Attachment_2_Bidders_Question_response_4.pdf

DATE

QUESTION

NO.

RFP REFERENCE/DISCUSSION (if necessary) QUESTION government response

12/12/2014 1

Section B, Note A: Spares CLINS contain Note A (2009-14; 3009-14; 4009-

14). These CLINS are for various spares. Note A states “The CLINs are unpriced at award. Following delivery of the TDP the spares list will be finalized and priced. Section B prices will be established prior to option exercise.”

Does this mean we are not supposed to price these under this competitive procurement?

Do not price spares under this competitive procurement.

12/12/2014 2

Section B, CLIN 2007, Provisioned Item Order: There is no SOW Reference.

The only place in the SOW that references CLIN 2007 is under 3.2.5

Obsolescence and Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Material

Shortages (DMSMS) Management and Support. There are many CLINS referenced under this SOW paragraph as well. DFARs PGI 217.7601 states that Provisioned Items Order means an undefinitized order issued under a contract that includes the Government’s requirements for provisioned items. (Provisioned items with firm prices are acquired by supplemental agreement or by separate contract).

Please advise what is expected to be bid here.

Do not price the PIO line under this competitive procurement.

12/12/2014 3

Page 141 of RFP, paragraphs b- f: Rates Summary (Worksheet 2f), there are conflicts between the information contained in this paragraph and what is identified in notation at the bottom of Worksheet 2f included in

Attachment 1.

See 3A and 3B answers.

12/12/2014 3A

A) RFP states in paragraphs b-e on page 141 that “All rates must be linked to a single source (Solicitation Attachment, Worksheet 2f) so that an adjustment of the rates stated in the source worksheet 2f will automatically result in an adjustment to all the cost summaries.” However in Attachment 1, Worksheet 2f at the bottom it states “Prepare one of these forms as needed for each CLIN as applicable” indicating that separate rate worksheets are required.

May we provide one consolidated rate worksheet?

Yes, please submit one consolidated rate worksheet for all CLINs. Ensure that any adjustments of the rates in the source worksheet

2f will automatically result in an adjustment to all the cost summaries.

12/12/2014 3B

B) RFP states in paragraph f that “Offerors shall round direct labor rates

($) to two (2) decimals to the right of the decimal point (hundredths position). Offerors shall round ratios and factors to no more than five (5) decimal places to the right of the decimal point (billionths position)”.

However in Attachment 1, Worksheet 2f at the bottom it states “Round cost values to whole dollars, Round Rates to two decimal points and G&A and FCCM to three decimal points.”

Please advise if we are required to round factors other than direct labor rates to three or five decimal places.

Please round factors other than direct labor to three decimal places. The RFP will be revised.

12/12/2014 4

Section L, Clause HQ L-2-0017 SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND CMMI OR

EQUIVALENT EXPERIENCE (Page 151 of RFP): Number of months for software experience is blank.

Is there a time frame within which cited experience must fall? The offeror shall provide SW Development and

CMMI or equivalent experience for five (5) years or 60 months. The solicitation will be revised.

12/12/2014 5

Section L, Clause HQ L-2-0017 SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND CMMI OR

EQUIVALENT EXPERIENCE (Page 151 of RFP): Page count limit for CMMI® or equivalent model-based process maturity appraisals performed is blank.

Is there a page-count limit beyond the technical volume page-count limit?

No, the page count limit is included as part of the technical volume page count limit.

12/12/2014 6 Section L, Clause HQ L-2-0016 SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (Page 151 of RFP): Page count limit for SDP rationale is left blank.

Is there a page-count limit beyond the technical volume page-count limit?

No

12/12/2014 7

Section L, paragraph L.1.5 (page 127) and Section L, Clause HQ L-2-0013

SPECIAL PROPOSAL RECEIPT REQUIREMENTS (NAVSEA) (ALTERNATE I)

(page 150): These state, respectively, "Only hand delivered...proposals...will be accepted" and "It is recommended that proposals be mailed in accordance with RFP instructions.

Which paragraph is correct? Follow L.1.5.

12/12/2014 8

SOW 3.2.6.1 states "After successful completion of PDR, the Contractor shall fabricate EDMs with associated …." There is no mention of limitations on EDM material procurement (long lead or otherwise) prior or post

PDR.RFP.

Can EDM material (long lead or otherwise) be procured prior to PDR?

Offeror shall use their discretion.

12/12/2014 9 Section C, 2.1: Section references MIL-STD-881C, Work Breakdown

Structures for Defense Materiel Items, 03 Oct 2011.

Does the Government have a standard

WBS it wishes to use or shall

Contractor's develop their own in accordance with MIL-STD-881C, and if so, which appendix?

