Q A_-_12_May_2015.pdf

Number Document

Description Page # Section/ Paragraph Question/ Comment Proposed Action/ Change Government Response

1 8595311 15-16

Reference: On page 15 of 8595311 it states that “The data processor shall be a GE Fanuc PPC4A-5WR Rev

CA12. An equivalent CCA may be substituted in its place with Government approval. “ and on page 16 it states that “The data processor shall, when integrated with the DP HAL (provided by the Government) and vxWorks 5.5.1 OS/BSP , meet the minimum requirements defined in the GCB Concurrent Operations

Demonstration Section while running OPSW or equivalent DP FDFL OPSW simulation.”

Question: Assuming the GE Fanuc PPC4A-5WR Rev CA12 cannot be obtained and must be replaced with an equivalent the following additional information is required for realistic planning of the NRE design, development, integration, and testing phases of the GCB: What is the estimated time after contract award that the government shall deliver the initial version of the DP HAL to the contractor; What is the interval between developmental releases of the DP HAL; When will the final version of the DP HAL be provided to the contractor as functionally complete and fully tested; Is it expected that the contractor will conduct a trade study and propose an equivalent processor CCA for concurrence and approval by the government prior to the government initiating and DP HAL development; and Does the government intend to specify an equivalent alternate after contract award?

Please clarify the intent of the specification requiring an obsolete part and how the Contractor should provide a substitute that can be integrated with the Government-provided HAL.

Also, please clarify the timing after contract award when the

Government will provide the DP HAL.

The final version of the DP HAL has been provided as GFI in the "Competition Library."

If the Contractor utilizes a different DP CCA than the one specified, Government approval will be required. It is the contractor's responsibility to integrate the delivered DP

HAL with a new DP CCA.

2 8595311 17

Reference: 8595311 states on page 17 “All SPs in the system shall be ready to execute SP OPSW or FDFL within 5 seconds from removal of the card’s reset line.”

Question: What is the definition of “ready to execute SP OPSW or FDFL?” Does the initiation of execution of the vxWorks image within 5 seconds from the removal of the card’s reset line meet the intent of this requirement?

Please clarify "ready to execute SP OPSW or FDFL".

The "ready to execute" requirement can be verified by sending a message over the VME from the SP to the DP.

3 8595311 17

Reference: 8595311 states on page 17 “The DP HAL shall be built using the Tornado 2.2.1 and GNAT ADA compile environments.” and “DP HAL applications shall be built on top of the delivered DP BSP and run with the vxWorks 5.5.1 operating system.”

Question: If the GE Fanuc PPC4A-5WR Rev CA12 cannot be procured for the contract and an equivalent alternate is selected: Are these requirements indicating that any alternate will be required to fully support the designated WindRiver and GNAT software versions; and If a BSP is unavailable from the processor vendor or WindRiver, is it the responsibility of the contractor or the government to develop, test, and support the BSP?

Please clarify the requirement independent of the design in the case where the processor is not available.

Yes, any alternate will be required to fully support the specified SW versions. It is the contractor's responsibility to develop, test, and support BSP.

4 8595317 17

Reference: 8595317 states on page 17 “The BSAR shall supply 12 ADSP-21160 processors, or equivalent, organized in three (3) clusters of four processors each, to perform sonar signal processing as shown in

Figure 1-1.5.”

Question: Is it the intent of this and numerous related requirements that any redesign of the BSAR required due to unavailability of the ADSP-21160 must contain 12 processors structured and interconnected as in the current design? If this is not the intent, recommend restating requirement as

“The BSAR shall supply 12 ADSP-21160 processors organized in three (3) clusters of four processors each, to perform sonar signal processing as shown in Figure 1-1.5, or via an equivalent alternate processing architecture and processor(s).”

Please clarify the requirement independent of the design in the case where the processor is not available.

Yes, it is the Government's intent that the archetecture of the BSAR remain as close to the legacy design as possible.

