N00024-16-R-6247_-_ADC_MK5_RFP_Consolidated_Responses_v14.pdf

Vendor Questions and Gov't Responses for NAVSEA Solicitation N00024‐16‐R‐6247 ADC MK5

NAVSEA SOLICITATION N00024-16-R-6247 ADC MK5

Item # Document Page # Section Section Title Para Question or Comment Updated Consolidated Response

1 RFP 123 L-3; 1.2 Solicitation Response Requirements

Appendix Document s

The Software Development Plan (SDP) is limited to 20 pages, which is insufficient space to comprehensively address the requirements of IEEE Std. 12207:2008, and ISO/IEC/IEEE 15289:2011 (p 44 of the solicitation).

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise the RFP Appendix Documents table to increase the SDP page count to 40 pages, as follows:

From: Software Development Plan - 20 pages To: Software Development Plan - 40 pages

RFP AMENDMENT PAGE 13

2 RFP 75 52.217-7

and 52.217-

Options The "Latest Option Exercise Date" is provided for all the option CLINs/SLINs, however there is no discussion as to the earliest these CLINs/SLINs may be exercised. There are no pre-requisites or "no earlier than" dates for these options. Though we do not believe that this is the intent, there is nothing in the solicitation stopping the exercise of these CLINs/SLINs upon contract award.

Comment Noted. NO CHANGE

3 RFP 51 Section E Inspection and Acceptance CLIN

The statement; "Final acceptance is contingent upon each EDM satisfactorily passing First Article Testing." This indicates that each EDM -1 and EDM-2 unit, each variant of EDM-2 and every one of the EDM devices, must pass First Article Testing prior to acceptance of the LRIP units. PIPS para. 6.2.1.1 indicates that the first article testing will be done on samples of EDM-2.

Comment Noted.

4 RFP 51 Section E Inspection and Acceptance CLIN

Please confirm the Contractors understanding that SOW 3.3.6.1 has precedence and that First Article Testing is conducted on EQT units during the Governments EQT and EDM-2 period when Government development testing is conducted.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise CLIN 0403 in Section E - Inspection and Acceptance as follows:

From: Final acceptance is contingent upon each EDM satisfactorily passing First Article Testing.

To: Final acceptance is contingent upon EDM-2 EQT and EDM-2 devices satisfactorily passing First Article Testing.

RFP AMEND. PAGE 8

5 RFP 166 M.3.1.1.2 Sub-factor 1.22 - Systems Engineering Approach

3.1.1.2.a. The Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) is not a required submittal, however this paragraph states that the "Government will evaluate the Offeror's systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) to ensure it meets the requirements identified in the SOW.

Comment Noted.

6 RFP 166 M.3.1.1.2 Sub-factor 1.22 - Systems Engineering Approach

3.1.1.2.a. Recommend that the SEMP be required and included as an appendix without counting against the Technical Volume page count restrictions.

The SEMP will improve the Governments ability to evaluate all aspects of systems engineering to include the offerors comprehensive approach to risk, test & evaluation, safety and other associated system engineering disciplines.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Section L, Paragraph 3.1.1.2.a as follows:

From: The Offeror shall describe their approach to meeting the Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) requirements identified within the SOW.

To: The Offeror shall provide their Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) in accordance with Section 3.2.1 of the SOW. RFP AMEND PAGE 18

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will also revise the RFP Appendix Documents table (Page 123) to add a Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) entry, as follows:

Add: Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) - 40 pages RFP AMEND PAGE 13

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY

SOURCE SELECTION SENSITIVE INFORMATION – SEE FAR 2.101 and 3.104

Item # Document Page # Section Section Title Para Question or Comment Updated Consolidated Response 7 RFP 56 and 57 of 174

HQ F-1-

Tables: "LOE ITEMS" and "NRE Completion Items", including note following.

RFP CLIN “pairs” for NRE and HW, including CLIN pairs 0001AF/0203, 0001AG/0204, 0001AH/0303 do not appear to “match up” as do the earlier CLINs. In the earlier cases, for example, CLINs 0001AB/0104, the NRE POP is sufficient to cover the HW CLIN delivery period, even if the NRE CLIN is exercised at its earliest date (contract award) and the HW CLIN is exercised at its latest execution date. A quick schedule analysis shows that, in the latter cases, worse case execution scenarios (earliest NRE, latest HW) yield significant gaps in completion dates. This difference could lead to gaps in CLIN coverage or even premature closure of NRE CLINs, given the comment found at RFP section F, below the table titled “NRE COMPLETION ITEMS”, in the “Note” (page 57 of 174).