The offeror shall use their discretion when developing their own WBS. Please be cognizant of

MIL-STD-881C Appendix B and the CSDR manual

(http://dcarc.cape.osd.mil/Files/Policy/500004m1

.pdf).

INS-R ISM Solicitation N00024-15-R-5226 Questions

12/12/2014 10 Section F, CLIN 3003: Section lists production submarine LRIP units as 4 and an additional 4 units appeared to be listed.

Please confirm that this is a typo since

Section B appears to show only 4 units.

CLIN 3003 is for four (4) Submarine Production

Units. The solicitation will be revised accordingly.

12/12/2014 11 Section B: CLIN 3003 and 3008 are not listed as optional in Section B. Please confirm this omission as a typo.

Yes, this omission is a typo. The solicitation will be revised.

12/12/2014 12 Section F (CLIN 0002, 1002, 1003, etc.): Delivery of units (EDMs, PPUs, etc.) have one delivery date per CLIN.

Are all units ordered to be delivered by the stated CLIN date, or is the date specified for the first unit?

The RFP will be revised as follows: CLIN 0002 QTY changes from 7 to 3; CLIN 0002 Delivery changes to 12 months ADC; CLIN 0003 Delivery changes to

12 months ADC; CLIN 0010 "EDM" Option is added with a QTY of 4; CLIN 0010 Delivery is 9 months ADOE; CLIN 1003 Delivery changes from 6 months ADOE to 9 months ADOE. All units are to be delivered by the stated CLIN date.

12/12/2014 13 SOW 3.2.7.4 requests contractor support for the EQT.

For proposal pricing and scheduling purposes, what is the USG’s anticipated duration of EQT?

The anticipated duration of EQT is 12 months.

Support is level of effort.

12/12/2014 14

SOW 3.2.8 desires the FCA 30 days prior to the TRR. NAVSEA Technical

Review Manual implies a sequence of an FCA following a TRR.

Furthermore, SOW para 3.2.9 indicates the PCA is 30d prior to PRR. PRR is subsequent to EQT. Hence, the FCA is conducted on a pre-production baseline and the PCA is conducted on a Post EQT baseline.

Is this the USN intent? yes.

12/12/2014 15 Section H 52.217-9 OPTION TO EXTEND THE TERM OF THE CONTRACT

(MAR 2000)

For proposal pricing and scheduling purposes, can the Government provide anticipated option exercise dates?

See Section F of the Solicitation

12/12/2014 16

Section L, L.4.1 Volume I: Offer/Administrative (11) states that one complete unclassified copy of proposal in .pdf format must be submitted with Volume 1.

Is this a copy of the Prime proposal or subcontractor proposal(s)? If the Prime

Proposal, will this be one .pdf file containing all 5 volumes?

The Government does not understand this question.

12/12/2014 17

Section L, L.4.1 Volume I: Offer/Administrative (12) states that one complete copy of classified annex in .pdf format (if required) must be submitted with Volume 1.

How can this be done and keep Volume

I unclassified?

Please submit on two separate CDs.

12/12/2014 18 SOW 3.2.14.1 indicates that the USG will provide written approval after the

PDR before the contractor can commence fabrication of the ten EDMs.

How much time is anticipated for the written approval to be provided?

The TRM (GFI) states 5 days max.

12/12/2014 19 Section L, L.4.4 Volume IV: Cost Summary requires a Small Business

Subcontracting Plan.

Is this the same item as required under

L.4.1 (8)?

yes

12/12/2014 20 SOW 3.2.14.2 indicates that the USG will provide written approval after the

CDR before the contractor can commence fabrication of the PPUs.

How much time is anticipated for the written approval to be provided?

The TRM (GFI) states 5 days max.

12/12/2014 21

Section L, L.4.1 Volume I: Offer/Administrative & L.4.4 Volume IV: Cost

Summary: RFP requests Section B to be included in three separate sections of the proposal Volume I (4), RFP pg 132; Volume IV (1.1), RFP pg 139; and

Volume IV (3.1), RFP pg 142.

Are these all duplicates?

Please submit Section B with Volume IV RFP pg

139. The solicitation will be revised accordingly.

12/12/2014 22 Section L, L.4.4 Volume IV Solicitation Package 1.3 requires a "Staffing Plan

(same as Volume III)". Vol. III is Past Performance.

Is this a typo? There is staffing information identified under Volume II

Technical Factor 3. Request clarification as to if these are the same?

Section L.4.4 Volume IV, 1.3 title will be revised to

"Staffing Plan (same as Volume II, Factor 3 Section

F" in the solicitation amendment.

12/12/2014 23 Section L, L.4.4 Volume IV, Cost Summary, para. 3.8, references an

Attachment J-10, which was not found with the RFP.

