Government Responses to JMM BRU DRFP Industry Questions.pdf

Government Response to JMM BRU DRFP Questions from Industry 21 Jun 2012

Reference Industry Question/Government Response

RFP

Does the Government intend to provide dates for award of Option CLINs 0002, 0003, 0004, 0005, & 0006?

Government Response:

The JMM BRU Option exercise windows are event driven (PDR, SVR, etc.). Offerors shall use their Integrated Master Schedule and notional Project Plan (SOW, Appendix 01) to forecast windows for exercise of Options.

Draft Request for Proposal, Part 1 - The Schedule, Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs, CLIN 0004AB and 0005AB, JMM BRU Container for Production Lots 1 and 2.

Will the government please provide the drawings and specifications for the CNU-660 as soon as possible?

Government Response:

The Government will not provide any drawings or specifications for the CNU-660. Compatibility with the CNU-660 container is not a requirement of the JMM BRU acquisition. The title for CLIN 0004AB and 0005AB will be modified to reflect "JMM BRU Shipping Container".

Section B: CLINs 0001, 0002 & 0003;

Inspection/Acceptance states 'Source' while Section E states that PCO/Program Mgt will perform Inspection Acceptance (Destination). Please clarify.

Sections should be consistent Government Response:

Section B, CLINs 0001-0003, Inspection/Acceptance will be changed from Source to Destination.

Section B;

CLIN 0006 - Technical Data Package (TDP) with Government Purpose Rights (GPR)

As Section M places emphasis on cost as a selection criteria it is to the benefit of the customer to leverage off of contractor intellectual property (limited/restricted/patents) where/when possible.

Consistent with a cost effective approach, please consider using the data rights approach utilized on KC-46 Tanker program, wherein existing Contractor Intellectual Property (IP) is retained by the Contractor and data/source code developed with USG funds is provided as GPR/Unlimited. See the attached CDRL example, paragraph 5.0.

Government Response:

The intent of the Government is to procure a production level Technical Data Package with Government Purpose Rights.

Section B;

CLIN 0007 - Revise 'Unit Price' and 'Total Item Price' to read

'NSP'

Ties to language in 'Descriptive Data' Government Response:

The contracting writing systems does not allow the addition of "NSP".

Section B;

52.216-16 - 'Incentive Price Revision - Firm Target' (Oct 97) -insert Alternate I

Per FAR 16-406(a) and the basic clause, Alternate I is to be used when contracting with Option CLINS Government Response:

52.216-16 Alternate I will be added to Final RFP.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response Section B;

B030 - Contract Type: Fixed Price Incentive--Firm Target, paragraph (7), revise the timeframe for proposal submittal (for final Target Cost determination) from 45 days to 120 days.

Extension provides sufficient time to collect prime/supplier data required to constitute a 'fully supported', complete proposal IAW 52.216-16(c).

Government Response:

The Government will revise to 120 days in the Final RFP.

Section L; Book F Book F instructs to map to SOW IAW with Table 2.4. Cannot locate Table 2.4 in Section L or any other part of the RFP Solicitation document or in the SOW to comply with this instruction.

Where is the referenced Table 2.4?

Government Response:

Table 2.4 was deleted in Section L and replaced by Section L Attachment 10. Paragraph (iii) will be removed in Final RFP.

Section F;

Delete as page is blank

Government Response:

The Government will delete the page for the Final RFP.

Section G;

EGLIN-G002 - 'Billing Instructions for Multiple Accounting Classification Citations' (Jan 12) - Additional steps in payment process. (i.e. submit invoices to EGLIN FM for ACRN assignment/invoice approval - these steps outside the lean Electronic DD250/Payment (WAWF) process.

Clause includes additional steps beyond standard billing processes (i.e. submit invoices to program Finance Manager at Eglin for approval prior to submittal to payment office). Coordination/tracking of invoices through the additional/non-standard requirements will add costs to the overall contract.

Recommend removing additional requirements to ensure best value is submitted in offeror's proposal Government Response:

The Clause will remain as written.

Section H;

H006 Associate Contractor Agreement (ACA) Clause - two issues:

(1) states McDonnell Douglas Corporation.

- Suggest changing name to The Boeing Corporation;

(2) Recommend removing the reference to SDB I & BRU-61/A.

Why include SDB I/BRU-61 A FA8672-09-D-0062 on the ACA table? Please clarify what is to be provided if they remain.

(1) Corrects the legal name of the company;

(2) Clarifies what is expected to be shared between contractors regarding SDB I and BRU-61A.

Government Response:

(1) Name will be revised on the Final RFP to read The Boeing Company.

(2) The SDB I and BRU-61/A are considered an entire weapon system, not severable. The need is for the Contractor to establish an ACA with the Boeing Corporation for information concerning aircraft and weapon interfaces and BRU-61/A outer moldline (OML).

Reference Industry Question/Government Response Section I;

52.215-21 Requirements for Certified Cost or Pricing Data and Data other than Certified Cost or Pricing Data - Modifications .

Add Alternate I.

Alternate I provides flexibility regarding submittal format for certified cost or pricing data. Requisite data is provided within the proposal, but Contractor systems may differ from the format called out in the FAR. Alternate I will ensure 'best value pricing' is provided since proposals will be submitted in 'Contractor format'.

Government Response:

Final RFP will include 52.215-21, Alternate I - with language Contractor format is acceptable. However, awardee must ensure submission meets the requirements of FAR 15.408, Table 15-2. The Government will also add 52.215-21, Alternate III, to the Final RFP requiring submission via electronic media.

