decisions after completion of the major design review for each MAC participant. The off ramp decision evaluation will take place only after all MAC participants finish their current contract phase (i.e., base, development option 1, or development option 2.) The Government may exercise the off ramp decision if the Government encounters a funding shortfall wherein the Government is no longer capable of funding multiple participants on the MAC.

The Governments off ramp decision will be determined by the maturity of the designs and value determination of anticipated

What is the definition of "good value" to the Government? Can the Government provide additional clarification on the criteria?

This language has been clarified in section H.

T-20-R- 0011_v5_29 +Sept+2020.

pdf

Off Ramp Process

If Government announces plan to off-ramp, supplier will have opportunity to self assess TRL levels and provide production pricing. Off ramping decision based on design maturity that provides best value and lowest production cost

TRL is a measure of technology readiness, not a measurement of design implementation. A TRL assessment may not identify that a supplier is further ahead in the NGLD development or has a superior compliant solution. A Supplier that is proposing an older demonstrated technology could be given a higher score, yet may not be further developed from a non-demonstrated solution. Recommend to consider other factors beyond TRL such as development schedule progress, requirement compliance, manufacturing readiness, design approach, etc.

The TRL is being used as a standardized means of assessing the status of the SRD requirements. The Government has clarified that the technology maturity assessment will be based on the TRL self assessment at the time of the decision compared to what was proposed.

T-20-R- 0011_v5_29 +Sept+2020.

pdf

L24.3.2 element 1.1.2

Capability Element changed to API Integration/Description:

The Offeror shall specify whether they will be developing their own UAS or if they plan on using the government developed User Application Software (UAS). If the Offeror chooses to use the government developed UAS, the Offeror shall describe their approach on how to integrate the government defined APIs for the UAS with their proposed solution.

If the Offeror chooses to develop their own UAS, the Offeror shall provide details regarding the SRD requirements such as ease of programming /re-programmability, maintainability, operating system constraints (e.g., licensing costs, patching, upgradability), and expandability. The Offeror shall describe the Application Programming Interface (API) of the proposed implementation for compliance with modularity.

Some of the items referenced under the Offeror proposed UAS look like they would affect both options such as programmability, operating system, and expandability. Does the Government expect the Offeror to address these items if a Government UAS is proposed?

The element 1.1.2 will be evaluated based on evaluation criteria identified in section M

T-20-R- 0011_v5_29 +Sept+2020.

pdf

M2.1 Factor 1 Technic al, element 1.1.2

API

Integrati on/Desc ription

New Section on API Integration/Description

1. Robust device API description describing both the UAS and Hardware (to include, but not limited to OS, port interface, INFOSEC boundary) sides of the data exchange

2. Defined leader/follower model for the UAS and broad Hardware design (to include, but not limited to OS, port interfaces, INFOSEC boundary) emphasizing a value added proposition to API design approach

3. Minimizing the number of processes required to reprogram the device

The SRD and PWS state that the Government will develop the UAS API.

However this section implies the Offeror to be part of the API design approach. Should the offeror assume the UAS API design will be passed down from the Government or be developed jointly with the Government?

The government will design UAS; however, vendor(s) feedback will be required for full integration. This is applicable only if vendor(s) chooses the government developed UAS for the NGLD- M UAS solution.

NGLD-M

SRD

Requiremen ts Traceability Matrix.pdf

NGLD-

M_SRD

_0308

New Requirement: The NGLD-M shall support the distribution of key data and non-key mission data to all equipment specified in Table 8.5. For equipment that are not available for testing in Table 8.5, backward compatibility/interface shall be verified by inspection and/or analysis method.

How will the Supplier prove ECU compatibility by analysis or inspection? Many ECUs do not conform to the EKMS standards.

The inspection for those ECUs will be based on the current SKL ECU IDD and that the profile for that ECU aligns with the IDD.

NGLD-M

SRD

Requiremen ts Traceability Matrix.pdf

NGLD-

M_SRD

_0483

The NGLD-M shall provide an external zeroize interface to include a recoverable zeroization and a destructive zeroization.

This requirement implies that two separate external zeroize interfaces are required, one for recoverable and one for destructive. Can the Government provide clarification.

The government will not provide a feedback on vendor's design. Vendors can design as they deem to meet the requirements.

NGLD-M

SRD

Requiremen ts Traceability Matrix.pdf

NGLD-

M_SRD

_0617

New Requirement: The NGLD-M battery shall be field replaceable.

Do all batteries in the system (beyond m

Please refer to section 3.6 of TSRD. It states that "The use of internal-non-replaceable battery shall be avoided.

Batteries shall be replaceable by end user without tampering the unit….."