The requirement will not be rewritten. There are complex timing relationships between the Sharkfin (12 ADSP-

21160) processors within a node, and the 3 parallel nodes as well as between the BSAR and the GCB. The government sees a design change from the current architecture as high risk, and very difficult to accomplish in the obsolescence design period available. There are also very limited Government Subject Matter Experts resources that could assist the contractor in the redesign of the

BSAR.

FIR CIPS and MK 48

Restart Torpedo

Program

Guidance and

Control (G&C)

Section Acceptance

Document

Varies RVTM Tables

Reference: The verification method for Operational Reliability varies across the CIPS. FIR TX 8595319, Tuning Box 8595313 define as Test.

Question: Would these requirements be more appropriately verified by Analysis?

Change the verification to be "by Analysis."

The CIPS are being updated and will be redelivered at contract award. Operational Reliability will be verified by analysis.

6 5728239 3 3.5

Reference: The Wire Link Chassis – Acceptance Test Specification 5728239 calls out the following equipment: Telcom Tester (5729507) & Telcom Test Break out Boxes: 5729507-1, -2, -3, and -4.

Question: Will these be provided as GFE or is the Contractor responsible for building them?

Clarify GFE or CFE. If a Contractor responsibility, are the drawings available?

No, this hardware will not be provided as GFE, however, the delivered Wirelink Test Set will perform all necessary

Wirelink acceptance tests so the Contractor will not need to build these.

7 Attachment 4 1

Reference: Attachment 4, Item 6 (GCB Test Set)

Question: Since the GCB Test Set is to be provided as GFE after contract award: When will TDP be provided for the Test Set, LM 8553391; Can the contractor assume that there are no obsolescence issues with the equipment; Will all Test Set software be provided to the contractor; and Will the government provide additional technical data prior to contract award for the Test Set as this is critical data required to properly cost and schedule the manufacture and test of the deliverable units?

Please remove this deliverable until sufficient data can be provided to Offerors to develop a valid cost estimate.

Final TDP will be provided at Contract Award and Offerors can assume that it will be a functional test station. All test set software will be delivered to the contractor. The

Government is unable to provide more technical data on the test stations, but offerors are encouraged to view RFP section C paragraph 3.3.7.1.1 for information regarding the capabilities of this test station, as well as Attachment

12 for Test time and availability estimates, which provide adequate information for Offeror's to understand the scope of work required and to devleop a valid cost/price estimate.

Test Equipment that is capable of testing the GCB FIRs is a key deliverable and capability for the Navy in the production of G&C Sections. Offerors are expected to have the knowledge and skills to be able to design, develop, and modify test equipment as required.

Contractors proposing changes to the current GCB design will be required to deliver a functioning GCB Test Station to the Navy.

8 RFP 51 Section C/Para. 2.6 Paragraph identifies "associated Operation and Maintenance Manuals" for GFE. Will those manuals be provided with the Final RFP?

View the Attachment 3 Government Furnished

Information Items 8 to 13 for all available Operation and

Maintenance Manuals related to the Government

Furnished Equipment.

9 RFP

51, 182, 188, 190, 214

Section C/Para. 2.7; Section

L/Para. 3.1.2.6; Section

L/Para. 3.1.5.11; Section

L/Para. 3.2.1.1.1; Section

M/Para. 5.2.6

Is it the government's intent that a funded WFPP Agreement be in place for the usage of the government facilities identified for use by contractor's in RFP Attachment 5, GOVERNMENT FURNISHED

FACILITIES/ACCESS? If so, can the government provide the labor categories and rates for government personnel at these facilities in order for bidder's to calculate estimates to include in their proposals?

No, this is not the Government's intent and a WFPP agreement is not required for government facilities identified in RFP Attachment 5. The Torpedo Array Test

Facility, Nose Array Test Set and the Weapons Analysis

Facility will be made available to the contractor at no charge but on a not-to-interfere basis with other projects.

