N00024-17-R-5152_-_CSEA_Offeror_Questions_8_30_17.pdf

Tracker # Page # Section/ Paragraph Question/Comment Proposed Action/Change Answer

1 154 3.3.3 The Delivery Date Requirements in Table 2, Section 3.3.3 of the SOW are beyond the Period of Performance dates listed in Section F for completion CLINs 1000, 1002, and 1003. Please clarify the intended dates to execute.

The Government updated the dates listed in Table 2 of Section 3.3.3 and ensure alignment with Section F.

2 Bidder Library Testbed User's Manual (Preliminary) Version 3.6, 05 Jul

The Testbed User's Manual (Preliminary), Version 3.6, dated 05 Jul 00, was provided via the Bidder Library. This document relates to a variant of SSDS Mk2 MOD 0 build which is no longer in service in the fleet, is obsolete, and is outside the scope of the SSDS CSEA competition. A Testbed User's Manual related to a current or more recent SSDS Mark 2 build would be useful to the Bidders

Request the Bidders be provided with a current or more recent version of the Testbed User's Manual

The Government has uploaded the "Testbed on a Workstation (TWS) User's Guide" to the bidder library.

3 251 L.1.0 Ten calendar days is not enough time to develop a comprehensive understanding of the RFP and associated attachments, and given the significant additions and changes from draft to final, we request an extension to the questions deadline.

Will the Government extend the deadline for RFP questions to September 4, 2017? The Government extended the question period to 04 September via an update to FBO on 10 August 2017.

4 1 Section A, Box 9 Bidder respectfully requests extension to the proposal delivery date to 01 December 2017. The requested additional time for proposal submission provides non-incumbents the necessary time to adequately assess the SSDS architecture, code, unique configuration parameters, operation and performance and to address the new scope identified in the final RFP that wa not described in the draft RFP

Bidder respectfully requests extension to the proposal delivery date to 01 December

The Government has updated the proposal submission date to 1 December 2017.

5 308 M.2.1 How are Factors 3 and 4 weighted relative to 1 and 2? Please provide the weighting values of Factors 3 and 4 relative to those of Factors 1 and 2.

The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has revised Section M to deta the weightings of Factors.

6 126 C.3.3.2.3.2 Paragraph 3.3.2.3.2. specifies that SSDS technical manuals shall be developed in accordance with the SSDS Technical Manual Contract Requirements (TMCR) provided as GFI for each SSDS baseline, S1000D as applicable, and the SSDS Style Guides (e.g., an S1000D IETM Development Style Guide in Table 2.10).

These documents are not listed in the J-08 GFI attachment. The Contractor recommends that any required TMCRs and Style Guides be included as GFI in Attachment J-08.

The GFI List, Section J Attachment J-08, has been updated and provided in amendment 01.

7 C p. 146 3.3.3.1.2.1.1 Please provide the ERS (Enterprise Radar Suite) NCD (Naval Capability Document) referenced in the RFP. This document is required for a full understanding of the scope of the solicitation

We respectfully request that this document be delivered to the Bidders, in the interest of completing the delivery of the necessary reference information for the proposal

It has been determined by the Government that the NCD is not required. As such, all references to the NCD has been removed from the solicitation.

8 260 L.4.1.1.b The RFP requires Bidders to "discuss timing (i.e. error budget) impacts with respect to the ICS elements (e.g.

Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC)) caused by the incorporation of the ACB 20 capabilities". To date, no information on current ICS measured performance data, models, or tools which would enable non-incumbent Bidders to ascertain the current baseline performance has been provided. No CEC implementation was delivered with the SSDS software source code delivery. Will this data be made available to all Bidders?

Respectfully request delivery to all Bidders of the SSDS version of CEC with associated Wrap Around Simulation Processor (WASP)

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section L.

GOVERNMENT RESPONSES TO SSDS CSEA SOLICITATION #N00024-17-R-5152

COMMENTS/QUESTIONS

- In the event of a conflict between the RFP and the Government responses to the Draft RFP questions, the RFP will govern.