Since many data item (CDRL) deliveries are linked more closely to technical reviews and the related data submission, review and approval cycles than to the HW CLINs, the potential for gaps or premature closure of NRE CLINs before all related CDRL deliveries are completed and approved by the government is of significant concern in developing a cohesive and executable schedule.

Comment Noted. NO CHANGE

8 RFP 1,2,3,4,5,6,

19, 29, 56

B, F Supplies or Services and Prices, Contract Line Item Description, Deliveries or Performance

CLIN

0001 -

AA - AH

1) Is it the Governments overall intent to accumulate costs under individual SLINs and that CLIN 0001 is only a "roll up" CLIN for the sub-indentured SLINs?

2) Is it expected that CLIN 0001 will have separate NRE cost accumulation in addition to the SLINs?

3) Would the Government consider a different CLIN structure to simplify proposal evaluation and allow the Government to perform a more apples-to-apples cost comparison?

1) Yes, it the Governments intent that all NRE will be rolled up to one CLIN with each SLIN priced.

2) No.

3) CLIN Structure will remain unchanged. NO

CHANGE REGARDING ALL THREE QUESTIONS

9 RFP 12, 15, 16,

18, 21

B Supplies or Services and Prices CLINs 0108, 0205, 0304, Small Business Subcontracting Goals defined in Section B, including incentive fee language, imply additional incentive or evaluation criteria could be applied against SDB goals. Other portions of the RFP represent the small business goal as 5%.

Comment Noted.

10 RFP 12, 15, 16,

18, 21

B Supplies or Services and Prices CLINs 0108, 0205, 0304, Please confirm the specific small business goal for this contract is 5%. "Small Business Participation and Small Business Subcontracting Incentive" as discussed in Section B of the RFP is separate from the requirements of "Small Business Participation" in Section L paragraph 3.1.3.4. NO CHANGE

11 RFP 44 C HQ C-2-0065 Software Development Requirements

(a)(4) This paragraph indicates that CMMI appraisal / assessment is not required. Section L&M, the SOW and PIPs indicate Modular Open System Architecture (MOSA) is an important subfactor for evaluation and requirement within the PIPs. MOSA requires a significant amount of software discipline to effectively implement.

Comment Noted.

12 RFP 44 C HQ C-2-0065 Software Development Requirements

(a)(4) Due the criticality of software to the ADC MK5 performance, recommend that the prime contractor be CMMI Level 3 or equivalent

CMMI Level 2 or equivalent certification is the requirement. NO CHANGE

13 RFP 56, 57 F Deliveries or Performance NA CLINs 0001AA, AB/AC, AD, AE, AF, AG and AH have different delivery months after award. What SETR schedule does the Government have a preference for in reference to staggered delivery dates, e.g., single PDR or incremental PDRs aligned to delivery dates.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise the RFP Attachment 7 Statement of Work paragraph

3.2.6 to clarify, as follows:

From: The Contractor shall host all Systems Engineering Technical Reviews (SETRs).

To: The Contractor shall host all Systems Engineering Technical Reviews (SETRs) for the overall system development.

UPDATED IN SOW PAGES 20-21

14 RFP 57 F Deliveries or Performance NA 1) The Note Box below NRE completion table ties completion of NRE

CLINs to final acceptance of end item CLINs. There is no specific description of NRE efforts that will occur after CDR and during the development (build) effort.

2) In relation to the completion dates in the table on page 56/57, what is the implication of those completion dates to NRE CLIN completion dates?

"1) NRE efforts do not end after CDR. For example, see the SOW Section 3.2

2) See note in Section F under the ""NRE Completion Items"" table"

NO CHANGE ON EITHER QUESTION

15 RFP 123 L Solicitation Response Requirements

1.2 Section L requires no Executive Summary. Within the Volume structure, there is no requirement for an overall explanation of the integration of Factor 1 through Factor 4 to demonstrate to the customer that the offeror is providing a comprehensive, integrated and low risk approach to satisfying all requirements of the ADC MK5 program.

Comment Noted.

16 RFP 123 L Solicitation Response Requirements

1.2 Recommend that the Contractor be allowed to submit an Executive Summary of an additional five pages in length and one page may be an 11 x 17 foldout. It is also recommended that the Government advise the contractor if the Executive Summary will or will not be evaluated.

