Responses_to_Draft_RFP_Questions.pdf

RESPONSES TO DRAFT RFP QUESTIONS

QUESTION: How many copies of each TPS? (Appendix D)?

ANSWER: The SOW has been amended to reflect that TPS will be manufactured and delivered to satisfy the total requirement as stated in the contract. The reference to appendix D has been removed from SOW sections 4.2, 5.2, and 6.2.

QUESTION: Are SW CDRLs (SRS, SPS, etc…) required for the TPS software?

ANSWER: Yes each TPS is considered to be a Computer Software Configuration Item (CSCI).

QUESTION: Need more detail on what "On aircraft testing" means and what it will require.

Scope needs to be defined.

ANSWER: For B-2A spec paragraph 3.4.1.8 is specific to what SMS (on-aircraft testing is being performed) Other references to on-aircraft testing simply require the same test to be performed on-aircraft as in the backshop. Please refer to the SMS RLA and SMS SBRA sub-directories in the B-2 folder of the bidders library disks for further information regarding SMS testing. For B-52 on aircraft testing requirements are identified by specification paragraph

3.4.3.2 additional information with regards to test requirements is contained in the Mustang Source Code that has been provided as part of the bidders library. For B-1B the SMS “on-aircraft” testing is defined in 3.4.2.2 of the specification. Other references to on-aircraft testing simply require the same test to be performed on-aircraft as in the backshop.

QUESTION: Information on what legacy tester functionality is being replaced is vague. Will the BAT be required to meet all performance specifications of the COLT, CBMTS, MUSTANG, ESTS-C, JBERTS and MAU-12?

ANSWER: The BAT is required to replace of the 6 testers identified. In doing this, the BAT should test each UUT to the same level of confidence or better than the TPSs and Test Procedures currently in operation. Please consider that for the ESTS-C replacement, the requirement is to provide and replace I level test capability only.

QUESTION: Information on the B-2 TRU and the two JBAs is not included in the data package provided.

ANSWER: The JBAs are currently tested in concert with the SBRA. Please refer to SBRA documentation. The B-2 TRU overhaul instructions will be available after contract award.

Currently limited testing is performed on the TRU.

QUESTION: Will current Test Program software be provided?

ANSWER: Current TPS SW that the Government owns and has distribution authority for can be requested by the wining contractor after contract award. Please note that the BAT program is not authorized as a secondary distribution agent. The BAT office will assist in identifying the appropriate office for TPS and Tech Order requests.

QUESTION: Will contractors be responsible to provide TPSs according to the provided TRDs, or will the TPSs be required to conform to current field tests? The provided TRDs and test procedures may not represent current test procedures.

ANSWER: Data provided in the Bidders Library is provided as is with no guarantee of accuracy.

As such existing TRDs and manual procedures should form a good baseline from which to start analyzing TPS requirements. Existing TPS source code and executables should accurately reflect the current fielded test capability and should meet the UUT Operational Safety Suitability & Effectiveness requirements. GFP inspection and site visits as approved by the BAT Office may be used to analyze, verify and document UUT testing requirements. In short it is highly desired that TPSs conform to the current field tests.

QUESTION: Increment 1 requires that requirements analysis be completed for all UUTs for BAT. Will all LRUs and any other GFP be available for inspection during the requirements analysis phase?

ANSWER: Yes, through a combination of GFP and site visits approved by BAT Program as necessary.

QUESTION: With regard to the performance specification, does the following paragraph last bullet (test crl (lrus) ..) mean a standalone test program set for the CRL-IWIU, and CRL-S/V Junction Box or that the backshop test of CRL must include the IWIU and S/V JB?

3.4.3.3 Backshop Tests

The BAT system shall provide off-aircraft Backshop tests: output cables and wiring test capability, down to faulty LRU’s to include:

Stub Pylon/Heavy Stores Adapter Beam (Key Performance Parameter)

- IWIU test

- Weapons Relay Panel (WRP)

Cluster Bomb Rack (CBR) functionality, to include: (Key Performance Parameter)

- A-6 bomb release unit and associated wiring operational Check Out

- Test A-6 bomb release unit LH/RH functionality (Key Performance Parameter)

Test MAU-12 Operational Check Out

- CRL to include Common Core

- 1760 cable configuration -Test MAU-12 to CRL interface (Ejector Rack) functionality, to include firing voltage, stores away, arming solenoids, and stray voltage

- Power Supply Units

Test CRL (LRUs) to include:

- IWIU

- S/V Junction Box

ANSWER: Test of the CRL will include testing the assembled CRL, standalone test of the IWIU and S/V Junction Box.

QUESTION: Draft Section M under Subfactor One: The bullet point UUT Analysis Risk Mitigation Plan part (h) lists the “Conventional Rotary Launcher (CRL) 1760 Cluster Bomb Rack (CBR) (B-52H).” Was the intent to actually list these as two separate line items, since the (S)CRL and the CBR are actually two distinct items? Or, as an alternative, was the intent to include both items as a single point of address in the risk mitigation plan?

ANSWER: This should be two separate items, section M will be corrected.