- Answers to classified questions, if not addressed below, will be included with the release of the RFP

9 260 L.4.1.1.b The RFP requires Bidders to "discuss timing (i.e. error budget) impacts with respect to the ICS elements (e.g.

Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC)) caused by the incorporation of the ACB 20 capabilities". To date, no information on current ICS measured performance data, models, or tools which would enable non-incumbent Bidders to ascertain the current baseline performance has been provided.

SSDS testbed software (including sensor, effector, and other required interface simulators or stimulators) is required to collect measurements from the existing source code base to establish a baseline. This information has not been provided

Please provide SSDS testbed software (including sensor, effector, and other required interface simulators or stimulators)

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section L.

10 260 L.4.1.1.b The RFP requires Bidders to "discuss timing (i.e. error budget) impacts with respect to the ICS elements (e.g.

Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC)) caused by the incorporation of the ACB 20 capabilities". To date, no information on current ICS measured performance data, models, or tools which would enable non-incumbent Bidders to ascertain the current baseline performance has been provided.

Please provide documentation describing the objective and measured Technical Performance Measures for the most recent SSDS build

Please provide documentation describing the objective and measured Technical Performance Measures and current error budget for the most recent SSDS build

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section L.

11 89 C.3.1.10.f The RFP requires that "For software modules already having a software model and for software modules with more than thirty (30) percent change in a new capability project or ECP, the Contractor shall document and model the system". No information has been provided to the Bidders which would allow a non-incumbent to estimate the current state of software models for existing SSDS components nor the amount of change required based on ACB- 20 new capabilities. Please deliver SSDS software design models and related artifacts via the Bidder Library

Please deliver SSDS software design models and related artifacts via the Bidder Library

The Government has provided all related models and artifacts as GFI. No additional information is planned to be released.

12 263 L.4.1.5 The RFP requires Bidders describe the Build 6 on Suite A Hardware with MODE 5 IFF Modifications (CLIN 1004) Technical Approach. SSDS Build 6 is a legacy build that has not been provided to Bidders, disadvantaging non-incumbents in developing their technical approach

Please provide SSDS Build 6 source code and associated documentation The Government has removed CLIN 1004 as a requirement from this solicitation.

13 289 Appendix 3 to Section L

The Highly Desired Qualifications for both the Chief Engineer and Chief Architect key personnel read, in part, "Substantial engineering knowledge of Carrier or Large Deck Amphibious Ship Warfare Systems (WS) as well as experience with SSDS Integrated Combat System (ICS) System Engineering and Architecture." Was it the Government's intention to omit that substantial experience in other US Navy surface navy combat systems is a highly desired qualification of these key personnel

Recommend rewording requirement to "Substantial engineering knowledge of Carrier, Large Deck Amphibious, or other equivalent US Navy Ship Warfare Systems (WS) as well as experience with SSDS Integrated Combat System (ICS), or equivalent, complex US Navy combat system, System Engineering and Architecture"

The Government has considered the recommendation and revised Section L.

14 L.3.1, p.257 L.3.1 The RFP specifies, "Text within tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material may use 8-point font." Is Arial Narrow an acceptable font for text used in these cases?

Allow Arial Narrow 8-point font for tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, and graphic material

The Government has considered the recommendation and revised Section L.

15 L.3.1, p.257 L.3.1 For volumes with no page count, will the Government accept page numbering by individual section rather than consecutively for the entire volume?

Allow sectional page numbering so that plans and procedures will not need to be renumbered.

The Government has considered the recommendation and revised Section L.

16 Section L, p. 254; 279 L.3.2 Contents of Offer Para. a.; L.4.6 Volume VI Para. 6

Section L.3.2 Paragraph a. indicates that Standard Form 33 with blocks 13 through 18 completed by the Offeror should be submitted in Volume VIII.

Section L.4.6 Para. 6 states that the Offeror should include an SF-33 with blocks 13 through 18 completed and clearly identify the location of each of these items in the Total Cost/Price Volume (VI). Is the SF-33 form required to be included in both Volumes?