There is no requirement for an executive summary in this RFP. NO CHANGE

17 RFP 133 L Past Performance 3.1.4 Will the Government consider lowering the dollar thresholds for Past Performance citations?

Dollar thresholds for past performance will remain as stated in the RFP. NO CHANGE

18 SOW 48 3.5.2 Quality Surveillance 1 Paragraph references CDRL A052, Test Equipment Certification Plan and an earlier reference to execution of the plan in paragraph 3.2.2.1.

CDRL A052 was not provided, nor does the reference paragraph discuss the TECP. CDRL A038 (provided) is titled "Contractor Validation Program" and subtitled "Test Equipment Certification Plan". CDRL A038 is referenced in paragraph 3.3.3.2.1 of the SOW.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 7, Statement of Work in Section

3.5.2 Quality Surveillance as follows:

From: Test Equipment Certification Plan (CDRL A052) as described in paragraph 3.2.2.1

To: Test Equipment Certification Plan (CDRL A038) as described in paragraph 3.2.2.1 SOW PAGE 48

19 SOW 21 3.2.6.1 System Requirements, System Functional and Systems Design Review (SRR/SFR)

Title The System Design Review is in the title for this section, however is not mentioned elsewhere in this section or any other section and has no associated requirements.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 7, Statement of Work Section

3.2.6.1 as follows:

From: 3.2.6.1 System Requirements Review/System Functional (SRR/SFR) and System Design Review

To: 3.2.6.1 System Requirements Review/System Functional (SRR/SFR) SOW PAGE 21

20 SOW 21 3.2.6.1 System Requirements, System Functional and Systems Design Review (SRR/SFR)

Item 2 It is not clear what is expected for the operational requirements development called for under item 2 "The SRR/SFR presentation shall cover: … 2. Operational Requirements Development - The Operational Requirements should be delineated in enough detail to allow the review body to understand if the system requirements will meet and/or the operational needs." Where are the operational needs articulated? With operational needs defined (by the Government), how are the operational requirements to be delineated? What are the differences between the operational requirements and operational needs?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 7, Statement of Work Section

3.2.6.1 (2) as follows:

From: 2. Operational Requirements Development – The Operational Requirements should be delineated in enough detail allow the review body to understand if the systems requirements will meet and/or the operational needs.

To: 2. Operational Requirements Development – The Operational Requirements should be delineated in enough detail to allow the review body to understand if the systems requirements will meet the requirements identified in the PIPS. SOW

21 SOW 11 3 Integrated Master Schedule 3.1.2.2 The SOW states the IMS shall support the needs of all functional areas and all Integrated Product Teams. The SEP, describes various IPTs on page 24 and in tables on page 25 - 32. The PIPs describes a specific IPT in section 5.3.2.

Comment Noted.

22 SOW 11 3 Integrated Master Schedule 3.1.2.2 1) Please identify any additional IPTs and Working Groups (WGs) that the Contractor can be expected to work with during the ADC MK5 program.

2) Recommend that the Prime Contractor be part of the T&E WG, Risk Mgt Team, ILS WG, System Security and any other WGs applicable to

ADC MK5

The awarded contractor will be invited to attend IPT and Working Group meetings identified in the SEP. NO CHANGE

23 SOW 19 3 Configuration Management 3.2.5 This section states, " The Contractor shall establish the allocated baseline at PDR. The Government shall establish the initial product baseline at CDR". The IPR described in 3.2.6.5 on Page 25 includes "presentation shall include demonstrations of software performance" and on Page 26 includes "review results obtained during in-house testing, including problems encountered and solutions implemented and/or proposed." The CDR described in 3.2.6.6 on page 26 contains similar language.

Comment Noted.

24 SOW 19 3 Configuration Management 3.2.5 In as much that IPR and CDR follow PDR, please confirm the Contractors assumption that software development and selected elements of hardware development, as defined by the Contractor, may occur at the contractors discretion after PDR approval.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 7, Statement of Work Section 3.2.5 as follows:

Added: The contractor shall control the allocated baseline for hardware and software until Government approval after FCA

SOW PAGE 19

25 SOW 34 3 ADC MK 5 Special Test Unit Electronics (STU-E)

3.3.1.2 The description of this STU-E SOW task does not contain the word "design" in the first sentence. The STU task does contain the word design.

Comment Noted.