NGLD-M

SRD

Requiremen ts Traceability Matrix.pdf

NGLD-

M_SRD

_0618

New Requirement: The NGLD-M battery shall be swapped or replaced without any special tool.

Do all batteries in the system (beyond m

Please refer to section 3.6 of TSRD. It states that "The use of internal-non-replaceable battery shall be avoided.

Batteries shall be replaceable by end user without tampering the unit….."

NGLD-M

SRD

Requiremen ts Traceability Matrix.pdf

NGLD-

M_SRD

_0657

Added clarification: The NGLD-M shall remain functional in austere weather conditions.

Clarification: Austere weather implies harsh conditions, severe, frigid etc. Please refer to MIL-STD-810G Appendix A, Table A-I and MIL-

HDBK-310

How will the Supplier test or demonstrate this requirement?

Recommend that the Government specify test methods from MIL-STD- 810 for verification.

The NGLD-M SRD will be updated with the following:

Rain: 506.5 procedure 1;

freeze/thaw (524) - procedures I & II; icing/freezing rain (521.3);

humidity (507.5) - procedures I and II; Explosive Atmosphere (511.5) - procedure I.

NGLD-M

SRD

Requiremen ts Traceability Matrix.pdf

NGLD-

M_SRD

_0686

The NGLD-M shall have an operating system that is currently approved and maintained by the Department of Defense.

How will the Offeror know which Operating Systems are approved and maintained by the DoD? The NGLD-M will be an embedded system and can only use specific OS types. Can additional guidance be provided on Government approved OS’s?

Primary target operating systems include, but are not limited to, Linux, Embedded Linux, Android, Windows, Green Hills INTEGRITY, macOS, and iOS. The intent of this requirements is to ensure that OS should be able to pass the RMF and IASRD requirements;

be able to apply DoD STIGs, SRGs, be able to patch(as). The NGLD-M SRD has been updated with the clarification.

B08_Draft+R

FP_NGLD+M

_+Pricing+Te mplate+Spre adsheet_Rev ised+v5_29+ Sep+2020.xl sx

CLIN

Summar y

Which of the three Unit Prices on the LRIP tab should be transferred to the LRIP Option on the 25 Sept 2020 CLIN Summary tab?

The Government has updated the pricing spreadsheet to add a total cost to evaluate the LRIP option.

B08_W15P7 T-20-R- 0011_v5_29 +Sept+2020.

pdf

L27.

Volume V - Small Busines s Particip ation Factor.

Please clarify whether small business factors apply to the Development or Production phase.

The Small Business participation under the Small Business factor is for the total contract value and not limited to a single phase of the contract.

18 Section L

The offerors cost proposal will be evaluated for award purposes:

(b) at prices proposed for the evaluation quantities or based upon the applicable hourly rate multiplied by the corresponding quantity of labor hours specified for evaluation purposes

Specifically, SNC is seeking clarification regarding the 2nd part of the above sentence which reads "or based upon the applicable hourly rate multiplied by the corresponding quantity of labor hours specified for evaluation purposes." SNC believes that this language refers to the Pricing Spreadsheet Template v5; however, this template does not contain any inputs for either hourly rates or labor hours.

The Government has removed the reference but Offeror's must still comply with the other terms of the solicitation.

# Category Draft Document Reference (Paragraph Number and Section) Question / Recommendation Response

1. Executive Summary Proposal Organization

B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Page 122, L21.e “The Offeror shall prepare a readme file, included in Volume I, which describes the proposal organization and layout of the files in its electronic submission. The file shall describe the names of each file included therein. The readme file is a separate file that does not count towards the page limitations defined in paragraph L12 Table

1. The readme file provides descriptive information and is not evaluated ”

Is the readme file a separate file or a separate section of Volume I? The draft includes contradicting instructions. L21.e mentions its part of Volume I but also mentions this should be a separate file. Please clarify.

The Government has clarified Section L that the readme shall be included in Volume I.

2. Pricing B08_Draft+RFP_NGLD+M_+Pri cing+Tem plate+Spreadsheet_Revised+v5_2 9+Sep+2 020...

25 Sept 2020 CLIN Summary Row 2 of the table shows “Base (PDR),” “Option 1 (CDR),” “Option 2 (NSA Cert),” and “LRIP Option.”

Please clarify the meaning of these headings – for example, are they analogous to Year 1, Year 2, Year 3 (except for LRIP).

Are these milestones that need to be satisfied before moving on to the next option?

The Government has corrected the headings in the pricing template. The intent is for the headings to be representative of the milestone achieved in that base or option period.