Recommend the Government only require the SF-33 in Volume VI. The Government requires Offerors to submit in accordance with the amended instruction provided in Contents of the Offer, 2.0 and further detailed in Section L, 4.6.

17 Section L p. 274 L.4.3.10.3 In Paragraph 1, the Offeror is required to answer six questions in every submitted BOE for each applicable CWBS element within each CLIN and organized sequentially. Question #5 indicates that each BOE shall provide an estimate for the anticipated travel from the Contractor's facility to the worksite, in and around the worksite, and from the worksite to the Contractor's facility. Paragraph 2 requires the Offeror to discretely propose all travel as separate BOE's. Is the Government's intent for the Offeror to provide a separate Travel BOE for each CWBS element within each CLIN or for Travel to be bid as a separate discrete task within each CWBS element within each CLIN?

Recommend the Government restrict travel costs proposed to a separate Travel BOE. The Government intends to have travel bid as a separate discrete task within each CWBS element within each of the completion CLINs. The proposed travel shall be traceable to the CWBS task for which the Offeror believes is requiring the travel.

18 Section L, p. 275 and 280 L.4.3.10.3 and L.4.6.3

The RFP states for major cost-reimbursement subcontractors, it is "Major subcontractors are defined as any subcontractor performing 3% or more of the total hours under the order; however, where otherwise minor subcontractors cumulatively perform more than 10% of the total hours under the order or cumulatively perform more than $15M of work under the order, all subcontractors are considered major subcontractors and must propose as such."

Recommend that determination of major subcontractors be evaluated on a CLIN by CLIN basis.

The Government definition of "Major Subcontractor" is at the Contract level.

19 Section B, p. 32 CLIN 0070 CLIN 0070 states "see note B," which defines the CLIN as an Option Item.

This CLIN is not listed as an Option in Section I.

Recommend removal of "See Note B" under CLIN 0070 The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has removed Note B from

CLIN 0070.

20 Section B, p. 44 Section M, page 312

Section B Note C Section M paragraph 4.0

Note C, which applies to CLINs 0060-0079 states "Total cost including application of any indirect rates shall not exceed the cost specified in Section B". There are no NTE cost/values in Section B for CLINs 0060-0079 specified.

In Section M under 4.0 Total Evaluated Cost/Price paragraph 5, it states "All non-fee bearing ODC CLINs [0060-0069] and Travel CLINs [0070-0079] will be the not-to-exceed values as provided in Section B". There are no NTE cost/values in Section B for CLINs 0060-0079 specified.

Please update the RFP to include the NTE values in Section B for CLINs 0060-0079. The RFP has been amended to provide a reference in CLINS 0060-0070 to an added "Note G." Note G provides the NTE amounts associated with the ODC and Travel CLINs.

21 Section H, page 210 Section L, page 288

Section H, LEVEL

OF EFFORT –

ALTERNATE I

(MAY 2010)

Paragraph (a)

In Section H under Level of Effort, Alternate I (May 2010) Paragraph (a), there is a note that states "Total hours may be revised if the offeror proposes a deviation to the Government-provided level of effort."

In Section L Appendix 2, it states "The Offeror shall not deviate from the

Recommend Government update Section H to be consistent with Section L to normalize LOE hours across bidders.

The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has provided a revisions to Section H.

22 Section I, p. 230 Section I Clause 252.204-7012 Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting (Dec 2015) is referenced in Section I.

Request Oct 2016 version be referenced instead The Government has removed or updated outdated clause in the solicitation.

23 Section I, p. 229 Section L, p. 296

Section I Clause 252.204-7008 Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls in Section I page 229 references Dec 2015 version and Section L page 296 references Oct 2016 version.

Request Oct 2016 version be referenced in both sections and remove Dec 2015 version.

The Government has removed or updated outdated clause in the solicitation.

24 Section I, p. 221 Section I Clause 252.204-7009 Limitations on the Use or Disclosure of Third-Party Contractor Reported Cyber Incident Information (Dec 2015) is referenced in Section I.

