LWWAA_(15-R-6271)_Q A_R2.pdf

Question

No.

Question source: (RFP, attachment #, etc.)

Question: Response:

1 General RFP

Can you tell me if there is an incumbent contractor currently performing work for this requirement? If so, could you please provide their company name and contract number?

The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software was formerly procured as a part of the A-RCI sonar contract performed by Lockheed Martin. The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing softwarehas never been procured as a standalone item.

2 RFP, Section H, The RFP identifies 577 hours per week, or approximately 14.4 Full-Time-

Equivalents. If the proposed effort takes less than this, how does the RFP account for the reduced level of effort required to perform these tasks?

The Government will analyze each Offeor’s proposed solution to see if it will meet the requirements of the LWWAA and WAA.

3 RFP, Section B

CLIN number 0001 indicates 30,000 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 30,000 hours?

The Offeror should indicate the number of hours their proposed solution is based on by striking through the 30,000 hours provided in the RFP and indicating the level of effort in hours that the offerors solution is based upon.

4 RFP, Various Sections

Section I & L (Section I, page 57, 58 & 60; Section L, page 94 & 121): There are several FAR and DFAR provisions included within the solicitation (Section I, page

57, 58 & 60; Section L, page 94 & 121) which relate to requirements for submittal of certified cost or pricing data. In a full and open competitive solicitation such as this one, there exists a clear exemption to the requirement for submission of certified cost or pricing data. Therefore, bidders would not be required to provide the DFAR 252.215-7009 Proposal Adequacy Checklist and data pursuant to the requirements of Table 15-2 of FAR 15.408 with the Cost/Price volume. Bidders would be required to provide data necessary to support the remaining RFP requirements as part of the Cost/Price volume along with a cross-reference matrix mapping the cost proposal to the RFP requirements. Request NAVSEA acknowledgement that this approach is appropriate.

References to certified cost and pricing data include references to the appropriate

FAR section which delineate exceptions to the submittal of certified cost and pricing data and information on providing other than certified cost and pricing data;

therefore Offerors should read all clauses in their entirety and respond accordingly.

Furthermore, the clauses in Section I will become a part of the resulting award and will have applicability during performance of the contract. In this solicitation, the detail and format for the submission of information is as prescribed in the solicitation. To clarify, for the purposes of indicating the Governments submission requirements under this RPF, the Government is requiring DFAR 252.215-7009

Proposal Adequacy Checklist to be completed and also The Offeror shall provide cost summaries pursuant to the requirements of Table 15-2 of FAR 15.408. If an exception to the submission of a certificate is applicable, a certificate will not be required.

RFP Section L, page 106, 3rd paragraph

This section states “Excel tables shall be embedded as spreadsheets rather than pasted as pictures.” Based on prior experience, embedding these items as spreadsheets will exponentially drive file size to an unmanageable size and most likely corrupt the entire document. We intend to incorporate the Excel based pricing exhibits as word tables to provide the data in a searchable format within the word document, and provide working spreadsheets as separate Excel files in the electronic delivery. Is this acceptable?

This is an acceptable approach. All Solicitation response requirements contained in

Section L with regards to the page limitations and content are applicable.

RFP Section L, page 106, 5th paragraph

This section states “Any classified material pages count towards the 150 page total limit for the Technical Proposal.” However, the table on pages 105-106 indicates

“Classified Information (if applicable)” and “NONE” under Page Limit, creating a conflict. Do classified pages count or not count towards the page limit?

This is a typo. The table on page 105 has been updated to reflect that classified material is included in the Technical proposal page count.

RFP, Section M, Cost/price Evaluation

Criteria

The cost/price evaluation criteria in Section M provides no method for discriminating between a composite man hour rate and the total estimated cost to perform the task. The RFP requests the Offeror to fill out a table identifying labor categories to perform the effort, the number of hours necessary to perform it, and the hourly rate for each. The resultant composite rate is then applied to the total level of effort of 30,000 hours. This methodology results in a cost evaluation disadvantage to an Offeror who is able to perform the effort for significantly fewer hours at a marginally higher rate. Another Offeror who may require the entire

30,000 hours to perform the LWWAA integration tasks (with lower rates) could be evaluated more favorably.

The RFP has been updated (See section L and M) to advise that alternate solutions are acceptable and will be evaluated accordingly. Therefore an Offeror’s proposed solution or level of effort as proposed will be applied to their composite rate.

The LWWAA tasking under this RFP is an integration job which requires incorporating the IWS5A capability baseline into the production Tech Insertion baseline. Although the requirements are not strictly known, this is not a development job but rather an integration job and the level of work can be estimated and bid without restricting the government’s ability to integrate capability. It is therefore recommended there be a method included in the RFP evaluation criteria which allows the Government to evaluate an Offeror’ s proposed total cost to perform the effort rather than a simple comparison of composite hourly rates.