Section I;

52.216-16 - 'Incentive Price Revision - Firm Target' (Oct 97) -insert Alternate I

Per FAR 16-406(a) and the basic clause, Alternate I is to be used when contracting with Option CLINS Government Response:

52.216-16 Alternate I will be added to Final RFP.

Section I;

52.245-01 - Alt I - Govt Property (Aug 10), Alternate I (Aug 10) - Delete Alternate I

Removing Alternate I will remove the 'risk of loss' requirement from the contractor and will ensure the lowest price/best value proposal is provided to the USG.

Government Response:

IAW FAR 45.107(a)(2), The Government shall use Alternate I unless exempted by 45.104(a). Subject acquisition does not meet any of the four (4) exemptions.

Section I;

252.227-7030 - Technical Data Withholding of Payment (Mar 00)

Reduce the value of the withhold to 1% of the delivered item which represents a fair, reasonable amount for 'penalty' for 'untimely' delivery of technical data.

Government Response:

The clause will remain as written.

Section I;

252.246-7001 - Warranty of Data (Dec 91) and Alt I (Dec 91) - Delete both basic and Alternate clauses.

Protection is provided under 52.246-3, 52.246-6, 52.246-8, 52.246-19. Further protection beyond these clauses will drive non-value added costs into the proposal.

Government Response:

The clauses will remain in Final RFP. Suggested clauses are not included and do not apply to this acquisition.

Section I;

Various FAR/DFAR clauses should be removed from the solicitation/contract as they conflict with overall program requirements. See listing below:

See below…

Reference Industry Question/Government Response FAR 52.204-2 - Alternate I - Security Requirements (Aug

96) Alt I (Apr 84) - Delete

Alternate I is applicable to only cost type Research and Development efforts/contracts with educational institutions Government Response:

FAR 52.204-2 will remain. Alternate I will be removed from Final RFP.

FAR 52.216-7 - Allowable Cost and Payment' (Jun 11) - Delete

Not applicable as there are no cost-type CLINs in this DRFP Government Response:

Subject clause will be removed from Final RFP.

FAR 52.219-28 - 'Post award Small Business Program Representation' (Apr 12) - delete as this clause in Not Applicable to large business concerns

Applies to Small Business concerns only Government Response:

JMM BRU solicitation is a full and open acquisition. Clause will remain in Final RFP. If awarded to a large business, the clause will be removed from final contract.

FAR 52.223-15 - Energy Efficiency in energy-Consuming Products (Dec 07) - Delete clause.

Not Applicable to contracts where energy consuming products to be delivered are for combat or combat related missions.

Government Response:

Subject clause will be removed from Final RFP.

FAR 52.223-16 - IEEE 1680 Standard for the environmental Assessment of Personal Computer Products (Dec 07) - Delete

Clause applies to solicitations/contracts for personal computer products, services that require furnishing of personal computer products for use by the USG or Contractor operation of Govt owned facilities.

Government Response:

Subject clause will be removed from Final RFP.

FAR 52.227-11 - 'Patent Rights - Ownership by the Contractor' (Dec 07) - Delete

Clause is not applicable when DFAR 252.227-7038 is in the contract Government Response:

JMM BRU solicitation is a full and open acquisition. Clause will remain in Final RFP. If awarded to a large business, the clause 52.227-11 will be removed from final contract.

FAR 52.237-11 - Accepting and Dispensing on $1 Coin (Sep

08) - Not applicable

Contractor will not provide services that involve daily business operations conducted in premises owned by the United States.

Government Response:

Subject clause will be removed from Final RFP.

DFAR 252.204-7010 -Requirements for Contractor to Notify DoD if the Contractors Activities are Subject to reporting under the US-International Atomic Energy Agency Additional Protocol (Jan 09) - Delete

Delete as no radioactive /nuclear effort required under this contract

Subject clause will be removed from Final RFP.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response DFAR 252.208-7000 - Intent to Furnish Precious Metals as Govt Furnished Material (Dec 91) - Delete

Delete as the items being delivered are not anticipated to require the use precious metals supplied by the USG Government Response:

Subject clause will be removed from Final RFP.

DFAR 252.212-7002 - Pilot Program for Acquisition of Military-Purpose NonDevelopmental Items (Jun 11) - Delete

This clause is not applicable for 'traditional defense/government contractors'.

Government Response:

Subject clause will be removed from Final RFP.

DFAR 252.227-7008 - Restriction on Acquisition of Specialty Metals ( Jul 09) - Delete

This clause is applicable to the delivery of defined specialty metals as end items, but does not apply to items containing specialty metals Government Response:

Subject clause will be removed from Final RFP. DFARS Clause 252.225.7009 will be added to the Final

RFP.

DFAR 252.247-7026 - 'Evaluation Preference for Use of Domestic Shipyards-Applicable to Acquisition of Carriage by Vessels for DoD Cargo in the Coastwise or Noncontiguous Trade' (Nov 08) - Delete

Not applicable as this contract is not for the overhaul, repair or maintenance work for covered vessels performed in shipyards located in the US or Guam Government Response:

Subject clause will be removed from the Final RFP.

DFAR 252.249-7002 - 'Notification of Anticipated Contract Termination or Reduction' (Oct 10) - Delete

This program does not fulfill the requirements of a 'major defense program'.

Government Response:

Subject clause will be removed from the Final RFP.

FAR 252.227-7039 - 'Patents - Reporting of Subject Inventions' (Apr 90) - Delete

This clause is not applicable to DoD contracts.