For access to Government facilities, the Contractor shall establish a Test Availability Plan (TAP) with the appropriate Government activity 90 days prior to planned use.

10 RFP 57, 62, 69

Section C: 3.3.7.3, 3,3,3, and

3.3.2.3.1

Exhibit A

Section C, paragraph 3.3.7.3 refers to the Calibration and Measurement Requirements Summary (CMRS) as CDRL A012. Para 3.3.3 refers to CDRL A012 as the Data Accession List (DAL). Para 3.3.2.3.1 refers to

CDRL A012 with respect to the Inter-Organizational Contract Processes Familiarization Workshop. Exhibit

A and associated 1423 refer to A012 as the Data Accession List (DAL).

Neither of the Calibration and Measurement Requirements Summary (CMRS) or CDRL for the Inter-

Organizational Contract Processes Familiarization Workshop are called out in Exhibit A or associated 1423 documents.

Update Section C and Exhibit A with respect to the

Calibration and Measurement Requirements Summary

(CMRS) and the Inter-Organizational Contract Processes

Familiarization Workshop CDRLs.

Update Section C and Exhibit A with respect to the

Calibration and Measurement Requirements Summary

(CMRS) and the Inter-Organizational Contract Processes

Familiarization Workshop CDRLs.

No update to Section C or Exhibit A is required. Both items are required as part of the Data Accession List IAW

CDRL A012.

11 RFP 71 Para. 3.3.9.1

The recent RFP update added the Re-compete Program G&C Section Acceptance Documents to the contract baseline. The individual FIR CIPS contain both Section level and Torpedo level verification requirements. Does the G&C Section Acceptance Document remove the contractor's responsibility to conduct the Section and Torpedo level testing requirements of the individual FIR CIPS?

Yes, per Section C Paragraph 3.3.9, "The Contractor may validate FIR or CCA level requirements contained in the specifications in the Contract Baseline at the G&C level, and CCA level requirements at the FIR level, if adequate requirement coverage can be shown in the Test Procedure - First Article Test Procedures (CDRL

A034). For example, non-operational environmental requirements at the FIR level may be able to be verified using a Section level test."

12 RFP 72 Para. 3.3.10.3

Section states: "If more Contractor support is necessary during the Government POM qualification phase than established above, a TI will be issued to the Contractor to fund the necessary support". The baseline level of support required by the Contractor is no longer defined within Section 3.3.10.3, as it had been in the Draft RFP.

Define level of support the Contractor is required to perform during Government POM Qualification prior to the point at which a TI will be issued.

RFP updated to clarify that no Contractor support is required during Government POM testing. If any

Contractor support is required a TI will be funded.

13 RFP 93 HQ C-2-0065; para. 5

The DMSMS/Obsolescence Management portion of the Clause states "...that the Contractor shall be responsible for identification, resolution and implementation of all DMSMS/Obsolescence issues…" Is it the Government's intention that after PRR, the Contractor would be responsible for all contractor implementation costs and schedule impacts at the discretion of the Government, including both build to print and build to specification FIRs? If so, can the Government provide details as to when a

DMSMS/Obsolescence issue would constitute a change or result in either schedule or cost relief to the

Contractor?

Is it the Government's intention that after PRR, the

Contractor would be responsible for all contractor implementation costs and schedule impacts at the discretion of the Government, including both build to print and build to specification FIRs?

Yes.

If so, can the Government provide details as to when a

DMSMS/Obsolescence issue would constitute a change or result in either schedule or cost relief to the

Contractor?

Schedule/cost relief for the Contractor would be evaluated on a case by case basis. As with any contract requirement, Contractor cost/schedule relief typically only arises from added work that is out of scope or a Government caused delay.

14 RFP 104 Section E; Clause HQ E-2-0003

RFP page 104 – HQ E-2-0003 states “Calibration System Requirements. The calibration of measuring and testing equipment shall, as a minimum, adhere to the requirements of Z540.2-2006”

Z540.2 is a Guide to the Expression of Uncertainly in measurement. Was this reference meant to be

Z540.1-1994 for General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories?