As indicated in the RFP, Section M, "The information presented in the Cost/Price

Proposal shall be evaluated by the Government to determine (i) the extent to which the Offeror understands the Government’s requirements and (ii) a Government estimate of the likely costs of performance should the Offeror receive the award." In evaluating offers, the Government will calculate a Government Total Evaluated Price

(GTEP).

RFP, Section L-3, page

Due to the significant amount of material in the NUWC reading room, we request that the RFP question period be extended to 45 days The question period has been extended; Section L-3 of the RFP has been updated.

10 Attachment 1: SOW

We assume that maintenance of the prior deployed configuration is not part of this award, Please clarify the SOW with respect to prior deployed configurations

Maintenance of a prior deployed configuration is not part of this award, as indicated in the SOW Section 1.0; the Contractor shall develop, test, and deliver a common operation LWAA and WAA software under this procurement.

11 Attachment 1: SOW What software languages are used in the current WAA/LWWAA software?

Red Hat Linux is the Operating System. The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item; as indicated in the SOW

Section 1.0, under this procurement the Contractor shall develop, test, and deliver a common operation LWAA and WAA software. The Offeror will be responsible for choosing the software language as part of thier solution to meet the requirements of the solicitation (including all attachments, documents on the E-Tic, classified reading room, and technical specifications).

12 Attachment 2: GFI Please supply a deployment diagram for the WAA/LWWAA software with respect to the current and planned server architecture

All information and technical parameters necessary to propose to this requirement are contained in the solicitation (including all attachments, documents on the E-Tic, classified reading room, and technical specifications). The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item; as indicated in the SOW Section 1.0, under this procurement the Contractor shall develop, test, and deliver a common operation LWAA and WAA software.

13 Attachment 2: GFI So we can adequately cost the effort, please provide the size of the WAA/LWWAA sonar string in SLOC, Components, and Executables

All information and technical parameters necessary to propose to this requirement are contained in the solicitation (including all attachments, documents on the E-Tic, classified reading room, and technical specifications). The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item.

14 Attachment 2: GFI Are there automated test scripts for the existing WAA/LWWAA software? Will they be made available at award?

All information and technical parameters necessary to propose to this requirement are contained in the solicitation (including all attachments, documents on the E-Tic, classified reading room, and technical specifications). The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item; as indicated in the SOW Section 3.2.2 and 3.2.3, the Offeror is responsible for implementing and maintaining a test program.

15 Attachment 2: GFI How big are the manual test procedures (in pages, number of tests, or number of steps)

All information and technical parameters necessary to propose to this requirement are contained in the solicitation (including all attachments, documents on the E-Tic, classified reading room, and technical specifications). The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item; as indicated in the SOW Section 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 , the Offeror is reponseible for implementing and maintaining a test program.

16 Attachment 2: GFI

Does the Technical Data Package (TDP) for the prior APBs contain the same documentation as is required on the contract and if so will these documents be provided upon award?

The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item; as indicated in the SOW Section 3.1.2.14 "Technical Data Package", the Offeror is responsible for developing the TDP.

17 Attachment 2: GFI Please provide a representative sample of current software so we can assess the current software quality

All information and technical parameters necessary to propose to this requirement are contained in the solicitation (including all attachments, documents on the E-Tic, classified reading room, and technical specifications). The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item; as indicated in the SOW Section 1.0, under this procurement the Contractor shall develop, test, and deliver a common operation LWAA and WAA software.

18 Attachment 2: GFI Are all current WAA/LWWAA string algorithms provided at contract award?

No. All information and technical parameters necessary to propose to this requirement are contained in the solicitation (including all attachments, documents on the E-Tic, classified reading room, and technical specifications). The LWWAA and

WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item; as indicated in the SOW Section 1.0, under this procurement the Contractor shall develop, test, and deliver a common operation LWAA and WAA software.

19 Attachment 2: GFI When will the Government provide the specification tree for the WAA/LWAA and its parents?

The LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item; as indicated in the SOW Section 1.0, under this procurement the

Contractor shall develop, test, and deliver a common operation LWAA and WAA software.

20 RFP Attachment 3 (GFE)

We assume that the WAA/LWWAA related source code and associated specs

(including the current PTR list and test results associated with the current configurations) will be included as GFE. Please update the GFI/GFE list

The Government will not be providing LWWAA and WAA related source code and associated specs, the LWWAA and WAA sonar processing software has never been procured as a standalone item; as indicated in the SOW Section 1.0, under this procurement the Contractor shall develop, test, and deliver a common operation

LWAA and WAA software.