3. Pricing B08_Draft+RFP_NGLD+M_+Pri cing+Tem plate+Spreadsheet_Revised+v5_2 9+Sep+2 020...

25 Sept 2020 CLIN Summary The description column in the table shows Base Period, Development Option 1, and Development Option 2.

What defines these? For example, are they defined by time such as First Year, Second Year, Third Year?

These headers are defined as they currently read.

Base= the base year; Development Option 1= option one; Development Option 2= option two;

LRIP Option= LRIP Option

4. Pricing B08_Draft+RFP_NGLD+M_+Pri cing+Tem plate+Spreadsheet_Revised+v5_2 9+Sep+2 020...

25 Sept 2020 CLIN Summary Cell G22 (LRIP entry). What number should go into this cell? The LRIP worksheet asks for 3 FFP unit prices for 3 bid quantities to get evaluation totals but it is unclear which number should be entered into G22 of the 25 Sept 2020 CLIN Summary

The Government has updated the pricing spreadsheet to add a total cost to evaluate the LRIP option.

5. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Page 140 (Section M2.2 Cost Factor (d))

Please provide “Government determined weightings for each range to determine weighted price” and the “Government determined quantity” for consideration in development of pricing.

The Government has removed this from Section M.

6. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Page 140 (Section M2.2 Cost Factor (d))

Please provide Will the Government provide to the bidders “Government determined weightings for each range to determine weighted price” and the “Government determined quantity?”

The Government has removed this from Section M.

7. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011 v5

29+Sept+2020 Pages 3, 33, 34 What constitutes materials in CLINs 0003, 1003, and

2003? Are some of these materials for EDM units and PPUs?

The term material is defined in FAR 45.101.

8. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Page 140 (Section M2.2. Cost Factor)

What is “Task Orders 0001?” Is this the same as the “initial Task Order” mentioned in M2.2. (a)?

This reference has been removed.

9. Pricing B08_Draft+RFP_NGLD+M_+Pri cing+Tem plate+Spreadsheet_Revised+v5_2 9+Sep+2 020...

CLIN Summary and Plug Numbers worksheets

Please make the headings consistent between the 2 worksheets: CLIN Summary worksheet uses Base (PDR), Option 1 (CDR), Option 2 (NSA Cert) while the Plug Numbers worksheet uses Base Year 1, Base Year 2, and Base Year 3.

The Government has updated the pricing template to resolve this issue.

10. Pricing B08_Draft+RFP_NGLD+M_+Pri cing+Tem plate+Spreadsheet_Revised+v5_2 9+Septem ber+2020

‘25 Sept 2020 CLIN Summary’ tab

What total price should be entered for the LRIP option for CLIN 3001?

The Government has updated the pricing spreadsheet to add a total cost to evaluate the LRIP option.

11. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs, Page 35.

There are two CLINs for LRIP:

3001 - LRIP and 3002 – LRIP Materials for which proposed prices shall be provided.

In the Pricing Spreadsheet Template, only CLIN 3001 is required to be priced (LRIP it i )

What is the intent for CLIN 3002? Wouldn’t all materials required for LRIP be included in the LRIP FFP unit price (CLIN 3001)? Please reconcile CLIN structure between both files.

The Government will remove CLIN 3002 for the final RFP.

12. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Section L.25.2 Price and Cost Narrative states that “each Offeror shall ensure any proposed cost-reimbursement subcontractors provide whatever information is necessary to help the Government understand why the proposed subcontractor costs are realistic in the subcontractors xxxxCOSTNARRxxxx.docx (or PDF).”

Please confirm that Section L.25 instructions apply only to subcontractors that are proposed on a cost reimbursement basis and no cost/price information is required from subcontractors proposed on FFP/T&M/LH basis.

As stated in the L25.2 paragraph, the Government confirms the accuracy of the instructions.

13. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R-

Section L.25.2 Price and Cost Narrative states that “each Offeror shall ensure any proposed cost-reimbursement subcontractors provide whatever information is necessary to help the Government understand why the proposed subcontractor costs are realistic in the subcontractors xxxxCOSTNARRxxxx.docx (or PDF).”

Please confirm that Section L.25 instructions apply only to subcontractors that are proposed on a cost reimbursement basis and no cost/price information is required from subcontractors proposed on FFP/T&M/LH basis. In addition, please confirm prime offerors are required to perform cost and price analysis on cost reimbursement subcontractors and price analysis on subcontractors proposed of FFP/T&M/LH basis.

As stated in the L25.2 paragraph, the Government confirms the accuracy of the instructions.

14. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Section L.25.6 Volume Organization In Section 3 Sanitized Cost Proposal shall be submitted - It shall be the same as the cost proposal but with all costs/prices deleted.

