Consolidated_OMS_questions_ _comments__responses_29_Sep_15.pdf

Document / RFP Section or Attachment Number

Section/Paragraph Page Requirement Description / Clause or Definitive Citation Requiring Clarification Offeror’s Comment/Question Government’s Responses

RFP

Section I

52.215-9

Changes or Additions to Make-or-Buy Program

Please consider deletion of this clause as it is not applicable.

This clause is to be used in solicitations and contracts when it is contemplated that a make or buy plan will be incorporated in a firm fixed price FFP or cost plus fixed fee (CPFF) contract and Alt II when the plan will be incorporated in a cost plus incentive fee (CPIF) contract

Section I

252.225-7038

Restriction on Acquisition of Air Circuit Breakers

Please review applicability of this clause.

This clause has been deleted.

3 RFP

Section I 252.232-7007 124 Limitation of Government’s Obligation

Please consider deletion of this clause as FFP Orders CLIN would not be incrementally funded.

Section K

52.227-15 151 Representation of Limited Rights Data and Restricted Computer Software

Please delete as applicable DFAR clause(s) are included in the RFP.

“X” has been removed in Amendment 1.

5 RFP

Section L 52.215-20 165

Requirements for Cost or Pricing Data or Information Other Than Cost or Pricing Data

Request deletion of requirements for certified cost or pricing data given the expectation for adequate price competition in accordance with FAR 15.403-1.

6 RFP

Section L 52.222-46 165

Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees

Please indicate where in the proposal the total compensation plan should be provided. It is not evident in Section L.

This information should be captured within the Cost Volume of the proposal.

7 RFP

Section M

Section M paragraph 2.5 Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Participation (Sub-Factor)

Section M paragraph 2.5 Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Participation (Sub-Factor)

Please verify this section should be number 2.6 to be consistent with proposal structure.

RFP updated as paragraph “2.6”

8 RFP

Section B

Section B Small Business Participation and Small Business Subcontracting Incentive

64-65

The SBSIF described in this clause is available for Items 0001 and (if options are exercised) 0101, 0201, 0301, 0401 and 0501), if and to the extent the option is exercised.

Should all references to the SBSIF applicability to CLIN 0001 be changed to reflect applicability to CLIN 0002?

RFP updated as “The SBSIF is applicable to Items 0001 and (if options are exercised) 0002, 0101, 0201, 0203, 0204, 0301, 0303, 0401, 0403, 0501, and 0503).”

9 RFP

Section C

Section C TI-20 OMS Systems for VA New Construction

When engineering changes are incorporated into production units, the Contractor is required to conduct Design Verification Tests and supportability analysis and provide updated source data to support the enhancements as identified in the Attachment 2.

DVT and analysis are required for Class 1 or Major Changes as defined by the CMP. We assume DVT and analysis are not required for Class 2 or Minor Changes. Is this correct?

DVT and supportability analysis are required for any engineering changes.

10 RFP

Section L

Section L, 3.0 Proposal Requirements, Volume I Section 1.5 Facilities

The Offeror shall state whether its facility is approved for ACCM (Alternative Compensatory Control Measures) and describe the network infrastructure setup to support ACCM requirements. If the Offeror’s facility is not approved for ACCM, the Offeror must demonstrate the ability to obtain approval for its facility security clearance to handle ACCM data for VA Class submarines and describe the network infrastructure setup to support ACCM requirements.

This contract requires work with VIRGINIA Class stealth performance data that falls under the protection of Alternative Compensatory control Measures (ACCMs). Access to this data is only authorized with specific prior permission from PMS450.

Additional handling requirements in accordance with NAVSEA

INSTRUCTION S5510.18

“SECURITY POLICY FOR

STEALTH PERFORMANCE

DATA WITH ALTERNATIVE

COMPENSATORY CONTROL

MEASURES (ACCMs)” apply.

This statement revised as “This contract requires work with SSN 774 Class submarines stealth performance data that falls under the protection of Alternative Compensatory Control Measures (ACCMs). In addition to possessing SECRET security clearance, personnel accessing classified information in the performance of this contract need also possess ACCM. Some data and associated information which may be provided by the Government as part of this contract will be subject to need-to-know validation and approval by designated Naval Sea Systems

Please identify how prospective offerors may obtain a copy of NAVSEA Instruction S5510.18 so that bidders may determine the specific additional handling requirements for ACCM and the process PMS450 approval.

Command classification authorities.

Supplemental air-gapped segregation requirements will be enforced for electronic (computer) data and networks. Hard copy (paper) data will be subject to approved physical storage segregation. Such access and approvals will be provided as appropriate upon contract award and codified by modification of Form

DD254."

Updated in SOW Section 3.0 and Page 170 of the RFP, paragraph (b) of the HQ L-2-0003 FACILITY

SECURITY CLEARANCE

(NAVSEA) (FEB 2012) clause.

Section B

SLIN 0503 55 “First Delivery TI20 OMS Spares” is incorrect.

Amendment 1 updated as “Fourth Delivery TI20 OMS Spares”

Section F

Section F

CLIN 0204

13 & 96 “FOB: Destination” is incorrect. RFP updated as “FOB: Origin”

13 RFP

Section B CLIN 0503AM 55

FY22 TI20 OMS Production CPIF for VA New Construction First Delivery TI20 OMS Spares OPTION

YEAR - 5 (FY22)

It appears this may be incorrect referencing “First Delivery” with a first delivery spares being referenced under 0503AC. Should 503AM be updated to be “Fourth Delivery” which would align with the other associated deliveries of OMS system and Pre Cable Kits?

Yes, Amendment 1 updated as “Fourth Delivery TI20 OMS Spares”

14 RFP

Section B

Small Business Participation and Small Business Subcontracting Incentive

65 Paragraph (d) SBSIF Earned

The table at the top of page 65 appears to have an editorial error.