Request Oct 2016 version be referenced instead The Government has removed or updated outdated clause in the solicitation.

25 Section C 2.11, p. 65 C2.11 In accordance with section C2.11 of the RFP request the following documents be provided: PEOIWSINST 4732.1 (Element Certification Policy Memo and Element Certification Process Document), PEOIWSINST 5200.3 (Verification, Validation and Accreditation (VV&A) of Modeling), PEOIWSINST 4731.1 (COMBAT SYSTEM STRESS AND

ENDURANCE TEST, and PEO IWS Memo Ser IWS10/17-065 SSDS Combat System Security Directive).

Request Government provide the following documents: PEOIWSINST 4732.1 (Element Certification Policy Memo and Element Certification Process Document), PEOIWSINST 5200.3 (Verification, Validation and Accreditation (VV&A) of Modeling), PEOIWSINST 4731.1 (COMBAT SYSTEM STRESS AND ENDURANCE TEST, and PEO IWS Memo Ser IWS10/17-065 SSDS Combat System Security Directive).

The Government has posted additional documentation in the Bidders Library to address the Offeror's question.

26 Section F, p. 199-204 Section F Section F DELIVERIES and PERFORMANCE notes that the FOB for each CLIN is the Origin (Shipping Address). However, clause 52.247-34 F.O.B.

Destination is referenced on page 204.

Recommend removing clause 52.247-34 F.O.B. Destination. The Government has removed or updated outdated clause in the solicitation.

27 Bidder Library Bidder Library The Testbed User's Manual (Preliminary), Version 3.6, dated 05 Jul 00, was provided via the Bidder Library. This document relates to a variant of SSDS Mk2 MOD 0 build which is no longer in service in the fleet, is obsolete, and is outside the scope of the SSDS CSEA competition. A Testbed User's Manual related to a current or more recent SSDS Mk 2 build would be useful to the Bidders

Request the Government provide a current SSDS Mk 2 Testbed User's Manual. The Government has uploaded the "Testbed on a Workstation (TWS) User's Guide" to the bidder library.

28 Section C, Section C, P3.3.3.5

In accordance with the provided build plan, Mode 5 IFF has been implemented with Release 2 for CVN 78. Expecting that much of this implementation is applicable to Build 6, SCNs and other associated documentation should be provided to support the development of an accurate scope of effort and cost.

Provide all applicable MODE 5 IFF documentation (i.e. CONEMPs, white papers, SCNs, etc.) associated with its implementation in Release 2 for CVN 78.

The Government has removed CLIN 1004 as a requirement from this solicitation.

29 Section C, Page 151 Section C, 3.3.3.1.2.2 It is expected to add the ESSM Block 2 functionality onto the FCLIP Phase 2 SSDS developed baseline. The integration approach for these capabilities was described in a set of 6, COIs (Concept of Integration) papers. Could these documents be provided to the bidders, to support a more accurate estimate of the effort required to integrate the ESSM Block 2 missile?

Provide the 6, Concept of Integration papers for FCLIP Phase 2. The Government has posted additional documentation in the Bidders Library to address the Offeror's question.

30 Section C, Page 151 Section C, 3.3.3.1.2.2 As the integration of ESSM Blk 2 will need to build upon the capability upgrades currently being implemented under FCLIP phase 2 (e.g. 2T uplink), an understanding of the status of implementation of phase 2 initiatives at the time of contract start is needed to fully assess the scope of work for ESSM Blk2 integration in the RFP response.

Provide status of implementation of FCLIP Phase 2 at the time of contract start in conjunction with descriptions of FCLIP scope.

The Government has posted additional documentation in the Bidders Library to address the Offeror's question.

31 Section C, Page 264 Section C, 4.1.7.1 A reference is made to the NSSMS Stalker is referred to as an existing EO/IR system that has had some utilization by the fleet. No documentation has been provided on this system itself, or any Fleet Evaluation reports for the trial deployments. These documents could be valuable to ensure that current fleet desires and usage could be taken into account in the system design.