26 SOW 34 3 ADC MK 5 Special Test Unit Electronics (STU-E)

3.3.1.2 Please confirm the Contractors assumption that this is a typo and that design activities for the STU-E shall be bid in the appropriate NRE CLIN. If NRE is not bid in the appropriate CLIN, where is NRE for this end item bid?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 7, Statement of Work Section

3.3.1.2 as follows:

From: The Contractor shall fabricate, test, and deliver the ADC MK 5 Special Test STU Electronics (STU-E) that meet th

PIPS.

To: The Contractor shall design, fabricate, test, and deliver the ADC MK 5 Special Test STU Electronics (STU-E) that meet the PIPS. SOW PAGE 34

27 SOW 38 3 Factory Acceptance Test 3.3.5 The FAT requirement is unclear as to what units the Government desires FAT conducted.

Comment Noted.

28 SOW 38 3 Factory Acceptance Test 3.3.5 Please confirm the Contractors assumption that FAT will be conducted on selected units of EDM-2 as a draft procedure in support of LRIP. 1st formal FAT will occur during LRIP.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 7, Statement of Work Section 3.3.5 as follows:

Add: FAT shall be conducted on a representative sample of EDM-2 devices, and then be conducted on 100% of the LRIP devices. SOW PAGE 38

29 SOW 24 3.2.8.1 System Requirements, System

Functional and Systems Design Review (SRR/SFR)

1st It is not clear what is expected for the operational requirements development called for under item 2 "The SRR/SFR presentation shall cover: … 2. Operational Requirements Development - The Operational Requirements should be delineated in enough detail to allow the review body to understand if the system requirements will meet and/or the operational needs." Where are the operational needs articulated? With operational needs defined (by the Government), how are the operational requirements to be delineated? What are the differences between the operational requirements and operational needs?

Refer to the response to #20. SOW PAGE 21

30 SOW 35 3 ADC MK 5 EDM-2I, and EDM- 2T.

3.3.1.6, 3.3.1.7, 3.3.1.8

The description of these tasks do not contain the word "design" in the first sentence. The EDM-2 task does contain the word design.

Comment Noted.

31 SOW 35 3 ADC MK 5 EDM-2I, and EDM- 2T.

3.3.1.6, 3.3.1.7, 3.3.1.8

Please confirm the Contractors assumption that this is a typo and that design activities for the EDM-2 test variants shall be bid in the appropriate NRE CLIN. If NRE is not bid in the appropriate CLIN, where is NRE for this end item bid?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 7, Statement of Work Sections 3.3.1.6, 3.3.1.7 and 3.3.1.8 as follows:

Sections 3.3.1.6 ADC MK 5 Engineering Development Model-2 Inert (EDM-2I) From: The Contractor shall fabricate, test, and deliver the ADC MK 5 EDM-2 Inert units that meet PIPS.

To: The Contractor shall design, fabricate, test, and deliver the ADC MK 5 EDM-2 Inert units that meet PIPS.

Sections 3.3.1.7 ADC MK 5 Engineering Development Model-2 HERO Test (EDM-2T) From: The Contractor shall fabricate, test, and deliver the ADC MK 5 EDM-2 Test (EDM-2T) unit for Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance (HERO) that meet PIPS.

To: The Contractor shall design, fabricate, test, and deliver the ADC MK 5 EDM-2 Test (EDM-2T) unit for Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Ordnance (HERO) that meet PIPS.

Sections 3.3.1.8 ADC MK 5 Engineering Development Model-2 EQT (EDM-2EQT) From: The Contractor shall fabricate, test, and deliver the ADC MK 5 EDM-2 Environmental Qualification Testing (EQT) (EDM-2EQT) units that meet the PIPS.

To: The Contractor shall design, fabricate, test, and deliver the ADC MK 5 EDM-2 Environmental Qualification Testing (EQT) (EDM-2EQT) units that meet the PIPS. SOW

PAGE 35 FOR ALL THREE UPDATES

32 Attachment 1 - PIPS 69 5.7.1 Storage & Stowage Periodic Calibration and Maintenance

The requirement that the system shall not require calibration, periodic, or preventive maintenance for a minimum of 12 years (ref. PIPS 5.7.1) appears to be in conflict with the requirement to provide documentation addressing diagnostic monitoring and replacement of any component(s) in the ADC MK 5 that are anticipated or known to have aging characteristics that will reduce dormant reliability after seven years below the level specified in paragraph 5.6.2 (ref. PIPS 5.7.2.1).