Government Response:

JMM BRU solicitation is a full and open acquisition. Clause will remain in Final RFP. If awarded to a large business, the clause 52.227-11 and 252.227-7039 will be removed from final contract.

FAR 252.232-7004 - 'DoD Progress Payment Rates' (Oct

01) - Delete

Delete as this clause is applicable to only Small Business concerns Government Response:

JMM BRU solicitation is a full and open acquisition. Clause will remain in Final RFP. If awarded to a large business, the clause 252.232-7004 will be removed from final contract.

Section J, page 33, Attachments 5 and 6 JMM BRU Production Lot 1 Unit Pricing Tables and JMM BRU Production Lot 2 Unit Pricing Tables

The referenced Section J attachments 5 and 6 are just placeholders. Does Section L Attachment 2 - Lot 1 Production Unit Pricing and Section L Attachment 3 – Lot 2 Production Unit Pricing represent the pricing tables from Section J Attachments 5 and 6?

Section L Attachments 2 and 3 will become Section J Attachments 5 and 6 upon contract award.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response Section L, Page 15 of 17, states that if an offeror has an approved Comprehensive Subcontracting Plan (CSP), the offeror shall submit the approved plan. Section L, Page 4 of 17, states that the Subcontracting Plan (Volume 2, Book G) may only be 15 pages.

Will the inclusion of the Offeror's Government- approved Comprehensive Subcontracting Plan be considered an appendix to Book G and therefore exempt from the page count limit?

Government Response:

Section L, Page 4 of 17, Subcontracting Plan (Volume 2, Book G) will be revised from 15 pages to "As Required" pages.

Section L;

Paragraph 2(B)(6)(b)(iii) references Table 2.4; Table 2.3 & 2.4 are missing from the solicitation

Provide Tables 2.3 and 2.4 Government Response:

Tables 2.3 & 2.4 in Section L have been replaced by Section L Attachment 10. Paragraph (iii) will be removed from the Final RFP.

Section L Volume 1 Book B Cost/Price Proposal;

Vol 1 Book B - Cost/Price Proposal - has 50 page limit.

Request changing page count to 'As Required''

Section L of the DRFP states 'The proposal…shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of the Contractor's claims. It further states 'the Government will base its evaluation on only the information presented in the Offeror's written proposal. EGLIN L001, paragraph (J) states that the government intents to evaluate proposals and award without discussion.

That being the case, Contractors must be allowed to provide sufficient data in the Cost/Price volume to clearly substantiate the cost/price assertions.

Government Response:

Section L Volume 1 Book B Cost/Price is a narrative of the pricing tables and will remain at a 50 page limit. Additional clarifying details should be provided with the BOEs. The BOEs will be evaluated as part of the Mission Capability Factor.

Section L Volume 2 Book D IMP/IMS;

Vol 2 Book D - IMP/IMS - has a 50 page limit. This book includes the CWBS/IMP/IMS/BOE information. Request changing page count to 'As Required'

Section L of the DRFP states 'The proposal…shall include sufficient detail for effective evaluation and for substantiating the validity of the Contractor's claims. It further states 'the Government will base its evaluation on only the information presented in the Offeror's written proposal. EGLIN L001, paragraph (J) states that the government intends to evaluate proposals and award without discussion.

That being the case, Contractors must be allowed to provide sufficient data in the Cost/Price volume to clearly substantiate the cost/price assertions.

Section L Volume 2 Book D Plans and Schedules (IMP/IMS) will be changed to "As Required".

Reference Industry Question/Government Response Draft RFP. Section M, 3.0(B) CP-2: Reasonableness How will the Government evaluate cost reasonableness within the LPTA selection process? Will the

Government conduct cost realism analysis and potentially adjust an offeror's price?

Government Response:

Cost reasonableness will be evaluated IAW DoD Source Selection Guide dated Mar 2011 and the definition provided in Section M, Factor 1 Paragraph 3.0(B) Subfactor CP-2, Reasonableness. Cost realism will not be conducted under this source selection.

Various Locations;

Source code and source files are requested

Please clarify what is meant by 'source files' - is this the executable or the source code? As Section M places emphasis on cost as a selection criteria it is to the benefit of the customer to leverage off of contractor intellectual property (limited/restricted/patents) where possible. Consistent with a cost effective approach, please consider using the data rights approach utilized on KC-46 Tanker program, wherein existing Contractor Intellectual Property (IP) is retained by the Contractor and data/source code developed with USG funds is provided as GPR/Unlimited. See the attached CDRL example.

Government Response:

During contract execution, the Government technical team needs access to the OFP source code for safety and other Government technical reviews. The intent of the Government is to procure a production level Technical Data Package with Government Purpose Rights.

General Question: The following documents are referenced to but were not included in the Draft RFP and attachments.

Please provide as soon as possible to support current JMM BRU design efforts..

Government Response:

See below...

1988 Test Procedure - Pacific Missile Test Center Ground Plane Interference (GPI) Testing

Government Response:

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

2YZA00023 - Rev G JSF Air Vehicle Environmental Description Document (EDD)

Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZEU00001-0002A - Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Electrical Power System (EPS) Usage and Test Document

Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

70E993198 Rev D - ICD, SDB System General Arrangement

Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Boeing after contract award.