Provide manuals and reports relating to the deployment of the NSSMS Stalker EO/IR system.

The Government has reviewed the comments and no changes were made to the solicitation. The intent of the sample problem is not to develop a solution for a specific EO/IR sensor but rather a flexible architecture that could be used for any EO/IR sensor. The Stalker EO/IR sensor was provided as an example.

32 Section L, p. 255 Section L. 2(h) Section L does not provide a specific proposal volume in which to include the Offeror's statement.

Recommend the Offeror's Statement be included in Volume VIII The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has revised Section L.

33 Section M, p. 308 M.2.1 Section M, Paragraph 2.1 on Page 308 states, “Within Factor 1, all areas of focus are taken in totality to arrive at an adjective rating. These areas of focus will not receive their own adjective ratings.” However the relative importance of each subfactor is not stated.

Recommend the Government change the statement to read, “Within Factor 1, all area of focus are taken in totality to arrive at an adjective rating. These areas of focus will not receive their own adjective ratings and are all of equal value”

The Government has reviewed the comment and no change to the solicitation. The areas of focus are taken in totality to arrive at the adjective rating in Factor 1.

34 Section C, p. 177 3.3.3.5 Build 6 on Suite A

Understand that IFF Mode 5 integration is occurring in SSDS Build 10. A contractor should understand what/how IFF Mode 5 is currently implemented in order to accurately assess and estimate the implementation, integration and test of IFF Mode 5 capability for SSDS Build 6.

Government to please provide the Build 10 Versioned Object Base (VOB) in order to accurately estimate the development, integration and test of IFF Mode 5 capability fo SSDS Build 6.

The Government has removed CLIN 1004 as a requirement from this solicitation.

35 Section C, p. 177 3.3.3.5 Build 6 on Suite A

Understand that IFF Mode 5 integration is occurring in SSDS Build 10. A contractor should understand the design and requirements impact in order to accurately assess and estimate the design and development of IFF Mode 5 capability for SSDS Build 6.

Government to please provide the Specification Change Notice (SCN) and other documentation utilized to implement IFF Mode 5.

The Government has removed CLIN 1004 as a requirement from this solicitation.

36 Section C, Page 142 Section C, P.3.3.3.1. "Contractor shall develop and incorporate ACB 20 capabilities of ESSM BLK 2, SEWIP BLK 3 and EASR on HTI16 configuration leveraging on Build 11, inserting these capabilities into the software resource library, and deliver a Build 12 running on HTI-16. " The acceptance criteria is stated as "zero Risk Assessment levels R1 and R2 TRs" - Government should clarify expectation of contractor if Build 11 contains R1 and R2 TRs, should this also say "new"?

Recommend RFP language be changed to read, "contains no new R1 and R2 TRs." The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section C.

37 105 Section C,

3.2.2.3.8 SSDS

Technical Manuals

Technical Manual and IETM maintenance includes preparation of changes and revisions to existing preliminary and basic issue system-level data modules provided as GFI. The Contractor uses this source documentation to produce the necessary changes and revisions. PDF versions of existing documents are not sufficient. Subparagraph "b." states, "The Contractor shall participate in the evaluation and selection of IETM authoring software and host platforms; development of the IETM conversion process; ..." The Contractor contends that any documents to be maintained should be workable using the selected software and platforms.

The Contractor recommends inserting a new sentence between the existing 2nd and 3rd sentences.

New Sentence: Existing preliminary and basic issue system-level IETMs will be provided to the Contractor in a format consistent with selected IETM authoring software.

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section C.

38 270 Section L, 4.3.1 System Engineering Management Plan

(SEMP)

Section L, Paragraph 4.3.1 refers to Paragraphs 3.1.14 (Hardware Technology Insertion (HTI) Approach) and 3.2.2.2 (Integrated Combat System Safety), neither of which refers to CDRL A017.

The Contractor recommends that the two references be changed to Section C paragraphs 3.2.2.3 (System Engineering) and 3.3.2.3 (System Engineering). Both of these paragraphs reference CDRL A017.