Revise Z540.2-2006 to Z540.1-1994.

Z540.1-1994 is no longer the standard. However, the reference contained in the RFP was inaccurate. The RFP is amended to read "Calibration System Requirements. The calibration of measuring and testing equipment shall, as a minimum, adhere to the requirements of Z540.3-2006."

15 RFP 165

Section L; DFARs Clause

252.234-7001

Is the right of the Government to perform reviews of EVMS under DFARS clause 252.234-7001 "Notice of

Earned Value Management" applicable to all contract CLINS or CLIN0001 only as stated in paragraph

3.3.2.3.2.1 of the Statement of Work.

Change applicability of 252.234-7001 as it pertains to Gov't review of EVMS to FPI/CPFF CLINS only in accordance with

SOW.

Updated RFP to revise applicability to CLIN 0001 only.

16 RFP 172 Section L, Para 1.1

The formal RFP was updated to specify 8-point Times New Roman font within tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material. Times New Roman is difficult to read, especially in graphics, at 8 point. Is it acceptable to use a clearer font, such as Arial or Calibri, at no less than 8 point font for tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material?

Remove Times New Roman Restriction in Section L, Para 1.1 for tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material.

Times New Roman is required.

17 RFP 180 and 212

Section L, Paragraph 3.1.1.12 and Section M, Paragraph

5.1.12

Both Section L and Section M note how the SDP will be evaluated. However, only Section M, Paragraph

5.1.12 notes firmware. The first paragraph states "The Government will evaluate the Offeror's proposed software development plan and approach to ensure that the Offeror understands the software development requirements of the solicitation with regards to the Software and Firmware requirements of the G&C Section and of the Transmitter Test Equipment and for compliance with the minimum content requirements stated in Section L and C, and CDRL A022."

Although firmware development could be documented within a SDP, that plan and the standards cited traditionally cover software only. Other plans or documents such as Firmware Support Manuals or

Hardware Development Plans could also be used.

Must the SDP contain process associated with firmware development or can these be documented in another artifact or plan and if does this needs to be provided at proposal submittal?

RFP section 3.1.1.12 has been revised to include firmware.

It is the Government's desire that the Firmware be included in the SDP, and may be included as an SDP appendix.

18 RFP 190 Section L/3.2.1.1.2

Section 3.2.1.1.2 states, "the Offeror shall propose the Unit and Total price for each (including stepladders as specified in Section B Note F)." For purposes of showing total price for each stepladder, what quantity should be assumed? Should the offeror base the total price calculation on unit price * quantity used for determining unit price?

Specify how total price should be determined since quantities are not provided.

Proposing total price for the stepladder CLINs is not required. For the Stepladder CLINs, pricing is to be provided under Section B Note F. The pricing tables in

Note F do not allow for a proposed Total Price. Offerors are to provide proposed Unit Prices for each proposed stepladder range.

Section 3.2.1.1.2 has been revised to read, "In addition to the requirements listed in paragraph 3.2.1.1, the Offeror shall propose the Unit and Total Price for each (with the exception of the stepladder CLINs which shall be proposed as specified in Section B Note F) of the following Firm

Fixed Price CLINs 0003, 0004, 0005, 0103, 0104, 0105, 0203, 0204, 0205, 0303, 0304, 0305, 0403, 0404, and

0405.

19 RFP 190/191 Section L/3.2.1.1

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 certified cost or pricing data pursuant to the requirements of Table 15-2 of FAR 15.408 with the

Cost/Price Proposal. Will the Government please remove the FAR 15-2 of FAR 15.408 requirements within

Section 3.2.1.1 in accordance with FAR 15.403-1 (C)(1) due to the competitive nature of this acquisition?