AS-6113 Rev B - System Performance Specification for the BRU-55/A Aircraft Bomb Ejector Rack

Government Response:

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

Dated 12 December, 2001 - F/A-18 E/F Recommendation for BRU-55 Acoustic Qualification Test Levels and Endurance Test Durations

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response DFAR 5352.247-9005 - Shipping Container Bar Code Numbering

Government Response:

Contractor can acquire from the FAR website via http://farsite.hill.af.mil/

DoN Anti-Tamper Desk Reference - DoN Anti-Tamper Desk Reference

Government Response:

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

F-35 Ordnance Hoist System (OHS) ICD and Drawing - F-35 Ordnance Hoist System (OHS) ICD and Drawing

Government Response:

The SPS does not reference an OHS ICD because it does not exist. IAW the SOW, the Contractor shall establish ACA's to facilitate interacting with Contractors whose participation will be necessary to ensure the successful development of the JMM BRU design and integration with the SDB II and F-35.

Informal Report 26 Mar, 2002 - F/A-18 E/F Vibration Environments for the BRU-55 (with carriage of MK-82

JDAM)

Government Response:

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

IRIG 106-01 - Inter-Range Instrumentation Group (IRIG) Part II Telemetry Networks dated May, 2001

Government Response:

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

IRIG 106-05 - Inter-Range Instrumentation Group (IRIG) 106-05 Part 1: Telemetry Standards Appendices A through M and Chapters 1 through 10 dated July, 2005

Government Response:

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

ITEA Conference 7 Mar, 2001 - F/A-18 E/F Wing Mounted Stores Noise and Vibration Evaluation

Government Response:

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

LMA-MN040 - General Purpose Cleaning Solvent, Low Vapor Pressure

Government Response:

Contractor to obtain commercial document.

MDC A4241 Rev B - F/A-18 E/F Thermal Design and Evaluation

Government Response:

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

OUSD(AT&L) 03 May, 2000 Memorandum - Guidelines for Implementation of AT Techniques in Weapon Systems Acquisition Programs

Government Response:

Government will provide with the Final RFP.

RTCA DO-160 - Environmental Conditions and Test Procedures for Airborne Equipment

Government Response:

This document is available for purchase in the commercial marketplace.

UAI-PSCP-R02 - UAI Compliance Certification Plan Government Response:

UAI-PSCP-R02 is no longer current and has been replaced with UAI-PSCP-R03. Government will

UAI-PSCP-R03 - UAI Compliance Certification Plan Government Response:

Government will provide UAI-PSCP-R03 with the Final RFP.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response UAI-PSICD R03 - Universal Armament Interface Platform/Store Interface Control Document A01

Government provided on DVD with the Draft RFP.

General Question: The following drawings are referenced to but were not included in the Draft RFP and attachments.

Please provide as soon as possible to support current JMM BRU design efforts..

Government Response:

See below...

2ZAV43757-0001 - Drawing: Station 4 Aft Strut Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAV43760-0001 - Drawing: Station 4 Forward Clevis Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43259-0001 - Drawing: Station 4 Aft SDB II Strut Bracket

Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43263-0001 - Drawing: Station 8 SDB II Strut Fitting Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZWH60714-0001 - Drawing: Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAV43758-0001 - Drawing: SDBI Adaptor Bolt Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43252-0001 - Drawing: Station 4 Forward SDB II Strut Brackets

Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43262-0001 - Drawing: Station 4 Forward SDB II Strut Brackets

Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43250-0001 - Drawing: SDBII Adapter Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43261-0001 - Drawing: Station 8 Forward SDB II Strut Brackets

Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZWH60709-0001 - Drawing: HARNESS ASSY Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43773-0002 - Drawing: STRUT BRACKET Station 8 Forward Strut Brackets

Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43763-0002 - Drawing: STRUT BRACKET Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response 2ZAV44601-0004 - Drawing: SE HOIST Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2SJJ03781-0001 - Drawing: SE BRACKET Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43751-0002 - Drawing: ADAPTOR SDB I Adapter Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAH43761-0002 - Drawing: STRUT BRACKET Station 9 Forward Strut Brackets

Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

2ZAV43757-0001 - Drawing: STRUT Station 8 Aft Strut Government Response:

To be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response SOW/CDRLs SOW 2.5.2 Integrated Digital Environment;

The Contractor shall ensure the IDE implements the capability for program management and technical activities to digitally create, store, access, manipulate, share, and exchange programmatic and technical data.

Does the requirement to manipulate programmatic and technical data imply that the Government needs write capability to the Integrated Digital Environment, or is simply a read capability sufficient?

Government Response:

The Government will require the ability to digitally create, store, sort, access, write, share, and exchange programmatic and technical data. The SOW will be updated to reflect this language.

SOW 2.6.7.1 Systems Engineering Technical Reviews (SETRs);

...The Contractor shall conduct the SETRs in accordance with

NAVAIRINST 4355.19D…

Does the Government have a particular Instruction (other than NAVAIRINST 4355.19D) for the entry/ext conditions and expected content of each of the required reviews? Is the direction in paragraph 2.6.3 to brief the requirements traceability at all SETRs apply to each of the required reviews in paragraph 2.6.7.1? Similarly, is the direction in paragraph 2.6.4 to review the status of CAIV activities at all SETRs also apply to each of the required reviews in paragraph 2.6.7.1, or the direction in paragraph 2.6.7.4 to provide a TRA at each SETR?

Government Response:

NAVAIRINST 4355.19D is the only governing instruction for the entry/exit criteria and expected content for each SETR event. As defined in the SOW, requirements traceability status must be briefed at all SETR events. Similarly, the status review of CAIV activities must be briefed at all SETR events.

SOW requirements remain for requirements traceability, CAIV activities, and TRA reviews at all SETR events.