Please clarify the requirement for Sanitized Cost Proposal submission. If costs/prices are to be deleted from the Cost Proposal, the file would include no data. The provided pricing template is a means of consolidating total cost/price for the proposal but the proposal cost/price shall be submitted IAW FAR 15.408, 15.2 format. The Government will add a note to the pricing template.

15. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Section L.25.6 Volume Organization In Section 2 Cost Proposal, “Offerors shall use the format found at Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.408, Table 15-2 format.”

Is this requirement applicable for Base (PDR), Option 1(CDR) and Option 2 (NSA Cert) only?

This is a format requirement for how the cost proposals shall be submitted.

16. IMS A02+NGLD-

M+IDIQ+PWS_DRAFT_29+Sept +2020;

And A02+NGLD- M+Engineering+Development+P

WS_DRA

FTclean_29+Sept+2020.doc

IDIQ PWS Page 27 (10.0 Period of Performance, lines 855 - 856) Engineering Development PWS Page 28 (10.0 Period of Performance, lines 1140 - 1141)

The IDIQ PWS states, "The period performance for this Multiple Award contract shall begin immediately upon award for up to a total PoP 10 years (120 months)." The Engineering Development PWS States, "The PoP for this TO shall be a three

(3) years or less."

Should the Integrated Master Schedule's (IMS) timeline reflect the IDIQ's 10 year PoP, or the Task Order's 3 year PoP? The Government clarified that the IMS shall focus on the task order and not the IDIQ PWS.

17. General B08_Draft+RFP_NGLD+M_31

+July+2020.pdf Page 136 “Defined leader/follower model for the UAS and broad Hardware design”

Would the Government please clarify what is meant by “leader/follower model” in the context of the UAS and hardware design?

The Government has clarified that the leader/follower model is in reference to hardware and software development. The element is asking to explain if the hardware drive the design of the software or will the software drive the design of the hardware.

18. General B08_Draft+RFP_NGLD+M_31 +July+2020.pdf

Page136 “minimizing the total number of parts required to meet full NGLD-M capability” Page 136 “reduces the number of parts required to support the

NGLD- M

operations/functionality defined in the SRD for the operational

What is the difference between these two physical design attributes for which strengths will be assessed?

Both statements stress minimizing the number of parts, but what is the difference between “full NGLD-M capability” and “required to support NGLD-M operations/functionality defined in the SRD for the operational user”?

The Government has removed one of the duplications.

19. General B08_NGLD- M+Draft+3+RFP+Questions+and +Respons es+FINAL

Question 93 “The Government will provide the bidder's library as part of the RFP solicitation.”

Items included in the bidders library (e.g. API Design Definition and Development Approach, Notional SW Architecture) are essential to developing/verifying responses to the RFP (e.g. providing a Robust device API description describing both the UAS and Hardware). The Government response to question 93 appears to state that the bidders library content will be provided with the release of the final RFP.

Request that the Government provide access to this information before final RFP release, to allow offerors sufficient time to create a response.

The Government made the Bidder's library available with the latest draft RFP.

20. General B08_Draft+RFP_NGLD+M_31 +July+2020.pdf

Page 136 “b. Element 1.1.2:

API Integration/Description” Page 138 “Sub-Factor 1.2:

UAS Approach/KMI Implementation”

The two sections identified have additional, new SRD Section M requirements from the previous draft to the most recent (e.g. Element 1.1.2 has 11 new SRD requirements, Sub-Factor 1.2 has 22 new SRD requirements).

Based on the increased response requirements, request that the Government increase the total page count to 60 pages. The Government will consider the request.

21. Off- Ramping Decision

B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Section H2, Titled Off- Ramping Decision

The Government states: “… the Government would only exercise an off-ramp decision after completion of the major design review for each MAC participant.”

Can the Government clarify which “major design review”? The Government has clarified the major design review was in reference to PDR or CDR.

22. Warranty B08_W15P7T-20-R-

0011_v5_29+Sept+2020 Section I-207, Warrantee of Systems and Equipment

The section does not reference or discuss any potential defects related to the Governments UAS.

How will the Government handle defects emanating from an offeror utilizing the Government UAS?

Defects traced back to the Government UAS will be addressed by the Government.

23. General B08_W15P7T-20-R-

Page 2 Page 2 says “The proposed effort will be for …three

(3) base year period…”. The base periods include PDR, CDR and NSA certifications and LRIP.

If the contractor completes any of these requirements in less than one calendar year, will they be allowed to start the next phase immediately? This is a possibility but the Government would have to make a programmatic decision to move into production.

24. General B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011 v5 29+Sept+2020

Page 143 Section M24 paragraph 2

Request the Government correct typo(mentor/prot\’e9g\’e9) in paragraph 2 The Government has fixed this issue.