Remove Table 15-2 of FAR 15.408 requirements from

Sections 3.2.1.1.1, 3.2.1.1.6, and 3.2.1.1.7

Table 15-2 of FAR 15.408 requirements/references have been removed from referenced Sections.

20 RFP Section B

CLIN descriptions for Option Years 1 - 4 for CLINs related to G&C Section, CBASS Upgrade Kits, Factory Test

Equipment, Engineering Services and Support, and Hardware Repair and Maintenance all reference the

Base Year. Please clarify that the CLINs listed in the Section B are for Options Years 1-4 and not all as Base

Year as listed.

Clarify Section B CLIN descriptions RFP has been updated to reference the correct Option

Years throughout Section B.

21 RFP 198 Section L/3.2.3

Paragraph 3.2.2 (c) asks for the amount of rent to be computed in accordance with FAR 52.245-9 for any government production or research property to be used in the performance of work under this solicitation, however, on page 117 of the RFP, clause 5252.245-9111 indicates property accountable under the GFE list (attachment 4) is provided on a rent free basis. Is the computation of rent only necessary if the offeror is proposing to use government property other than that provided in Attachment

4?

Yes, the rent computation is only for items beyond the GFP provided in Attachment 4 and Attachment 5. RFP updated to include reference to Attachment 5 in clasues

5252.245-9108 and 5252.245-9111.

22 TDP Attachment 1

The file Transmitter.xls associated with FIR 5728260 Transmitter, Baseline Sonar Signal lists the CHASSIS, TRANSMITTER WIRED assembly as being part number 5728275. However, Item #1 on file PL5728260.pdf calls for assembly part number 8325608-1 CHAS, XMTR-WIRED. Is it the Government’s intention to incorporate ECP 48-RTN14002 into the build to print baseline?

Clarify Governments intent on Transmitter FIR baseline.

No, part number 5728275 is the correct Transmitter Wired

Chassis and we do not want to incorporate ECP 48-

RTN14002.

23 TDP Attachment 1

ECP 48/NUE15031 is referenced within Transmitter Baseline.xls and ECP 48/NUE15029/NOR

48/NUE15029-5 14-Apr-2015 is referenced within file PL5728260.pdf. These change documents cannot be found within attachment 1. Will the Government be providing those change documents?

The changes made in ECP 48/NUE15031 were implemented in the delivered transmitter baseline.

NOR 48/NUE15029-5 changes were implemented in Rev V of PL5728260 and delivered in the "Competition Library"

Disk dated 4/22/15.

24 TDP Attachment 1

TDP document 5895331 Manufacturing Quality Assurance Specification, section 3.1.3 specifies “The FIR shall undergo functional testing, as documented in the HASS Plan, during random vibration HASS”. The

Nose/Array FIR is a passive piezo-electric device that may incur damage if impedance testing is done during HASS vibration levels in a dry environment. Is it compliant to offer no functional testing during random vibration HASS for the Nose/Array FIR, but perform impedance testing after HASS vibration?

Note: correct document number is 8595331.

Yes the proposed course of action is compliant and this should be documented in the Government approved HASS

Plan.

25 TDP 11

Attachment 1; MK 48 Restart

Torpedo Program Guidance and Control Section

Acceptance Document para.

3.3.1

Section 3.3.1 Reads:

Para 1 "For Storage/Non-Operating, Non-Operating, Flooded Tube and Operating, and Seawater environments, the sealed G&C Section shall not exhibit any damage or deterioration after immersion in sea water for a duration of seven (7) days and allowed to air dry for two (2) months in a non-humidity controlled environment."

Para 2 "For Storage/Non-Operating, Non-Operating, Flooded Tube and Operating, and Seawater environments, the sealed G&C Section shall not exhibit any damage or deterioration after immersion in sea water for a duration of twenty-four (24) hours and allowed to air dry for one (1) week in a non-humidity controlled environment for a total of nine (9) cycles between max operating and max stowage temperatures."

Does one G&C Section UUT satisfy each paragraph testing requirement or is one UUT needed for each

Operating condition listed above in the paragraphs?