21 Exhibit A: CDRLs/SOW

Is it authorized for the format of CDRL items be tailored to "customer format?"

Please confirm that versions of Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) required to be used on this contract are available from the Defense Logistics Agency at http://quicksearch.dla.mil/ . Please update the CDRL if tailoring CDRL items to customer format is authorized.

Please read the Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) in their entirety; the DIDs contain all information necessary to determine the format applicable to the CDRL.

Classified Requirement

Specifications

We understand that the objective is to establish common software among all the configurations. Has this been achieved with respect to the WAA vs. LWWAA? If not, what are the differences?

The contractor shall be responsible for delivering a common operational LWWAA and

WAA software, the differences between the LWWAA and WAA software is contained in the technical specification.

Attachment 1: SOW, Section 3.1.2.11 (pg. 11 -

12)

Please confirm that the latest revisions of all Data Item Descriptions referenced in the SOW should be used. As an example, Section 3.1.2.11.1 calls for DI-CMAN-

80639 and the current version is DI-CMAN-80639C.

Latest DIDs have been confirmed. DIDs have been corrected in questions 24 through

39 and all changes have been made to the applicable SOW and CDRLs.

24 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00C Block 4 changed from DI-IPSC-81432A to DI-IPSC-81432A NOT 1.

SOW updated accordingly.

25 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00H Block C changed from SESS to PSSS.

26 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00L

Block C changed from CMAN to SESS.

Block 2 changed from Configuration Audit Summary Report to Configuration Audit

Summary Report and Certification.

Block 4 DI-SESS-81022D supersedes DI-CMAN-81022C.

SOW updated accordingly.

27 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00M

Block 2 changed from Configuration Status Accounting System to Configuration

Status Accounting (CSA) Information.

Block 4 DI-SESS-81253B supersedes DI-CMAN-81253A .

SOW updated accordingly.

28 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00N Block 4 DI-SESS-80639D supersedes DI-CMAN-80639C.

SOW updated accordingly.

29 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00P

Block 2 changed from Request For Deviation (RFD) to Request for Variance (RFV).

Block 4 DI-SESS-80640D supersedes DI-CMAN-80640C.

SOW updated accordingly.

30 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00R Block 4 DI-SESS-80643D supersedes DI-CMAN-80643C.

SOW updated accordingly.

31 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00S Block 4 DI-SESS-80642D supersedes DI-CMAN-80642C.

SOW updated accordingly.

32 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00U Block 4 changed from DI-IPSC-81436A to DI-IPSC-81436A NOT 1.

SOW updated accordingly.

33 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00V Block 4 changed from DI-IPSC-81434A to DI-IPSC-81434A NOT 1.

SOW updated accordingly.

34 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00W Block 4 changed from DI-IPSC-81433A to DI-IPSC-81433A NOT 1.

SOW updated accordingly.

35 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00X Block 4 changed from DI-IPSC-81435A to DI-IPSC-81435A NOT 1.

SOW updated accordingly.

36 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00Y Block 4 changed from DI-IPSC-81441A to DI-IPSC-81441A NOT 1.

SOW updated accordingly.

37 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A00Z Block 4 changed from DI-IPSC-81442A to DI-IPSC-81442A NOT 1.

SOW updated accordingly.

38 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A010 Block 4 changed from DI-IPSC-81427A to DI-IPSC-81427A NOT 1.

SOW updated accordingly.

39 CDRLs/SOW Data Item #A011 Block 4 changed from DI-NDTI-80809B to DI-NDTI-80809B NOT 1.

SOW updated accordingly.

Attachment 1: SOW, Section 3.1.2.11 (pg. 11-

12)

The following Data Item Descriptions required by the SOW are not available on the

Defense Logistics Agency website http://quicksearch.dla.mil/. We obtained them from other means. As such, we are unsure if they are official versions. Please confirm or correct the versions of the inserted DIDs. 1. DI-

CMAN-80639C ; 2. DI-CMAN-80640C ; 3. DI-CMAN-80642C ; 4. DI-CMAN-80643C ;

5. DI-CMAN-81022C ; 6. DI-CMAN-81253A. Confirm versions are correct, or supply source where correct versions can be obtained.

See responses provided in questions 24 through 39.

Attachment 1: SOW, Section 3.1.2.8 (pg. 9)

The SOW requires an "ILS Plan" in accordance with Data Item Description (DID) DI-

ILSS-80095. This DID does not comply with USD(AT&L) memorandum "Document

Streamlining - Life-Cycle Sustainment Plan (LCSP)" dated 14 Sep 2011. Is the memorandum invoked on this contract? Please advise.

The memorandum is not invoked.