Comment Noted.

33 Attachment 1 - PIPS 69 5.7.1 Storage & Stowage Periodic Calibration and Maintenance

Can the Government please clarify if the requirement for no preventive maintenance is a minimum of 12 years or seven years?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise Attachment 1, Prime Item Performance Specification, Section 5.7.2 as follows:

From: seven years

To: 12 years 34 Attachment 1 - PIPS 25, 55 5.3.2.2,

5.4.8.3.4 Electrical Interface Requirements, Bending Moment

Do the bending moment (5.4.8.3.4) requirements apply the same in the case of hand rammed ejection from the launcher (5.3.2.2)?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 1, Prime Item Performance Specification, Section 5.4.8.3.4 as follows:

Add: The bending moment requirements are for impulse launched devices only.

35 Attachment 1 - PIPS 24 5.3.2 Launcher Interface Requirements Will the ECL sabot and the PMS415-ADC5-IS-11-140 documents be made available prior to proposal submission?

No ECL Sabot documents will be available prior to proposal submission. Interface Specification has been provided as Attachment 13. SEE 5.3.2.1 ITEM #5

36 Attachment 1 - PIPS 65 5.5.7.1 &

5.5.7.3 High Temperature Storage Soak & Low Temperature Storage Soak

The PIPS says that applicable testing shall be in accordance with MIL- STD-810G, method 501.4, procedure I, based on the induced conditions listed therein. There is no method 501.4, procedure I in MIL-STD- 810G.

See response to question #54.

37 Attachment 1 - PIPS 65 5.5.7.1 & 5.5.7.3

High Temperature Storage Soak & Low Temperature Storage Soak

What will be the configuration of the ADC Mk5 unit for performance testing after the temperature soak? Will the unit be performance checked starting at the high/low temperatures? Or allowed to return to ambient temperatures prior to performance testing?

See response to question #54.

38 Attachment 1 - PIPS 65 5.5.7.2 & 5.5.7.4

High Temperature Storage Test & Low Temperature Storage Test

What will be the configuration of the ADC Mk5 unit for performance testing after the temperature soak?

See response to question #54.

39 Attachment 1 - PIPS 68 5.5.13 Solar Radiation The PIPS references MIL-STD-810G method 505.4. there is no method 505.4, procedure I in MIL-STD-810G.

See response to question #54.

40 Attachment 1 - PIPS 14 3.1.2 STU-E 1 At what level are the STU-E interfaces required to be? Pre- or Post- ADC/DAC? Can the Government provide the expected ICD/IDD for the STU-E testing? (PMS415-ADC5-IS-11-140)

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise the Statement of Work Paragraph 3.3.1.2 to include the following:

Added: NUWCDIVNPT will be responsible for interfacing and integrating the STU-E at the WAF.

41 Attachment 1 - PIPS 33 5.4.3.2.6 Transmit Signal Modes 1 What are the requirements for implementing the PA mode? Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 1, Prime Item Performance Specification, Section 5.4.3.2.6. See PIPS Section 5.4.3.2.6.7 for information on PA mode requirements.

42 Attachment 1 - PIPS 5.6.2, 5.4.8.1

Dormant Reliability Definition of Operational Service: what is the definition of operational service? Is the definition of operational service "standby condition" and transitions between stowage and standby (i.e. loading and unloading into

ICL)?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 1, Prime Item Performance Specification, Section 5.4.12 will be modified to further clarify the Stowage and Standby conditions. Section 5.4.12.8 will be added to the PIPS for clarification of Operational Service.

43 Attachment 1 - PIPS 5.6.2, 5.4.12.2

Dormant Reliability Definition of Stowage: Does stowage condition also apply to devices installed in the ECL as well as to those in a locker as defined in 5.4.12.2?

See response to Question #42.

44 Attachment 1 - PIPS 5.6.2, 5.4.12.2

Dormant Reliability Recommend clarifying that devices in the ECL are in an environment similar to stowage, and clarify any differences. [If ECL is flooded, dormant reliability requirements or maintenance requirements should be relaxed -- RC to examine/verify].

See response to Question #42.

45 Attachment 1 - PIPS 5 Dormant Reliability 5.6.2 This section states that dormant reliability applies to situations when the ADC is in storage, stowage or operational service. When the ADC is used in conjunction with the ICL, does operational service encompass the time spent in the Standby state and in Stowage to Standby Transition?