SOW Paragraph 2.6.7.5 Technology Maturation Plan (TMP) states: "The Contractor shall develop, resource, and implement a TMP to mature the JMM BRU system, subsystems, and critical technologies to achieve a Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of 6 by PDR and a TRL 8 by the System Verification Review (SVR)."

RFP Section L B.2 under Book B states: "...ensure each of the subsystems and interfaces achieve technology (system and subsystem) readiness level (TRL) of 6 at JMM BRU Preliminary Design Review (PDR) and TRL 7 at JMM BRU System Verification Review (SVR)." and "...shall identify the Offeror's plan to mature the current performance capabilities to the level necessary to achieve TRL 6 (system and subsystem) at JMM BRU PDR and TRL 7 at JMM BRU SVR."

The SOW states that a TRL of 8 is required at the SVR event and the RFP Section L for Book B states that a TRL of 7 is required at SVR. Please confirm that TRL 7 is required at SVR.

Government Response:

The Government requires TRL 8 at System Verification Review in accordance with the Systems Engineering Plan and Statement of Work. Section L & M will be corrected to reflect TRL 8.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response SOW 2.6.19 Modular Open Systems Architecture (MOSA);

...Secure or classified data systems shall also conform to the modular design approach…

Will SCG be delivered with RFP Government Response:

The Government will deliver the Security Classification Guide with the Final RFP.

SOW 2.6.23.2 Environmental Design Criteria (EDC);

The Contractor shall trace all the requirements from the JMM BRU EDC to the JMM BRU PEC using DOORS.

Possible Typo in the third sentence read " It should read . . . from the JMM BRU PEC to the JMM BRU EDC using DOORS."

Government Response:

Agree and the change will be made in the Final RFP.

SOW 2.6.24.3 JMM BRU Telemetry Does the government plan to make available the referenced telemetry packs to be used during JMM BRU testing?

Government Response:

The Government will not provide a telemetry and data recording kit. The Contractor is to provide the telemetry and data recording kit capability.

SOW 2.14.5 Protection of DoD Information;

Multiple documents spelled out

Will these documents be provided with formal RFP Government Response:

All documents were provided with the Draft RFP and will be reissued with the Final RFP. DoDi 8520.2 identified in the SOW will be changed to DoDi 8520.02 to reflect the latest version.

SOW 2.14.6 Protection of Non-DoD Information Systems;

The Contractor shall comply with Assistant Secretary of Defense (ASD) Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 08-027 Change 2…

Will these documents be provided with formal RFP Government Response:

Assistant Secretary of Defense (ASD) Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 08-027 Change 2 was provided with the Draft RFP and will be reissued with the Final RFP. The title of the file will be updated to reflect "ASD DTM 08-027 Change 2".

SOW 2.15 Program Protection Plan (PPP);

In the event the Contractor requires clarification of the PPP or annexes, the Contractor shall request such clarification in writing to the JMM BRU Procuring Contracting Officer no later than 30 calendar days from receipt of the PPP, its annexes, or any associated updates.

Will the Program Protection Plan be included with the RFP?

Government Response:

The initial Program Protection Plan will not be provided with the RFP, but will be provided at contract award.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response SOW 3.6.4 Design "Establish by program phase a CAIV baseline based on System Life Cycle Cost Elements"

How does the government intend to evaluate a CAIV with Life Cycle Cost Elements against the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable selection process when any technical offerings to reduce LCC are not recognized. Please clarify.

Government Response:

Cost As An Independent Variable (CAIV) activities will not be evaluated as part of the Cost/Price Factor. The JMM BRU Prime Contractor is required to perform CAIV activities during the design process in accordance with the SOW.

SOW paragraph 3.6.21.4 and Reference to B006 therein;

SOW paragraph states: "The Contractor shall deliver revisions to software, data, and software updates in accordance with the

DAL."

-B006 CDRL - Data Accession List (DAL), Block 16.

Requirements states: "Includes but not limited to…"

SOW - Please clarify what is meant by software, data and software updates?

B006 - Please clarify what is meant by the open ended statement.

Government Response:

SOW - The SOW paragraph 3.6.21.4 defines what is meant by software, data, and software updates.

B006 - The statement includes the minimum required documents to support the program. The Government requires access to relevant Contractor documents, as identified in the SOW, that are generated in their normal course of business in support of the JMM BRU contract.

CDRLS: A001,B001,C001,D001 & E001;

Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) Data Item - The first and all subsequent CDRL deliveries are requested to be delivered 12 working days after the end of the accounting month.

- Request to change the delivery to the 25th of the month following the accounting month end

CDRL requirements, as stated, would risk including current month end prime contractor data and previous month end supplier data in the same submittal.

Additional time is requested to align with Contractor month end data processing and allow time for schedule integration between prime and subcontractor.

Government Response:

CDRLs will be updated to indicate a delivery date of the 30 calendar days following the accounting month end.

CDRL A002, B002, C002, D002 & E002;

Contractor Performance Report Data Item - The first and all subsequent CDRL deliveries are requested to be delivered 12 working days after the end of the accounting month.

- Request to change the delivery to the 25th of the month following the accounting month end

CDRL requirements, as stated, would risk including current month end prime contractor data and previous month end supplier data in the same submittal.

Additional time is requested to align with Contractor month end data processing and allow time for schedule integration between prime and subcontractor.

Government Response:

CDRLs will be updated to indicate a delivery date of the 30 calendar days following the accounting month end.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response Exhibit A-E CDRL A004-E004;

Cost Data Summary report (DD Form 1921)

- Please delete CDRL A004

CDSR is mandatory on ACAT1 and ACAT 1A Programs. Since JMM BRU is an ACAT-III program and CDSR is not mandatory, it may be more cost effective to remove the requirement.