25. General A02+NGLD- M+IDIQ+PWS_DRAFT_29+Sept +2020

Page 10 section 6.1.4 Section 6.1.4 requires contractor to provide Government visibility into contractor expenditures for labor and material.

Does this apply to the FFP Program Management task or only the Engineering/Development task? The Government requires the status reports to track cost reimbursable tasks for the contract.

26. General A02_NGLD-

M_Program+Management+SOW _DRAFT_ 29+Sept+2020

Page 9 6.1.5.1 First paragraph says IMS is to be delivered to the Government at the time of proposal, and second paragraph says that this should be a MS Project formatted file. Draft solicitation section L21 does not list MS Project as an acceptable file format for the proposal submission.

Is the IMS to be embedded within Volume III or submitted as a separate MS Project file?

The Government has clarified the IMS can be submitted as a Microsoft Project File 2013 or newer.

27. Pricing B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Page 140 Section M.2.2 Section M.2.2 says this is hybrid CPFF, CPIF and FFP contract. It further sates Management and LRIP production is FFP, Engineering development is CPFF, and Travel, Material and ODCs are cost reimbursable.

IDIQ contract page 5 section

2.1 lists CPFF, FFP and FPIF.

Which part of the contract is CPIF? Request government update section M.2.2 to resolve discrepancies. The Government has removed all references to

CPIF from section M.

28. Deliverable A02_NGLD-

M_Program+Management+SOW _DRAFT_ 29+Sept+2020

Page 18 IMS delivery schedule Section 11 delivery schedule shows exhibit E004 IMS as due 15th of each quarter frequency of quarterly, but section 6.1.5.1 says IMS is due at time of proposal and is to be updated and submitted to the government on a monthly basis for review and comment.

Request Government clarify delivery schedule. The Government has clarified that the IMS shall be updated quarterly.

29. Small Business Participation

B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

Pages 120 and 132 Page 120 says there is no limit to the page count for volume V, Small Business Participation. Page 132 paragraph L28 16.6. says “the Small business Subcontracting Plan will be incorporated into any resultant contract and is excluded from the 25 page count limit.”.

Please confirm there is no page count limit applicable to either Volume V or VI. The Government has removed the reference to a page limit for the small business section.

30. Small

Business Participation

B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

L27. Volume V – Small Business Participation Factor

“Detailed explanations shall be provided when the offerors percentages do not meet the small business participation minimum objectives listed within the solicitation. If the offeror submits zero percentages, the offeror shall provide a detailed explanation to address how the offeror will achieve small business participation where zero percentages are presented.”

Please confirm that offerors may submit zero percentages without a detailed explanation for those small business categories where the Government has established a goal of 0%.

The Government confirms that instructions provided.

31. Small Business Participation

B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

L27. Volume V – Small Business Participation Factor (Paragraph 2)

The following sentence appears to contain an incomplete thought. Request clarification:

“Small business participation planned for this acquisition: Identification by name, type of business, products/services, dollar value, and percent of estimated TAV, timeframe, and nature of commitment of the small business utilization planned for this acquisition as and should be incorporated into the small business participation plan.”

The Government has clarified the sentence.

32. Technical B08_W15P7T-20-R-

0011_v5_29+Sept+2020 M2.1 Factor 1 – Technical / b) Sub-Factor 1.2: UAS Approach/KMI Implementation

“Additionally, the use of the Government UAS is deemed the approach that would provide the least amount of risk of unsuccessful performance of this sub-factor.”

Please provide rationale for the governments view that the Government UAS is lowest risk?

The Government views one of the highest technical risks to the NGLD-M development is the integration of KMI services into the device. The NGLD-M provides considerably more capability than legacy Tier 3 devices and the Government is reducing the technical risk of integrating the KMI services by leveraging NIWC-Pac in the NGLD-M development who has been developing similar software that ingerates the KMI services.

33. Technical B08_W15P7T-20-R-

M2.1 Factor 1 – Technical / b) Sub-Factor 1.2: UAS Approach/KMI Implementation

“Additionally, the use of the Government UAS is deemed the approach that would provide the least amount of risk of unsuccessful performance of this sub-factor.”

What risk(s) is the government mitigating with Government UAS?

The Government views one of the highest technical risks to the NGLD-M development is the integration of KMI services into the device. The NGLD-M provides considerably more capability than legacy Tier 3 devices and the Government is reducing the technical risk of integrating the KMI services by leveraging NIWC-Pac in the NGLD-M development who has been developing similar software that ingerates the KMI services.