When the ADC is used in conjunction with the ECL, does operational service encompass the time during which the ADC is contained in the

ECL?

See response to Question #42.

46 Attachment 18 - Systems Engineering Plan

57 Table 19 Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA)

Table 19 The Systems Engineering Plan identifies a Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) as part of the RAM Engineering activities, however, the Attachment 7 SOW does not include any FMECA efforts for the contractor or an associated CDRL.

Comment Noted.

47 Attachment 18 - Systems Engineering Plan

57 Table 19 Failure Mode, Effects, and Criticality Analysis (FMECA)

Table 19 Can the Government please clarify the contractor's responsibility to accomplish and deliver a FMECA?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will update the Statement of Work Paragraph 3.4.4 to add the following:

Adds:The Government will lead Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) efforts. The Contractor shall provide input through reliability CDRLs and meeting participation.

48 Attachment 18 -

Systems Engineering Plan

57 Table 19 Maintainability and Built-In-Test Demonstrations

Table 19 The Systems Engineering Plan identifies a Maintainability and Built-In Test Demonstration as part of the RAM Engineering activities, however, the Attachment 7 SOW does not include any Maintability/BIT demonstration efforts for the contractor or an associated set of CDRLs.

Comment Noted.

49 Attachment 18 - Systems Engineering Plan

57 Table 19 Maintainability and Built-In-Test Demonstrations

Table 19 Can the Government please clarify the contractor's responsibility to accomplish a Maintainability/BIT Demonstration?

The Offeror is not required to perform the Maintainability/BIT Demonstration identified in the SEP.

50 CDRL A001-A018 N/A CDRLs A006 and A007 Block 12 Block 12. Date of First Submission refers to Block 16, which does not include a Block 12. Date of First Submission.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will update CDRLs A006 and A007 to add a date of first submission.

51 CDRL A001 to A018 NA CLIN 0005 CDRL A007 - Technical Report - Study/Services; Minimum Sustaining Rate (MSR) and Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) Report

Block 4 Referenced DID, DI-MGMT-A not found. Believe this to be a typo and should be DI-MISC-80004B, which bears the correct title shown in Block 2.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will update the DID referenced in CDRLs A007 as follows:

From: DI-MGMT-A To: DI-MISC-80508B

52 CDRL A001 to A018 NA CLIN 0005 CDRL A009 - Conference Agenda Block 5 Reference DID, DI-ADMN-81249A; DAU ASSIST reflects that Revision B is the current version.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will update the DID referenced in CDRLs A009 follows:

From: DI-ADMN-81249A To: DI-ADMN-81249B

53 CDRL A019 to A035 NA CLIN 0005 CDRL A033 - Software Users Manual

Block 6 Reference DID, DI-IPSC-81443; DAU ASSIST reflects that Revision A is the current version. Validated by Revision A, Notice 1 for use in acquisition.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will update the DID referenced in CDRLs A033 as follows:

From: DI-IPSC-81443 To: DI-IPSC-81443A

54 Attachment 1 - PIPS 62-68 5.5, 5.5.1- 5.5.14

Various NA Some of the environmental qualification requirements seem redundent or not applicable for an expendable countermeasure. Can you please confirm that all identified environmental tests are required.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 1, Prime Item Performance Specification, Section 5.5 Environmental Qualification as follows:

Remove Section 5.5.3.1, Handling and Transportation Shock, 60 g's, Remove Section 5.5.3.3, Handling and Transportation Shock, Cornerwise, Remove Section 5.5.3.4, Handling and Transportation Shock, At-sea, Remove Section 5.5.7.1, High Temperature Storage Soak, Remove Section 5.5.7.2, High Temperature Storage Test, Remove Section 5.5.7.3, Low Temperature Storage Soak, Remove Section 5.5.7.4, Low Temperature Storage Test, Remove Section 5.5.8, Seawater Operationing Tempurature Remove Section 5.5.12, Salt Fog, Remove Section 5.5.13, Solar Radiation, Remove Section 5.5.14, Dust Environment

55 Attachment 1 - PIPS 62-68 5.5 Various NA Of all the Environmental Qualification requirements listed in PIPS

Section 5.5, only Section 5.5.3 Shock identifies whether the test is applicable for the bare device or the encapsulated (ECL loaded) device.