The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has revised Section L.

39 Section F, p. 199-204 Section F Section F DELIVERIES and PERFORMANCE notes that the FOB for each CLIN is the Origin (Shipping Address). However, clause 52.247-48 F.O.B.

Destination--Evidence of Shipment is referenced on page 204.

Recommend removing clause 52.247-48 F.O.B Destination--Evidence of Shipment. The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has revised Section F.

40 Section L, Appendix 5, Attachment J

Appendix 5 to Section L, worksheet L-I

In the instructions at the bottom for worksheet L-I, it says the displayed rate shall be through G&A which is interpreted as every rate needs to be inclusive of G&A. However, there is also a separate column in the worksheet for G&A.

Recommend remove displayed rate shall be through G&A from the worksheet instructions.

The instruction provided by the Government is to ensure all cost elements are included in the spreadsheet. No amendments to the instructions were made.

41 Section F, p. 204 Section F The clause FAR 52.242-15 Stop Work Order is incorporated by reference in Section F of the RFP. The Offeror believes this clause should not be present in a Cost Reimbursable contract. The correct clause (FAR 52.242-15 Alt 1) is incorporated by reference.

Recommend removing clause 52.242-15 Stop Work Order. The Government has reviewed the Offeror's question. No change is made to the solicitation.

42 SF 33 Block 9 identifies offers are due 04 Nov 2017. FEDBIZOPS lists 2 Nov as the delivery date.

Please clarify due date. The Government has updated the proposal submission date to 1 December 2017.

43 Section B;

Section H, page 209; M

H: H-30;

M: 4.0

Section B identifies CLINs with CPIF contract type, Clause H-30 references a base award cost incentive structure, and Section M paragraph 4.0 on page 312, third paragraph, references a "Cost Incentive fee overrun formula".

Please provide details on the Incentive Fee structure and the Cost Incentive Fee overrun formula.

The Government has provided details in Section L 4.6.3 and 4.6.4.

44 Section B, pages 28 - 36 and Section M, 4.0

In the Draft RFP, values were assigned to CLINs 0060 through 0079. In the Final RFP, these do not identify dollar values. Section M states "all non-fee bearing ODC CLINS (0060-0069) and Travel CLINS (0070-0079) will be the Not-To-Exceed Values as provided in Section B."

Please provide NTE values The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section B, Notes section, to provide the NTE values.

45 Section B, page 38 Section F, page 203 Section I, page 225

CLIN 1003 is listed as an Option in Section B. Section I identifies the "Latest Option Exercise Date" of 01-June-2023. Section F lists the CLINs performance delivery date as 01-JUN-2023. Should the Section F delivery date for CLIN 1003 be listed as "xx Months After Option Award"?

Please clarify. The Government has revised CLIN 1003 to an Option CLIN.

46 Section B, page 44 Note A Note A requires each CDRL to be separately priced. Total price of each CDRL will be dependent on the number of Option CLINs that are ultimately exercised and, more importantly, the scope of the task completion efforts that are not yet defined and will be provided at a later date during contract performance.

Recommend that this CLIN be identified as NSP or requirement only be applied to th completion CLINs 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1004.

The Offeror shall, for the purposes of the proposal, the Offeror shall complete the "Price Group" and "Estimated Total Price" in accordance with DFARS 215.470 for CLINs 1000, 1001, and 1002.

47 Section C, page 64 2.9. The reference documents refer to a draft copy of the SSDS ICS Requirements Document (SIRD).

Please provide the Final SIRD or identify the DRAFT SIRD version control. The Government provided SIRD posted to the Bidders Library shall be used by the Offeror for proposal generation.

48 Section C Page 142 3.3.3.1 Section 3.3.3.1 of the RFP reads: "These capability upgrades include Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR) Integration, Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) Block 2 Integration, Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP) Block 3 Integration, and modifications to associated Cyber Enhancements and integrated training." No further discussion on "associated Cyber Enhancements" appears in Section 3.3, which defines the CLIN 0001 ACB 20 completion scope.