QUESTION: Section L Question: Per Sec. L, A., within the 50-page Technical Volume limit the Offeror must address the Performance Specification and Statement of Work requirements with detailed narratives, and adhere to Sec. L, D instructions that require convincing rationale.

Would the Government consider expanding the Technical Volume to 100 pages to ensure the Offeror's ability to fully address RFP requirements?

ANSWER: No

QUESTION: Regarding DFARS clause 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting Dtd Dec 2015, what is the specific Covered Defense Information (CDI) for the BAT Program/Contract and/or when can we expect to be provided with that information?

ANSWER: All information provided by the government shall be safeguarded. After contract award it would include technical and program documentation developed by the contractor in the performance of the contract.

QUESTION: Section L Question: We understand that textual paragraphs will use a 12 pt font.

Will the Government consider allowing not less than 8 pt type for charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, and spreadsheets?

ANSWER: No smaller than 8 Pt is fine for charts, graphs etc.; however, all narratives shall be 12 pt.

QUESTION: Sections L&M Questions: Page 3 of 8 “Subfactor One: SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, sub-bullet Unit Under Test (UUT) Analysis Risk Mitigation Plan”

-B-1B On-Aircraft SMS testing (B1-B) à Please confirm that this is relating to the elements in Performance Specification paragraph 3.4.2.2 “B1-B Aircraft Weapons Delivery System”, exclusively.

ANSWER: Yes that is correct.

-Pylon Assy., B-52 Conventional Weapons Integration (B-52H) à For the sake of consistent terminology, please confirm that “Pylon Assy., B-52 Conventional Weapons” is actually the “Stub Pylon/Heavy Stores Adapter Beam” as listed in Performance Specification

3.4.3.3 Backshop Tests.

ANSWER: Yes that is correct.

-Conventional Rotary Launcher (CRL) 1760 Cluster Bomb Rack (CBR) (B-52H) à There appears to be two different items listed here (i.e. Conventional Rotary Launcher (CRL) and 1760 Cluster Bomb Rack (CBR)) that need to be narrated as risk mitigation for the B-52H. Please confirm that these are indeed two separate items, or is there another Risk Mitigation UUT intent.

ANSWER: Yes they are two separate items for the risk mitigation. We will correct the list.-B- 52 On-Aircraft SMS testing (B-52H) à Please confirm that this is relating to all the elements listed as “disconnects” in Performance Specification paragraph 3.4.3.2 “Wiring Tests”, exclusively.

ANSWER: Yes that is correct, also note that item (f) the SUU-67 disconnect is also covered by

3.4.3.2.

QUESTION: Draft BAT System Performance Specification Rev. 8, 01/26/16 Page 24 of 55, Paragraph 3.4.1.2 Rotary Launch Assembly Line Replaceable Unit Bench Check. Please specify in the Performance Specification how many unique “RLA Cables” are to be tested as standalone UUTs. (The information in the bidder’s library indicates that there could be as many as 69 individual and unique UUT TPSs for the RLA Cables.)

ANSWER: A list of cables to be tested will be added to the specification.

QUESTION: Page 28 of 55, Paragraph 3.4.3 B-52H Unique Requirements. Please confirm that both the Common Strategic Rotary Launcher, and SUU-67 were purposefully removed from the Performance Specification section 3.4.3 as UUTs for BAT tests. (They were both UUTs specifically listed in prior Performance Specification revisions).

ANSWER: Yes they have purposefully been removed.

QUESTION: CDRLs, B016, AAR: This CDRL is missing from the CDRLs PDF file that was released with the DRFP.

ANSWER: This is now being added.

QUESTION: Section M, 3.1 Tec Factor, Subfactor Two, RELIABILTY, Reliability Tasks, Page 3: Please confirm the Reliability requirement of 1500 hours MTBF applies to both the BAT Core tester and TPS (“BAT System”).

ANSWER: Yes, 1500 hours MTBF applies to the BAT system.

QUESTION: Section L, Subfactor Two: RELIABILITY, Configuration Item Reliability Risk Mitigation: Recommend replacing “The offeror’s technical proposal shall identify a minimum of five (5) configuration items that pose the greatest reliability risk…” with “The offeror’s technical proposal shall identify the dominant drivers that pose the greatest reliability risk…” ANSWER: The technical evaluation team will take this under consideration.

QUESTION: Section M, 3.1 Technical Factor, Subfactor Two: RELIABILITY, Configuration Item Reliability Risk Mitigation: Recommend replacing “This is met when the offeror’s technical proposal has identified at least five (5) configuration items that pose the greatest reliability risk…” with “This is met when the offeror’s technical proposal has identified the dominant drivers that pose the greatest reliability risk…” ANSWER: The Government requirement is five (5) Configuration Items.

QUESTION: Section M, 3.1 Technical Factor, Subfactor One: SYSTEMS ENGINEERING, P.3: Section M, Page 3, Subfactor 1, can the Government explain why the most complex TPSs are not included as a part of the UUT Risk Mitigation Plan?

ANSWER: UUTs for which the government provided TRDs or other equivalent data for a manual tester etc. were not included on the list.