The rows containing percentage

Table has been updated in Amendment 1 values should be shifted down one row.

15 Section L 1.1 179 Paragraph numbering

The instructions say “every paragraph … shall be numbered”.

Can Offeror interpret this to mean that every heading down to at least heading level 3 shall be numbered?

Yes

Section L

1.1

179 Font size and line spacing

The instructions stipulate that font size be no smaller than 12 Times New Roman and text line spacing shall be 1.5 lines. Do these requirement apply to figure captions and text within tables and diagrams?

Yes

17 Section L 1.1

The RFP references an OMS "performance specification" on the following pages:

- Page 184 "Demonstrate how the proposed OMS system meets the performance specification and provide supporting data, analysis, or a combination."

- Page 185 "Describe how the proposed OMS system will be integrated with A- RCI Sonar System and meet the OMS performance specification (GFI)."

- Page 186 " Describe the overall approach to satisfying the SOW and OMS performance specification based upon ..."

- Page 197 "... submit an initial Software Development Plan (SDP) that at a minimum addresses the requirements of

Is the “performance specification” specified in the RFP synonymous with the Attachment 3 “System Requirements Specification” plus classified requirements in the NUWC reading room?

The "performance specification" being referenced is the "Attachment 3 - System Requirements Specification for the Ownship Monitoring System (PMS401- OMSSpec-01) (dated Oct 2014)".

the contract and achieves the performance specification."

- Page 216 "The degree to which the proposed common OMS system meets the performance specification."

18 Attachment 3 3.6.3.2.1.2.d 31

Control commands shall include (at a minimum) reboot, calibration and gain control commands.

Is “calibration control command” required for STP Message Services?

No

19 Attachment 3 3.8.2.2.c 63

LOFAR, Footprint, Sensor Waterfall, Sensor v. Level Data, and Hydrophone Source Localization Data.

Does “Sensor v. Level Data” mean “Sensor vs Level Data”? Yes

20 RFP

Section C

FIRST ARTICLE

(CONTRACTOR

TESTING) (NAVSEA SEP

1990)

(b) The First Article shall conform in every respect to the requirements of this contract and shall be fully tested by the Contractor at its own expense to determine compliance with said requirements.

Please clarify First Article test and/or retest is at Contractor expense vs. an allowable contract cost.

Clause as currently stated was deleted and updated version was incorporated in Amendment 2.

21 Section L and M 1.6 and

Data Rights

Section L indicates, “In order to enable the OMS system to fully function within the A-RCI paradigm, the Government desires Government Purpose Rights (GPR) in all Data.

Section M, indicates, “Offerors that provide GPR or greater data rights to the Government will receive a more favorable evaluation.”

DFARS 227.7103-1(a) indicates DoD policy is to acquire only the technical data, and the rights in

The RFP Reflects Navy’s minimum needs. The RFP is not requiring any Offeror to sell or relinquish any rights in tech data. However, Section L is hereby modified to remove “The Data Also includes all data relating to commercial items or commercial computer software (hereinafter Commercial Data) used, generated and delivered in performance of this contract”.

data, necessary to satisfy agency needs.

(c) Offerors shall not be required, either as a condition of being responsive to a solicitation or as a condition for award, to sell or otherwise relinquish to the Government any rights in technical data related to items, components or processes….

(d) Offerors and contractors shall not be prohibited or discouraged from furnishing or offering to furnish items, components, or processes developed at private expense solely because the Government's rights to use, modify, release, reproduce, perform, display, or disclose technical data pertaining to those items may be restricted.

The “desire” for GPR in “all Data” and associated evaluation criteria appears to be inconsistent with the DFAR as the solicitation discourages the Offeror from bidding less than GPR, particularly with respect for GPR in commercial TD and computer software.

Offeror requests modification based on the Navy’s minimum needs to obtain the necessary rights.

22 RFP

Will a “Word” copy of RFP N00024-15-R-6262 (excluding Page 1) be provided for bidders to fill in?

The Government will not be providing a word copy of the RFP to prospective Offerors.

23 RFP Section B Various

CLINs 0002, 0101, 0201, 0301, 0401, and 0501 each indicates 20,000 hours of Engineering and Technical Services.

How should a bidder respond if their approach to providing a Best Value solution has a number of hours that differs from 20,000 hours?

The Government is not accepting alternate proposals/solutions. The 20,000 hours are for Engineering and Technical Services as identified under each CLINs 0002, 0101, 0201, 0301, 0401, and 0501.

CLIN 0004

CPIF

Est. Cost: $1,000,000 The Ordering period for this CLIN is for the duration of the contract.

This CLIN is for informational purposes only, and all prices should be at the priced SLIN(s).

See Note D

What is anticipated for this

CLIN?

What value should the offeror insert into the ''TARGET COST”' blank? Should the ''TARGET FEE" calculated based on that ''TARGET COST” or will the Government insert the ''TARGET FEE" value?

This is a CPIF Orders line item. The Estimated Cost is given as $1M. The Offeror is to provide any adders/burden cost and the target fee which is to be no more than 8%.

25 RFP Section B 6

CLIN 0005

FFP

Est. Cost: $1,000,000 The Ordering period for this CLIN is for the duration of the contract.

This CLIN is for informational purposes only, and all prices should be at the priced SLIN(s).

See Note D

What is anticipated for this

CLIN?

What value should the offeror use to calculate the "NET AMT'?

Should the Offeror apply a fee to the "Est Cost" to arrive at the

"NET AMT'?

This is a FFP Orders line item. The $1M estimated cost plus any burden cost and profit. The profit is to be no more than 12%.