Can the Gov't identify which tests will be conducted on which device configuration?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 1, Prime Item Performance Specification, Section 5.5 Environmental Qualification to identify which device configuration will be used for each environmental qualification test. A summary of those revisions are as follows:

The following Sections will be modified to specify that the ICL variant will be used for testing:

Section 5.5.1, Vibration, Transportation Section 5.5.3.2, Handling and Transportation Shock, drop Section 5.5.4, Low Pressure, Non-operating Section 5.5.5, High Pressure, Operating Section 5.5.6, Pressure/Temperature, Operating Section 5.5.7, Temperature/Humidity (Non-operating) Section 5.5.10, Electromagnetic Environmental Effects Section 5.5.10.1, Electromagnetic Radiation Susceptibility Section 5.5.10.3, Static-Electric Discharge Section 5.5.11, Salinity

The following Sections will be modified to specify that the ECL variant will be used for testing:

Section 5.5.1, Vibration, Transportation Section 5.5.9, Magnetic Field Strength Section 5.5.10.2, Conducted Electromagnetic Susceptibility

The following Sections will be modified to specify that both the ICL and ECL variants will be used for testing:

Section 5.5.2, Vibration, Shipboard Section 5.5.3, Shock

56 GFI Documents Disk NA NA PIPS, GFI and RFP Related Documents for Solicitation N00024-16-R-6247, Acoustic Countermeasure Device (ADC)

MK 5

NA Can the Government confirm that all the documents provided as part of the GFI package are marked correctly with regards to classification markings?

Yes, the markings on the documents provided on the "PIPS, GFI and RFP Related Documents for Solicitation N00024-16- R-6247, Acoustic Countermeasure Device (ADC) MK 5" disk are marked correctly.

57 Terms of Use Agreement (TOUA)

2 Last paragraph

Upon request by the Offeror via the document cited, two CDs were received;

(1) a CD with unclassified GFI and (2) a CD with classified GFI.

The final paragraph on page 2 of the TOUA states "to facilitate review, Program Manager PMS 415 Undersea Defensive Warfare Systems, has granted authority for your company to print ten (1) copies of the above documents or data" and track/log each as a method of controlling them. However, some of the files on CD (e.g. the PIPS) have security enabled which restricts printing.

CDs have been redistributed to enable printing.

58 RFP 2-4

B / CLINs 0001AD or 0001AE

F / CLINs 0001AD or 0001AE

C / CLINs 0001AD or 0001AE

Section B, page 2-4, and Section F, page 57 identifies CLINs 0001AD or 0001AE as part of the Base contract whereas Section C, page 29 (bullet 4 and

5) state "IF OPTION IS EXERCISED" for these CLINs.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Section C only, Sections B & F require no update.

SEE RFP AMENDMENT SECTION C PAGE 3.

59 RFP 2-4

B / CLINs 0001AA-AE

I / Clause 52.217-9

Section B, pages 2-4 identifies CLINs 0001AA thru 0001AE as part of the Base contract.

Section I, page 75, Clause 52.217-9 identifies CLINs 0001AA thru 0001AE as Options exercisable within 12 months after contract award.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Section B. See RFP Amendment page 3. The correction was made in Section B ONLY and was addressed in the previous Question (#58).

SECTION "I", Clause 52.217-9 is correct and requires no change.

60 RFP 57

F /

HQ F-1-0003

I / Clause 52.217-9 Clause 52.217-7

Section F, page 57 requires the delivery of CLIN 0001AH NRE at 16 months after the Option exercise date.

Section F, page 57 requires the delivery of CLIN 0303 at 4 months after the Option exercise date. Both CLINs have the same latest option exercise date of 36 months after contract.

These two delivery dates appear to conflict with one another as the NRE delivery is 12 months after than the required hardware delivery date.

See Note on page 57 in the "NRE Completion Items" table.

61 RFP 75

I / Clause 52.217-9

F /

HQ F-1-0003

I / Clause 52.209-4

Section I, page 75 identifies the option exercise dates of CLINs 0001AF NRE and CLIN 0203 as no later than 24 months after contract.

CLIN 0203 required delivery requirement is six months after Option exercise date, which would be at month 30.

Section I, page 72 states “(a) The Contractor shall deliver 20 unit(s) of Lot/Item ADC MK5 EDM-2 EQT within 40 calendar months from the date of this contract to ….”

It appears either the latest exercise/delivery dates are in error or the 40 month requirement is incorrect.