34. Contract B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

L-21 and L25.5 These provisions contradict one another. Given that this solicitation should result in adequate price competition, recommend deleting clause L-21 requiring submission of and a certificate of current cost and pricing data, and retain L25.5 indicating that such a certificate shall only be required in the event that the

KO

determines that adequate price competition does not exist after receipt of proposals. The Government confirms that instructions provided.

35. Contract B08_W15P7T-20-R-

0011_v5_29+Sept+2020 And A02+NGLD-

M+IDIQ+PWS DRAFT

29+Sept+2020

H2.1 Off-Ramp Process

10.1 Contract Type

The use of FPI Successive Targets contract type does not align with a Production TO approach. Offeror recommends that the contract type for FRP Delivery Orders revert back to FFP as indicated in prior Draft RFP versions. The Government has clarified the intent of the FPI

Successive target contract type.

36. Contract B08_W15P7T-20-R-

0011_v5_29+Sept+2020 And A02+NGLD- M+IDIQ+PWS_DRAFT_29+Sept +2020 And A02_NGLD- M_Program+Management+SOW _DRAFT_ 29+Sept+2020

L-29 252.234-7001 NOTICE

OF EARNED VALUE

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

6.1.5 Footnote

6.1.3 Footnote

The requirement in L-29 to produce documentation of the Offeror’s EVM system conflicts with the language of both the IDIQ PWS and PM SOW.

Recommend removal of clause L-29 to conform to the actual requirements of the other documents.

The Government has removed this clause.

37. Contract B08_W15P7T-20-R-

0011_v5_29+Sept+2020 I-209 252.209-7007

PROHIBITED FINANCIAL

INTERESTS FOR LEAD

SYSTEM INTEGRATORS

And K-18 252.209-7006

LIMITATIONS ON

CONTRACTORS ACTING

AS LEAD SYSTEM

INTEGRATORS

Recommend removal of these provisions because the NGLD-M contractor will not meet the definition of a Lead System Integrator based on the requirements of the solicitation.

The Government has removed this clause.

38. Contract B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011 v5 29+Sept+2020

Clause E-7 52.246-11

HIGHER-LEVEL

CONTRACT QUALITY

REQUIREMENT

Please fill in paragraph (a) and provide any higher-level quality standards that are mandated as part of the NGLD-M solicitation. If not applicable, please delete. The Government has revised the clause to identify

ASD-9100 as the higher level standard.

39. Contract B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011 v5

29+Sept+2020 Clause F-8 52.211-8 TIME OF

DELIVERY

Please fill in paragraph (a) or indicate whether offerors should propose a specific delivery schedule at this time. If not applicable, please delete. The Government has provided fill in language for this clause.

40. Contract/Prici ng B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020 And B08_Draft+RFP_NGLD+M_+Pri cing+Tem plate+Spreadsheet_Revised+v5_2 9+Sep+2 020...

H.1- SUMMARY OF POST

AWARD PROCEDURES

LRIP Tab

The minimum quantities stated in H.1 (5,000) and the LRIP Pricing Tab (1,000) conflict.

Please clarify the minimum LRIP order quantity.

The Government has fixed this issue.

41. Technical NGLD-M SRD Requirements

Traceability Matrix.pdf SRD ID NGLD-M_SRD_0483 The text “to include a recoverable zeroization and a destructive zeroization” was added to this requirement.

Does this mean the external zeroization (i.e. zeroize button) now needs to perform two types of zeroization?

The Government confirms the requirements defined in the SRD.

42. Technical NGLD-M SRD Requirements Traceability Matrix.pdf

SRD ID NGLD-M_SRD_0657 The tables and appendix called out in the added “clarification” portion of this requirement contain temperature values that are outside of the other operating threshold and objective requirements in the SRD matrix.

Which requirements have precedence in defining the operating temperature ranges of the NGLD-M?

The temperature requirements in the NGLD-M SRD has the precedence. In addition, the SRD 657 requirement has been updated to clarify which MIl_STD_810G procedures apply.

The NGLD-M SRD will be updated with the following: Rain: 506.5 procedure 1; freeze/thaw

(524) - procedures I & II; icing/freezing rain (521.3); humidity (507.5) - procedures I and II;

Explosive Atmosphere (511.5) - procedure I

43. Technical NGLD-M SRD Requirements Traceability Matrix.pdf

SRD ID NGLD-M_SRD_0686 Where is the master copy of the Operating Systems approved and maintained by the DoD?

Primary target operating systems include, but are not limited to, Linux, Embedded Linux, Android, Windows, Green Hills INTEGRITY, macOS, and iOS. The intent of this requirements is to ensure that OS should be able to pass the RMF and IASRD requirements; be able to apply DoD STIGs, SRGs, be able to patch(as). The NGLD-M SRD has been updated with the clarification.