Government Response:

CDRL A004, B004, C004, D004, & E004 will be deleted in the Final RFP. CDRL numbers will be "RESERVED". The SOW will be updated to reflect the deletion of the tasking.

Attachment 1 JMM BRU Statement of Work (SOW) Appendix 2 JMM BRU CSDR Plan;

CSDR Plan (SOW Appendix 02) JMM BRU CSDR Plan -indentifies requirement for DD 1921 and 1921-1;

CDRL A004 only requests the 1921.

- Please clarify

If CDRL A004 is required, then clarification is required for the submittal of the 1921-1 form.

Government Response:

CDRL A004, B004, C004, D004, & E004 will be deleted in the Final RFP. CDRL numbers will be "RESERVED". The SOW will be updated to reflect the deletion of the tasking.

SOW Appendix 6, DFDDP paragraph 3.7.3 - Software and Firmware Data (also called out in DFDD Package Checklist

CRD3);

Software Deliverables

Please clarify what is meant by OFP source files - is this the executable or the source code? As Section M places emphasis on cost as a selection criteria it is to the benefit of the customer to leverage off of contractor intellectual property (limited/restricted/patents) where possible. Consistent with a cost effective approach, please consider using the data rights approach utilized on KC-46 Tanker program, wherein existing Contractor Intellectual Property (IP) is retained by the Contractor and data/source code developed with USG funds is provided as GPR/Unlimited. See the attached CDRL, paragraph 5.0.

Government Response:

During contract execution, the Government technical team needs access to the OFP source code for safety and other Government technical reviews. The intent of the Government is to procure a production level Technical Data Package with Government Purpose Rights.

SOW Appendix 8;

List of test assets

Will the JTV, JTV+, STV, STV+,GTV's be provided as GFE, or provide data to support procurement

The Government is responsible to provide all non-JMM BRU flight test hardware.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response Attachment 1 JMM BRU Statement of Work (SOW) and SOW Appendix 9 SPVP Outline

Attachment 1 JMM BRU Statement of Work Appendix 9 SPVP Outline references an Appendix F “Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs) Identifies KPPs, KSAs, CTPs, and COIs, and gives a cross-reference to SPVP sections that describe how each MOE is verified.” But the attachment included as the Appendix 9 SPVP Outline does not mention Appendix F. Is Appendix F required as part of the SPVP with the proposal?

Government Response:

The Appendix F reference for the SPVP Outline is no longer required. The SOW Appendix 9 SPVP Outline has been updated to remove any reference to Appendix F. The updated SOW Appendix 9 SPVP Outline will be provided with the Final RFP.

SOW Appendix 10 PIT Risk Approval PRA Tool.xlsm The Appendix 10 attachment contains a link to an external reference that causes an Error when opening the document. Is the external reference needed for this proposal?

Government Response:

The PIT Risk Approval PRA Tool external reference is required for the proposal. The link was corrected and the SOW Appendix has been replaced with an updated version that does not contain the error.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response

SPS

Does the Government intend to identify ejection stroke length?

Government Response:

The Government does not intend to define the stroke length. The vendor shall define stroke length based on design solution to the performance requirements. An example of one of the requirements from the SPS is provided.

3.3.3.4.1 Weapon S&RA General Operations

a. The weapon S&RA shall be designed to have physical clearance, when fully extended without a SDB weapon present, to allow operations of all adjacent aircraft structures (e.g. Weapon’s bay door(s)).

Attachment 2 JMM BRU System Performance Specification (SPS), Section 3.2.2.1 Aircraft Employment AND Systems Engineering Plan (SEP), Section 3.2.2.1 of the SPS states that the carriage system shall be capable of both internal and external carriage (Table 1) on 11 different platforms (Table 2) with no indication of threshold versus objective requirements.

The SEP (pg 18) states, "The focus of meeting the objective aircraft requirements was limited to environmental design criteria. This decision was based on the fact that most of the environmental design requirements were being driven by the DoN's F-35 and F/A-18E/F. The existing BRU-61/A in inventory will meet the multi-carriage bomb rack need for the USAF SDB II program."

The SEP states that the JMM BRU design for the F-35 and F/A-18E/F will meet the needs for all other aircraft. Without a clear definition of Threshold vs Objective aircraft in the SPS and to avoid the costly analysis required to confirm the JMM BRU design to every aircraft in Table 2, will the government please confirm that designing the JMM BRU to meet the environmental and performance specifications for the F-35 and F/A-18E/F will satisfy all requirements?

Government Response:

Per SPS Section 3.2.2, the requirement is to design the JMM BRU to meet its performance requirements carried on any of the aircraft identified in Table 2 throughout the flight envelopes as identified in Table 3 and environments as identified in the PEC. Analysis is to be used to determine the composite environmental design criteria. The design qualification program verifies performance compliance with the composite environment criteria. Only F-35 B and F-35 C aircraft integration and flight testing will be accomplished during this contract.

JMM BRU SPS 3.2.3.1 c. The carriage system shall be physically capable of carriage operations (suspension and release) from the host aircraft pylons or parent bomb racks listed in Table 5 without modifications to the pylon or parent rack.

Does "without modification" mean that platforms other than F-35 will use only the lug attachments and sway braces with no other attachment or adapters?