Either of the proposed courses of action could potentially fulfill the requirement. This decision is left to the contractor's discretion.

26 TDP Attachment 1

Item MK 48 Restart Torpedo Program Guidance and Control Section Acceptance Document is noted as not being the final version and that the final version will be delivered at contract award. Will the contractor be responsible for cost and schedule impacts due to any changes in scope with the final version of the document?

Offerors are required to bid to the draft version provided.

For any changes to the final version after contract award, an ECP and/or bilateral contract modification will negotiated.

27 TDP Attachment 1 Can the Tuning Box Test Set PN 8620006 be used to test the WAS transducer assembly per the GOULD test procedure 5856764?

No, it can not.

28 RFP Attachment 4

Will all classified GFE test stations be provided to the contractor with a DSS approved operating environment? If not, will the government be providing an approved DSS Risk Acceptance Letter (RAL) for the duration of the G&C Production Restart Contract?

Example: The classified BSAR/Preamplifier test stations operate on Windows XP.

Offerors are to bid assuming that classified test equipment will be DSS compliant, either via a RAL or Windows 7. If at contract award the BSAR/Preamp Test Stations are not

DSS compliant the Government will work with the Offeror via ECP or bilaterial contract modification to get classified test stations ready.

29 RFP

Exhibit B CDRL

B001 & B003

DI-SESS-81000E

Does the requirement that drawings/models and associated lists conform to recent ASTM standards apply to legacy documentation that does not meet these more recent standards, therefore requiring review and update?

Yes

30 RFP 6

5895331 Manufacturing

Quality Assurance

Specification; Section 3.1.1

TDP document 5895331 Manufacturing Quality Assurance Specification, section 3.1.1 specifies “The FIR circuit card assemblies (CCAs) and backplane (if applicable) shall undergo HASS thermal cycling at the circuit card assembly (CCA) and backplane level”. The Nose/Array FIR does not have any CCAs since the

ICB contains no active components. Is it compliant to offer no Thermal screening at the ICB Circuit Card

Assembly level considering that the ICB will experience thermal cycling at the Nose Array FIR level?

Note: correct document number is 8595331.

It would be considered non-compliant to offer no thermal screening at the ICB CCA level.

31 8595311 GCB CIPS 149 Section C/Para 3.3

A review of the Attachment 1 GFI TDPs for the GCB FIR found that many of the programmable logic devices have source files that when compiled produce several warnings and do not comply with this

General Design Requirement. Warnings can include benign indicators such as an intended pulldown on an active net. For warnings, can the contractor instead perform the exercise of looking at each warning, creating a report that provides an explanation of each for those that are of no consequence; and only make changes to the warnings that are impactful to the design/operation?

Yes, this approach is acceptable.

32 8595311 GCB CIPS 149 Section C/Para 3.3

For timing constraints, the requirement is unbounded. Does this also pertain to I/O pins? It is neither practical nor necessary to create a timing constraint for every signal. For timing concerns, can the contractor perform the exercise of looking at all timing reports, create a summary report that provides an explanation of each item called out in the timing reports for those that are of no consequence; and only make PLD changes where timing might be a problem for the design/operation?

This does also pertain to the I/O pins. Further, the

Government believes that it is necessary to create timing constraints for every signal, especially when changing devices. The proposed alternate approach is not acceptable.

33 8475700 PL 1

Reference: PL 8475700, item 14, specifies 8475717 for the sensor. The 8475717 drawing is an Altered

Item Control drawing which specifies 8475711 on the PL as the item being altered. The 8475711 drawing is a Vendor Control Drawing and is (already) the correct configuration with the port modified to yield the

7/16-20-UNF-3A port (O-ring sealed) along with other dimensions for wire length, grommet size, outside dimensions, and other spec requirements (sheet 2).

Question: Is 8475711 the correct part number for Item 14 on the 8475700 PL vs. the 8475717 currently specified?