Please provide Attachment J-10.

This is a typo. The solicitation will be revised from

Attachment J-10 to Solicitation Attachment 1

12/12/2014 24 SOW 3.2.14.3 states that the TEMP is exit criteria for the TRR.

Is the TEMP equivalent to the Master

Test Plan of CDRL A0021 (since there is no TEMP identified in the RFP)?

The Master Test Plan identified in CDRL A0021 is not equivalent to the TEMP.

12/12/2014 25 SOW 3.2.6.1 indicates that “one EDM H/W & S/W element will be delivered in place.”

Is this intended to mean one EDM unit in each the surface and subsurface configuration will be retained by the contractor? If not, which configuration makes up the remaining nine units delivered to the TDA?

Yes.

12/12/2014 26

SOW 3.2.14.1 indicates the contractor may not start fabricating the EDMs until at least the completion of the PDR. Then Paragraph 3.2.6.1 indicates that the EDM must meet the requirements of the TRD before delivery of the balance of the EDMs to the TDA. CLINs 0002 and 0003 indicates that the EDMs will be delivered at 9 months after contract award. This implies that 10 units will be fabricated and all TRD requirements will be satisfied in a maximum of 6 months for two different application configurations

(Surface and subsurface).

Is this a correct interpretation of the

RFP expectations?

Please see the modified CLIN Structure discussed in the Question 12 answer and the revised RFP.

The Government's expectation is that 6 units will be fabricated and all TRD requirements will be satisfied in a maximum of 9 months for two different application configurations.

12/12/2014 27

SOW 3.2.6.1: The SOW uses the term “functional and performance requirements of the TRD.” Section 3.2 of the TRD list “Functional

Characteristics” requirements. Section 3.3 list “Navigation Performance” requirements.

Do these two sections embrace the complete understanding of the

“functional and performance” requirements indicated through the

SOW? If not, what requirements in the

TRD are not considered functional or performance requirements?

Yes.

12/12/2014 28

The TRD does not distinguish between requirements to be met for the

EDM or for the PPUs or for the LRIP configurations. Yet there will be at least three developmental configurations of both surface and subsurface configurations of presumable maturing design compliance. Additionally, Para 3.2.6.2 indicates the USN will conduct Environment Qualification

Testing (EQT) on the PPU configuration. These environmental requirements are presumed to be section 3.10 of the TRD. It appears that at least the TRD requirements of para 3.10 are not compliance criteria for at least the EDM.

Are there any other requirements of the TRD whose compliance before the

Post-EQT configurations will be relaxed?

The contractor shall address the requirements outlined in the SOW and the TRD as stated at each stage of this procurement.

12/12/2014 29

Technical Requirements Document paragraph 3.6.1 states “The ISM HW element primary input power shall accept 48 VDC, and require no more than 500 watts.”. However, INS-R Navigation Processor Module Data

Sheet paragraph 4.1 states “The NPM Power Distribution Assembly shall distribute 200 Watts (W) at 48 VDC to the ISM HW Element.”

Which is correct? 500 watts peak. 200 watts nominal.

12/12/2014 30

Technical Requirements Document paragraph 3.5.2 regarding size refers to

NAVSEA drawings 807-7100685, 807-7100696 and TRD Appendices B (ISM, Surface, Mounting and Space Requirements Sheets 1 and 2) and C ISM, Submarine, Mounting and Space Requirements Sheets 1, 2, AND 3. The

NAVSEA drawings appear not to be included in the bidder’s library and the appendices embedded in the TRD PDF file provided in the library cannot be opened.

Will the cited NAVSEA drawings be provided to bidders? Will viewable versions of the cited appendices be provided to bidders?

Please use the INS-R ICDs vs the NAVSEA drawings. TRD appendices will be emailed to

Offerors which requested the competition library on 12-23-2014. These files should be handled in accordance with the terms of use letter. Any discrepencies between the Appendices and the

INS-R ICDs, the INS-R ICDs take presidence.

12/12/2014 31

Section F CLIN 2001 is the successful completion of the Production

Readiness Review (PRR). CLINs 2002 and 2003 are for the delivery of Low

Rate Initial Production (LRIP) units. SOW Para 3.2.14.4 indicates that PRR will be considered successful when the contractor demonstrates a

Manufacturing Readiness Level (MRL) of 9 or above. The Department of

Defense defines MRL level 9 (nine) in association with authorization for Full

Rate Production including the LRIP cost targets have been met. The

Department of Defense definition of MRL Level 8 (eight) is associated with

LRIP authorization and readiness for a Milestone C decision.

Is SOW Para 3.2.14.4 reference to MRL

9 the intention of the RFP?

The requirement is MRL 8. SOW paragraph will be changed accordingly.