Government Response:

The JMM BRU must contain the lug attachments, swaybraces, and strut interfaces that are identified on the Lot 6 BRU-61/A. This allows for 14 or 30 inch suspension lug support, swaybrace pads that accommodate the parent pylons and S&RE systems identified in Table 5 and the strut attachment hardware identified in Lockheed Martin draft document 2ZAU10210. Any adapters necessary to ensure that the JMM BRU SDB weapon system captive carriage or release operations on aircraft other than the F-35 must be addressed at the time of integration for those specific aircraft. Those potential aircraft integration activities are not included as part of the JMM BRU solicitation.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response SPS, 3.2.3.2 Carriage-to-Aircraft Electrical Interface, "a. The carriage system electrical interface with the host aircraft shall be in accordance with MIL-STD 1760 Class II requirements to the extent required by the F-35B and F-35C aircraft as described in the Joint Strike Fighter Store Certification Guide (JSF JSCG)." The Joint Strike Fighter Joint Service Store Certification Guide Phase II, (1/6/2006), does not clearly specify which 1760 Class II requirements apply.

Please specify which 1760 Class II requirements apply.

Government Response:

The Government requires the JMM BRU to meet MIL-STD-1760E Class II requirements. The specific MIL-STD-1760E Class II pin usage will be determined via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award.

JMM BRU SPS 3.2.3.4 c. The carriage system mechanical interface with the SDB weapon shall comply with applicable approved Interface Control Notices (ICNs).

Will the referenced ICNs be provided with the RFP?

Government Response:

The SPS anticipated the potential for mechanical ICNs. Currently, there are no applicable approved mechanical ICNs or draft ICNs to provide with the Final RFP.

SPS, 3.3.1.3 System Operational Readiness, para b. - The requirement to be fully operational within 20 minutes shall be throughout the operating environments identified in the JMM BRU PEC including aircraft ground bases up to 5,000 ft above mean sea level.

Suggest to add the following to clarify the requirement - The time to fully charge the stored energy source from a fully discharged state (system pressure equal to ambient atmospheric pressure) shall not exceed 20 minutes after application of electrical power. The rack shall be capable of achieving the 20-minute pressurization requirement under all temperature conditions specified in the PEC at altitudes up to 5,000 feet above mean sea level. At altitudes above 5,000 feet, the system shall maintain operating pressure under all environmental conditions of the PEC.

Government Response:

The requirements will remain as stated in the SPS. The restatement as proposed does not fully address all performance considerations. Stored energy system performance is not the only concern and system pressure cannot be the sole focus of the readiness requirement. The performance requirement applies to all JMM BRU subsystems and components not just the stored energy system.

SPS 3.3.2.2 Pneumatic Stored Energy System Unique Requirements

To address any inability to achieve the 15 ppm requirement for water contamination and effects of stress corrosion due to water condensation, should the entirety of paragraph 5.1.7.3.i of MIL-STD 2088 be applied for both self contained and external pressure vessel filling of the proposed pneumatic ejection system? Recommend all requirements of referenced subparagraph i of MIL STD 2088 be incorporated into SPS 3.3.2.2.1 and 3.3.2.2.2.

Government Response:

The Government has reviewed MIL-STD-2088 and determined that for JMM BRU designs using pneumatic systems, only paragraph 3.3.2.2.2.e is applicable.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response Attachment 2 JMM BRU System Performance Specification (SPS), Section 3.3.3.4 Weapon and S&RA Operations, Sub Section 3.3.3.4.1, para e. The weapon S&RAs shall provide departure control of the SDB weapon throughout its extension to ensure that the SDB weapon remains within the weapon “1 inch plus 10 degree fall line” envelopes as defined in paragraph

3.3.4 of the F-35 JMM BRU GBU-53/B PSICD Addendum Volume I, 2ZAU10210.

1) Being that the design for JMM BRU has been constrained within the OML and Mass Properties of the legacy BRU-61/A, please confirm that the government will assume responsibility for meeting the fit and clearance specifications for weapon to weapon and weapon to aircraft. For example, the clearance issue between the AMMRAM on the inboard weapons bay door of the F-35B and the aft inboard SDB II.

2) Does the government anticipate incorporating waivers to the existing requirements for weapons bay clearances in the F-35B/C to accommodate the JMM BRU with a full load of 4 SDB II weapons?

3) Will the government please provide the drawings including the "Blob of Bombs" analysis that depict the fits and clearances within the weapons bay of the F-35 as soon as possible?

Government Response:

1) The Government assumes the responsibility for static fit within the F-35 weapons bay if the Contractor's JMM BRU meets the OML requirement as stated in the JMM BRU SPS. The Contractor is responsible for the physical properties of the JMM BRU such that under operational conditions the JMM BRU will not interfere with the operations of the aircraft or other air to air or air to ground stores as required by the SPS and that the JMM BRU provides adequate departure control of the SDB I or SDB II weapons to achieve weapon safe separation. The Contractor's JMM BRU design, through stiffness or other means must ensure departure control to achieve safe separation of all weapon stations.

2) The Government will incorporate waivers as currently required for static fit. No waivers are anticipated for the dynamic fall envelope.

3)Lockheed Martin draft document 2ZAU10210, provided with the DRFP that identifies the information available to ensure SDB II remains within the volume for safe separation. A "Blob of Bombs" analysis that includes JMM BRU or BRU-61 with SDB II weapons does not exist.

JMM BRU SPS 3.3.3.4.5 c. The weapon S&RA EOS pitch rate control shall provide pitch rate and variable range of pitch rate settings to ensure capture of controlled flight for miniature munitions identified in Table 1 throughout the aircraft flight envelopes in Table 3.