Recommend review of 8475700 REV F for correct callout of

PL Item 14.

8475711 is the correct part number for item 14 on the

8475700 PL vs. the 8475717 currently specified. The

8475717 drawing alters the 8475711 device by removing material that does not exist on the 8475711 device.

MK 48 CBASS Re-

Compete Program

Guidance and

Control (G&C)

Section Acceptance

Document (V6)

Page 9 of 23 3.2.4.2.4 Launch Acceleration

Reference: Paragraph states, "The G&C Section shall meet all requirements of paragraphs 3.2.1.1.2 while being subjected to longitudinal aft launch environment consisting of an initial jerk of 50 g/s minimum for a duration of 300 ms minimum and an acceleration of 15 G's/s for a duration of 900 ms minimum, while in its operating mode and oriented in its standard tube launch position."

Question: Is it the intent that the Contractor shall fabricate and/or procure, assemble, test and deliver

Factory Test Equipment necessary to satisfy this and other environmental testing where the requirement exceeds the current capabilities of the GFE test equipment defined in the Draft RFP Attachment 4 - GFE list?

Proposed Change: Please clarify.

The contractor is required to satisfy this and other environmental testing requirements. The government does not recommend building a facility and test equipment for this test as there are existing commercial and government facilities available for this single instance testing requirement, but that is the contractor's decision.

To use a government facility, a Work for Private Party

Agreement with the Government would be required. In the past, in order to complete this test, launch acceleration testing was completed on individual FIRs while being functionally tested and analysis completed to verify the higher level requirement was met.

Competition Library

(Technical Data

Package)

Various Various The following documents/drawings are missing from the Competition Library/Technical Data Package: Please provide the requested documents/drawings.

35.1 GCB CBASS-SPM-12-2054 GCB FIR SOFTWARE PROGRAMMING MANUAL (SPM) Document is contained in Competition Library REV 2 disc.

35.2 GCB T1554 TEST ENGINEERING INSTRUCTIONS, DP PROGRAMMING, LEVEL 2/3 Document is contained in Competition Library REV 2 disc.

35.3 GCB T1555 TEST ENGINEERING INSTRUCTIONS, SP PROGRAMMING, LEVEL 2/3 Document is contained in Competition Library REV 2 disc.

35.4 Preamp 8554154-1 INDUCTOR, 25mH, SHIELDED,TH Document is contained in Competition Library REV 2 disc.

However, delivered legacy drawing 5727460 also contains the needed information.

35.5 GCB 8553414SVD PLVD, TWC MODULE ASSEMBLY

The Software Version Description 8553414SVD was segmented into separate Programmable Logic Version

Descriptions 8554108PLVD, 8554109PLVD, 8554110PLVD, 8554111PLVD, 8554112PLVD for the TWC FPGA, Arbiter 8

CPLD, Core CPLD, Address Transceiver CPLD, and Data

Transceiver CPLD, respectively. These documents were provided as part of the Competition Library in GFI Item 2.

35.6 GCB T8553475 TEI, CPLD PROGRAMMING, PM5 This document is not able (nor necessary for this effort) to be provided because it is incumbent proprietary documentation.35.7 GCB 8553699 LABEL, SYSTEM The drawing number 8553699 is a typo. View drawing

8553669 which is the correct number.

35.8 Cables 8176856 PIGTAIL ASSY, W14 The W14 pigtail is not being procured as part of this solicitation.

35.9 Transmitter 5528084 FILM,REINF EPOXY ADH,APP

This document is not able (nor necessary for this effort) to be provided because it is company specific methodology and offerors will need to develop their own declassification process in accordance with SOW 3.3.1.1

35.10 BSAR MK48 DECLASS PLAN

This document is not able (nor necessary for this effort) to be provided because it is company specific methodology.

35.11 BSAR CTC TIN WISK MIT PLN This document is not able (nor necessary for this effort) to be provided because the location of this document is unknown.