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Section I as follows:

From: within 40 calendar months from the date of this contract To: within 30 calendar months from the date of this contract RFP

AMEND PAGE 11

62 RFP 124 L‐3 /

1.2

RFP Section L, Section 1.2 states that “fold out pages may be used for diagrams, charts or graphic material only and may not exceed 11 inches by 17 inches”.

See RFP Section L Subsection 1.2

63 RFP 124 L‐3 /

1.2

RFP Section L, Section 1.2 states that “every paragraph, figure, and table shall be numbered”. We assume that the reference to “paragraph” really means that every section (e.g. 1.1.g Reliability) shall be numbered, and not that every grammatical paragraph initiated by a line feed shall be numbered?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Section L as follows:

From: Every paragraph, figure, and table shall be numbered.

To: Every subsection, figure, and table shall be numbered.

64 RFP 135 L‐3 /

3.2.1.1 Please clarify the requirement specified in 3.2.1.c; does “each WBS” refer to work package?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Section L paragraph 3.2.1.1 as follows:

From: A cost summary for each WBS at the cost element level.

To: A cost summary for each WBS element at the cost element level. RFP

AMEND PAGE 25

65 RFP 146 3.34(a) Our interpretation of this section is an OCI Mitigation Plan is NOT required as part of the proposal submission if the Offeror is confident OCI does not exist and there is no appearance that OCI may exist.

OCI Plans are applicable per Paragraph 3.3.4 of Section L.

66 RFP 2-4 Schedule B CLIN 0001 N/A CLIN 0001, SLINs 0001AA, 0001AB, 0001AC, 0001AD and 0001AE, are part of the initial contract award. No award date for proposal estimating purposes has been provided. The award date on p 11, Figure 5, of the SEP shows a mid 4QFY17 award; this schedule also shows PDR to occur prior to award. The SEP schedule is not achievable and there is limited guidance with respect to the schedule and expected start date.

The schedule shown in Figure 5 of the Systems Engineering Plan is notional and a new schedule will be developed after contract award. RFP AMEND PAGE

67 RFP 45 Clause HQ

C-2-0065

HQ C-2-0065 SOFTWARE

DEVELOPMENT

REQUIREMENTS (NAVSEA)

(DEC 2006) (MODIFIED) (SEP

2012)

(b) Given the 20 page limitation on the Software Development Plan (SDP) and the constraints for the SDP to conform with DOD-STD-1679A, IEEE 15289:2011 and IEEE 12207:2008 (from HQ C-2-0065 SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS (NAVSEA) and DI- IPSC-81427A (from CDRL A024), it is not possible to describe an entirely compliant software development processe in a 20 page SDP.

From the RFP P. 45 of 174, states, “(b) The SDP shall be delivered to the Government for concurrence under CDRL and shall not vary significantly from that proposed to the Government for evaluation for award. The contractor shall follow the Government concurred with SDP for all computer software to be developed or maintained under this effort.

Any changes, modifications, additions or substitutions to the SDP also require prior Government concurrence.

Comment Noted. NO CHANGE SEE QUESTION #1 RESPONSE

68 RFP 45 Clause HQ C-2-0065

HQ C-2-0065 SOFTWARE

DEVELOPMENT

REQUIREMENTS (NAVSEA)

(DEC 2006) (MODIFIED) (SEP

2012)

(b) Please confirm that an SDP that is fully compliant with DOD-STD- 1679A, IEEE 15289:2011 and IEEE 12207:2008 and DI-IPSC-81427A is required to be delivered 75 DAC as required by CDRL A024 and that the 20 page SDP required by Section L, p 123 of 174 and evaluated per Section M, p 167 of 174 (item h.), to be included in our offer is to address Attachment SOW Section 3.2.8 only

Yes, the SDP shall be fully compliant with DOD-STD-1679A, IEEE 15289:2011 and IEEE 12207:2008 and DI-IPSC- 81427A is required to be delivered 75 DAC as required by CDRL A024.

Regarding the length of the SDP, please see response to Question #1.

69 Attachment 1 - PIPS 16 4.4.1 Drawings The PIPS section 4.4.1 references drawings that weren't provided on the GFI CD. Will those drawings be provided?

Amendment 0002 to Solicitation No. N00024-16-R-6247 will revise RFP Attachment 1, Prime Item Performance Specification, Section 4.4.1 will be modified to update the drawing numbers, and those drawings will be provided on the update CD.