44. Past Performance

– Section J

B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

L26.1 Volume IV Past Performance, General L26.2 Volume IV Past Performance, Relevant Contracts

L26.1 “Each Offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in Section J, Past and Present Performance Information.”

L26.2 “Submit information using the format contained in Section J Past and Present Performance Information.”

The Government has not included the Past and Present Performance Information within Section J List of Attachments. Please provide this attachment to industry prior to release of the final RFP and update Section J to reflect this document.

The Government will include the attachment in the final RFP.

45. Small Business Participation – Section J

B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

L28.16 Small Business Participation

“All offerors (both other than small businesses and small businesses) shall submit a Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) requirements outlined in Appendix I…” Please provide Appendix I requirements to industry prior to the release of the final RFP. The Government will include the attachment in the final RFP.

46. Small

Business Participation – Section J

B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

L28.16.8 “Offerors are to propose quarterly reporting for the requirements in L- Instructions to Offerors/ Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) Instructions, subparagraphs 1-3 above (contractor format acceptable) in accordance with Section J, Exhibit XX, Small Business Participation.”

Please provide Section J exhibit referenced in the clause above to industry prior to final RFP release.

The Government will include the attachment in the final RFP.

47. Cost Volume Organization

B08_W15P7T-20-R- 0011_v5_29+Sept+2020

L13. Page Limitations L25.6.1 Section 1 Introduction L25.6.2. Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

L13 “Each page shall be counted except the following:

cover pages, tables of contents, glossaries, OCCI mitigation plans, and 508 compliance information.”

L25.6.1 “Include table of contents; glossary of abbreviations and acronyms; summary descriptions of accounting, estimating, and purchasing systems; and changes to estimating, accounting practices, or Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) disclosure.”

L25.6.2 “Glossaries do not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes.”

Since table of contents and glossaries are not included within page count, would the Government consider making these a Volume III Cost requirement that precedes Section 1 Introduction requirements?

The Government will not consider the request.

Tables of contents and glossaries are exempt from page count regardless of the Volume.

48. General In consideration of the major acquisition strategy changes incorporated into this draft RFP that have not been previously released to industry, will the Government release another draft to permit industry to assess responses to this question submission?

The Government will take this into consideration.

Q# DRFP Document Sec # Page Text Reference from DRFP Comment/Question to the Government Response

1.

Model Contract H.1 45

When exercising an LRIP production option, the Government will order a minimum of 5,000 LRIP units per awardee.

In the pricing template spreadsheet, LRIP tab, row 8, it is stated the minimum LRIP quantity is 1,000 not 5,000, as listed in Section H. Can the Government please confirm the value in the Pricing spreadsheet should be updated to reflect the revised ordering minimum of 5,000 units?

The Government has revised pricing template to address this issue.

2.

Model Contract L.26.1 129

Each Offeror shall submit a past performance volume with its proposal, containing past performance information in accordance with the format contained in Section J, Past and Present Performance Information .

Section J does not contain the referenced attachment, can this attachment be provided prior to the final RFP?

the attachment will be provided by the Government upon the final RFP

3.

Model Contract L27, 129-131, Can the Government please confirm that the requirements in L28.16 Small Business Participation should be included and addressed as part of Volume V Small Business (ref L27) and not a separate contracts attachment?

The Government confirms the instructions provided in L28.16.

4.

Model Contract L.28.16 132

All offerors (both other than small businesses and small businesses) shall submit a Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) requirements outlined in Appendix I…

Can the Government please clarify where the referenced attachment can be located? No Appendix I is included within the DRFP or cited in Section J.

The Government will include the Appendix in the Final Solicitation

5.

Model Contract L.28.16 (4) 132

b) The proposed Total Contract Value for this requirement is $898,541,972.84 and includes the three year base periods and seven option years.

Can the Government please confirm that the Total Contract Value (TCV) provided here is an error and offerors are required to use their proposed cost as the TCV for calculation of SB participation? As the 7 option years for production are not included in the pricing of this offer, this TCV is based on the 3-year base only.

The Government has revised the language to the following: "The proposed Total Contract Value for this requirement is the vendors proposed ceiling for the life of the contract and should include the base period and option periods.

6.

Model Contract L28.16 (8) 132

Offerors are to propose quarterly reporting for the requirements in L- Instructions to Offerors/ Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD) Instructions, subparagraphs 1-3 above (contractor format acceptable) in accordance with Section J, Exhibit XX, Small Business Participation .

Section J does not contain the referenced attachment, can this attachment be provided prior to the final RFP?

The Government will include the Appendix in the Final Solicitation

7.