QUESTION: SOW/Performance Specification: 1.2.4 Government Data Rights / 3.1.4 Government Data Rights: SOW paragraph 1.2.4 and Specification paragraph 3.1.4 expands government data rights considerably. The use of COTS hardware/software may be employed to reduce development time/schedule risk. Detailed technical documentation for COTS items is often considered vendor proprietary. Will the government accept as sufficient the technical data normally delivered by the vendor with purchase of a COTS item?

ANSWER: The SOW language has been amended.

QUESTION: SOW, 3.3.1 Nuclear Certification Impact Statement (NCIS): Is the NCIS submitted prior to CDR a draft or one that has already been approved by the Government?

Recommend moving the submission of this document to 45 days after CDR or 45 days prior to Test Readiness Review (TRR).

ANSWER: The NCIS prior to CDR is a draft that is being sent forward for approval from NWSC, and will form the basis from which the government will develop and deliver a basic CRP back to the contractor.

QUESTION: SOW, Appendix B, B1.1.1 Military Standards: Recommend adding MIL-STD- 130N, “Department of Defense Standard Practice: Identification Marking of U.S. Military Property.”

ANSWER: This has been added to the SOW.

QUESTION: SOW, Appendix B, B.1.1.1 Military Standards: Recommend adding MIL-STD- 196F, 11 September 2013, “Department of Defense Standard Practice: Joint Electronics Type Designation Automated System.”

ANSWER: This has been added to the SOW.

QUESTION: SOW, Appendix B, B.1.1.1 Military Standards: Recommend adding MIL-STD- 3018, Change 2, 2 June 2015, “Department of Defense Standard Practice: Parts Management.”

ANSWER: This has been added to the SOW.

QUESTION: SOW Paragraph 3.5.4 Anti-Tamper: Based on our experience with anti-tamper requirements, test systems and test program sets we are having difficulty identifying the Critical Program Information (CPI) that needs to be protected. Normally this type of data is denoted as classified information at a minimum.

32.a. Can the government define the CPI or examples of CPI that would need to be protected for the BAT program?

32.b. If the government can define CPI that needs to be protected, what level of protection is required?

ANSWER: SOW paragraph 3.5.4 has been changed to provide clarification that this is only if required.

QUESTION: Concerned about asset availability for integration, especially B2. Have the program offices guaranteed times and durations of LRU availability? How will cost/schedule impacts be addressed if the government cannot provide LRUs, aircraft access, or flight line access in a timely manner?

ANSWER: As indicated during the Pre-Solicitation Conference and within the SOW, the AF must place emphasis on the Bomber Mission first and is taking all steps practicable to mitigate program risks to the maximum extent possible. If in the event that LRU availability impacts the BAT Program contract, each instance of this occurrence would be documented, analyzed and any identified impact(s) would be negotiated on a case-by-case basis. The AF Bomber Mission will take first priority while the new BAT Program design, development, integration and production program is underway to minimize impacts to national security.

QUESTION: SOW, 3.9.1 Test Assets and Government-Furnished Equipment (GFE): SOW paragraph 3.9.1 states that GFE will be provided as available. The availability of test assets can be a key cost driver in TPS development, integration testing, and travel. Please confirm a list of GFE availability will be provided with the final RFP.

ANSWER: As indicated during the Pre-Solicitation Conference and within the SOW, the AF must place emphasis on the Bomber Mission first and is taking all steps practicable to mitigate program risks to the maximum extent possible. If in the event that Government Furnished Property availability impacts the BAT Program contract, each instance of this occurrence would be documented, analyzed and any identified impact(s) would be negotiated on a case-by-case basis. The AF Bomber Mission will take first priority while the new BAT Program design, development, integration and production program is underway to minimize impacts to national security.

QUESTION: Many of the UUT parts could be long lead items. Many may also have an HCI requirement. Who will be responsible for providing piece parts for the UUTs? If the government does not have sufficient stock for UUT repair, how will cost/schedule impacts be addressed?

ANSWER: Based on initial review of the AF Supply Chain, it does not appear that ‘many of the UUT parts could be long lead items”. The stock listed parts will be sustained from the DoD Supply Chain and internally, the ATS Division will have Memorandum of Agreement(s) (MOAs) in place signed by all Weapon System Offices, their supporting Supply Chain Organizations as well as the AF Global Strike Command to sustain GFP on this contract. If in the event that GFP availability impacts the BAT Program contract, each instance of this occurrence would be documented, analyzed and any identified impacts(s) would be negotiated on a case-by-case basis.

QUESTION: CDRLs, Various: Multiple CDRL items do not contain due dates.

ANSWER: Agree, this was the most current DRAFT set of CDRLs available at date of DRFP release. Final CDRLs will have this information posted.

QUESTION: CDRLs, A004, CFSR: Request submission dates are no later than 15 calendar days following the reporting month to accommodate corporate financial systems.

ANSWER: Current requirement stands firm.

QUESTION: CDRLs, A005 IPMR: Request submission dates are no later than 15 calendar days following the reporting month to accommodate corporate financial systems.

ANSWER: Current requirement stands firm.