The pitch rate settings to ensure Capture of Controlled Flight are undefined. Request the government provide the pitch rate setting requirements as soon as possible to support current JMM BRU design efforts?

Government Response:

SPS para 3.3.3.4.5 provides selectable pitch rate range settings. Safe separation weapon pitch rates must be established following contract award via an ACA with the SDB II and F-35 Contractors. IAW the SOW, the Contractor shall establish ACA's to facilitate interacting with Contractors whose participation will be necessary to ensure the successful development of the JMM BRU design and integration with the SDB II and F-35.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response JMM BRU SPS 3.3.3.4.10 c. Carriage system reaction forces imparted to the aircraft shall not exceed the mechanical interface restrictions identified in the F-35 JMM BRU GBU-53/B PSICD Addendum Volume I, 2ZAU10210.

2ZAU10210 3.5.1 Separation Loads is TBD. When will the load data be made available? Request as soon as possible to support current JMM BRU design efforts.

Government Response:

The data will be available to the selected JMM BRU Contractor following contract award. IAW the SOW, the Contractor shall establish ACA's to facilitate interacting with Contractors whose participation will be necessary to ensure the successful development of the JMM BRU design and integration with the SDB II and F-35.

JMM BRU SPS 3.3.4.1 b. The carriage system shall be compatible with the equipment identified in Table 6 without modifications to these items.

When will the ICD and drawing for the F-35 Ordnance Hoist System (OHS) be made available? Request as soon as possible to support current JMM BRU design efforts.

Government Response:

There is no ICD for the OHS. IAW the SOW, the Contractor shall establish ACA's to facilitate interacting with Contractors whose participation will be necessary to ensure the successful development of the JMM BRU design and integration with the SDB II and F-35.

JMM BRU SPS 3.3.4.1 b. The carriage system shall be compatible with the equipment identified in Table 6 without modifications to these items.

When will these ICDs be made available? Request as soon as possible to understand any impacts to current design efforts.

Government Response:

The ICDs, drawings, or actual hardware, as applicable, will be available after contract award.

JMM BRU SPS 3.3.4.1 b. The carriage system shall be compatible with the equipment identified in Table 6 without modifications to these items.

How is the Universal Bomb Lifting Bar going to be used in conjunction with the JMM BRU or the SDB?

Government Response:

It will be used as an alternative means to mechanically lift the JMM BRU using the 14 or 30 inch suspension lugs.

JMM BRU SPS 3.3.4.1 b. The carriage system shall be compatible with the equipment identified in Table 6 without modifications to these items. Below Table 6 Note: It is recognized that additional adaptor cables and software updates may be required for CMBRE, CAATS, or Wraparound Test Set (A/E32M-96). It is recognized that Government approved SE adapters may be required for operations using SHOLS, MJ-1 MJ-40, MHU-83 and other general purpose handling and support equipment.

The note below Table 6 contradicts 3.3.4.1 b. Is the note correct and the requirement needs to be modified or deleted? Please clarify.

Government Response:

The notes allow for use of adapters, etc. to interface between the JMM BRU and test and support equipment. These adapters are not considered to be modifications to the items in Table 6. It is anticipated that adapters and software updates will be required in order for the test equipment to be able to communicate with the JMM BRU via standard aircraft 1553 interface and Joint Miniature Munitions Interface (JMMI) Enhanced Bit Rate (EBR) 1553 interface.

Reference Industry Question/Government Response JMM BRU SPS 3.3.4.2 Weapons Loading Requirements a. JMM BRU shall include physical interfaces compatible with current handling operations using the equipment identified in Table 6.

Would the government please provide the Airborne Weapons/Stores Loading Manuals for the F-35 and F/A-18E/F in order to comply with this requirement?

Government Response:

The F-35 weapon loading information can be acquired via ACA with Lockheed Martin after contract award. The F/A-18 E/F weapon loading manual will be made available after contract award.

SPS 3.3.4.2 Weapons Loading Requirements;

k. The JMM BRU shall accommodate the potential hook-lug entry angles expected during loading and downloading operations.

Clarify the loading procedure to determine entry angles Government Response:

The Loading procedures will be determined based on the JMM BRU design.

SPS 3.3.5.5.2 “Separate Events” Operation Do paragraphs 3.3.5.5.2 & 3.3.5.5.3 represent two alternatives to the safety interlock requirement of 3.3.5.5 Government Response:

"Separate Events" operation must be used for ground safety interlock operations. "Separate Events" or "Simultaneous Events" operation may be used for safety interlock operations during flight.

SPS 3.3.5.5.3 “Simultaneous Events” Operation Do paragraphs 3.3.5.5.2 & 3.3.5.5.3 represent two alternatives to the safety interlock requirement of 3.3.5.5 Government Response:

"Simultaneous Events" operation shall not be used for ground safety interlock operations. "Separate Events" or "Simultaneous Events" operation may be used for safety interlock operations during flight.

SPS, 3.3.7.3.1, General BIT and Reprogramming, c. "The carriage system shall be capable of conducting Built-In-Test (BIT) of its operational readiness sufficient to ensure the system’s capability to meet its mission performance requirements."

Please provide a list of carriage functions to be tested by BIT.

Government Response:

BIT coverage is to be determined based on the Contractor's design and reliability of components/functions as established through design reviews and analyses (FMECA, FTAs, etc.).

SPS,3.3.7.3.2, BIT Coverage and Effectiveness, e. "BIT fault detection shall be no less than 75% of the total carriage failure rate."

Reference to failure rate is not clear.