Model Contract M2.1 139

Element 1.3.2 … Strengths may be given in areas such as but not limited to: schedule efficiencies;

demonstrated experience in integrating DevSecOps into Systems Engineering processes; relevant Industry Standard Certifications that pertains to the development of the NGLD-M. IDIQ PWS 6.2 thru 6.2.5 and 6.2.13 and 6.2.14;

The emphasized text appears to have been inadvertently cut off. Can the Government please clarify the relevance of cited PWS sections on evaluated strengths for this section?

The Government has fixed the identified issue.

8.

Model Contract M.2.2 140

(b) at prices proposed for the evaluation quantities or based upon the applicable hourly rate multiplied by the corresponding quantity of labor hours specified for evaluation purposes.

As there are no labor hours specified for evaluation purposes can the Government please confirm that “or based upon the applicable hourly rate multiplied by the corresponding quantity of labor hours specified for evaluation purposes.” will be deleted in the Final RFP?

The Government has removed the reference but Offeror's must still comply with the other terms of the solicitation.

9.

(d) at quoted unit prices for the provided quantity ranges (will be multiplied by the Government determined weightings for each range to determine a weighted price.

Based on the latest revision to the DRFP and the identification of bid quantities for LRIP, can the Government please confirm there are no weighting values and the referenced text should be deleted?

The Government will not publish the weights with the RFP. The Offeror is to propose quantity pricing based on the provided Pricing Spreadsheet.

10.

Based on the technical complexity and criticality of the potential solution, combined with the demanding production requirements during the latter phases of this program, we believe a 10% Small Business Participation target is a more realistic and reasonable target for this acquisition based on the current FAR standards of only counting small business participation at the first tier level. If lower-tier subcontracting could be counted towards the prime’s small business goals per the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) 2020, a 12% Small Business Participation target is more realistic and reasonable.

The Government has revised the Small Business participation requirement to 15%.

11.

Model Contract M1.3.3 134

We ask that the Government reconsider the impact and appropriateness of weighting Cost, rather than Technical, as one of the most heavily weighted Evaluation Factors in determining a Best Value solution for a critical, technically complex, developmental effort that requires NSA certification.

Recommend a return to the evaluation criteria contained in the 31 JULY 2020 draft RFP which read as follows: “The Government will evaluate the proposals for the four (4) major factors for source selection: 1) Technical, 2) Cost, 3) Past Performance, and 4) Small Business. The Technical factor is significantly more important than Cost, Past Performance and Small Business factors. The Cost factor is of greater importance than Past Performance and Small Business factor. The Past Performance factor is of greater importance than Small Business factor.

The combination of Technical, Past Performance, and Small Business are greater than cost.

The Government rejects the recommendation

12.

IDIQ PWS 6.2.1 15 The effort is further outlined in the initial TO as attached to this PWS.

The IDIQ PWS does not have an identified attachment in the DRFP package. Can the Government please clarify if there is a separate attachment to be provided? Or if this is a reference to the Engineering Development PWS provided with the DRFP?

The Government has clarified the reference to mean the Engineering Development PWS.

13.

Model Contract;

Pricing Template

CLIN 3001,

3002; CLIN

Summary

Tab

3001 LRIP SERVICE

REQUESTED: LRIP CLIN

CONTRACT TYPE: Firm Fixed Price 3002: LRIP Materials

SERVICE REQUESTED: LRIP

MATERIALS CLIN CONTRACT

TYPE: Firm Fixed Price

Section B identifies two (2) CLINs for LRIP but the pricing spreadsheet only has a row to capture the costs of CLIN 3001. Can the Government please confirm the spreadsheet will be updated to add a row to capture cost for CLIN 3002 with the Final RFP?

The Government will remove references to CLIN 3002 from the Pricing Template.

14.

Model Contract; IDIQ

PWS

In light of the complexity and administrative burden for both the Government and the contractor that are frequently experienced in conjunction with the negotiation, administration, and performance of FPI Contracts, we recommend the Government consider the exclusive use of a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) Contract type in lieu of an FPI Contract for the Production Phase. As the Government intends to compete subsequent production delivery across two (2) contractors, the nature of competition will continuously incentivize NGLD-M contractors to reduce unit costs proposed to ensure their offerings remain viable. During the execution of LRIP, which is performed as FFP, contractors will have enough reliable information to establish a FFP for bidding on subsequent Production Delivery Orders. This will provide the Government competitive unit costs and remove Government risk due to unplanned cost growth.

Understanding the Government’s willingness to institute a FFP for Production DOs in IDIQ PWS 10.1.1 due to funding or contractor performance issues, we believe that a FFP contract type for production provides the highest-value, lowest risk approach for the Government in the Production Phase from its onset.

The Government has clarified that FPI Successive target may be used if production delivery orders cannot be competitively awarded.