What "associated Cyber Enhancements" are to be included in ACB 20? Is the Government's expectation that all the Cyber‐related capabilities described in the SIRD be implemented as part of the ACB 20 CLIN 1000 completion scope?

Clarify that ACB 20 "associated Cyber Enhancements" are as defined in the SOW Section 3

The Government has reviewed the Offeros's comment and has revised Section C.

49 Section C, page 144 3.3.3.1.2 Section 3.3.3.1.2 the RFP says: "The Contractor shall successfully perform the combat management system engineering, decompose the Government ACB 20 requirements, develop detailed requirements, design, and code changes to the SSDS software required to develop and integrate ACB 20 software and capabilities utilizing the specification document hierarchy as provided in Attachment J‐22 “SSDS MK2 Element Specification Tree,” and as identified in the following: ACB 2020 SELF DEFENSE SYSTEM

(SSDS) INTEGRATED COMBAT SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS

DOCUMENT (SIRD)." Attachment J‐22 shows the SIRD as a "Development Document", not part of the specification tree "proper". Further, the SIRD includes requirements that go beyond the capability upgrades for Enterprise Air Surveillance Radar (EASR) Integration, Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) Block 2 Integration, and the Surface Electronic Warfare Improvement Program (SEWIP) Block 3 Integration.

Please clarify the Government's intent with respect to the SIRD as a part of the specification tree. In particular, are all the new KPPs, Cyber, Fire Control Loop (FCL) Modernization, Interoperability, Logistics, and Time Management requirements in the SIRD expected as part of the ACB 20 CLIN 1000 completion scope?

Clarify that with respect to defining the ACB 20 CLIN 1000 completion scope, the intended use of the SIRD is limited to the ESSM BLK 2, ERS (EASR), and SEWIP BLK 3 sections.

The Government has reviewed the comment and the intended use of the SIRD is limited to the ESSM BLK 2, ERS (EASR), and SEWIP BLK 3 sections and those aspects of Cybersecurity, Interoperability, Logistics, and Time required for implementation of those capabilities.

50 SIRD SIRD The JHU/APL whitepaper entitled "Cyber Threat Model Analysis for Acquisition Programs" dated January 2013 is referenced in the SIRD.

Provide referenced document in bidder's library. The Government has posted additional documentation in the Bidders Library to address the Offeror's question.

51 Section F, pages 199 and

CLINs 00x0 have a POP start of 14-FEB-2019. Will CLINs 1000, 1001, 1002, and 1004 will have the same PoP start date?

Please clarify. The Government has reviewed the Offeror's comment and has revised Section F.

52 Section I, page 226 Para. (c) Paragraph states: "The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options(s) under this clause, shall not exceed five (5) years, . . ."

According to Section I, Clause 52.217-9(c), the schedule including options is a 10 year Period of Performance.

Proposed change: Update statement to reflect a duration of ten (10) years. The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has amended the solicitation accordingly.

53 Section J, page 243 Attachment J-05 "Calendar Year Rate Sheets for H-30" was not included with the RFP's Section J attachments zip file

Please provide Attachment J-05. In Section L Appendix 5, the Offeror will price the sheet that will become Section J-

05. See the CSEA cost Table Section L, Appendix 5 Tab L-J Table "Attachment J- 05: Calendar Year Rate Sheets for Clause H-30."

54 Section L Page 259 3.1 Para 1; bullet 5 Is there an update to the SSDS Security Classified Guides for ACB 20? If yes, please provide. The Government refers Offerors to the SSDS Security Classification Guide in the Bidders Library.

55 Section L Page 260 4.0 Para 1 The last sentence states: “The award date of this procurement is planned to be March 2019”. This does not align with Section F Period of Performance start dates for CLINs 00x0 which start in February 2019.

Please clarify The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section F in the amendment.

56 Section L Appendix 5 Worksheets L-J, L-I and L-H

Is Worksheet L-J only for labor costs, including subcontractor labor? Please clarify. The Government has reviewed the comment and offerors are referred to the Section L, Appendix 5 instructions "Additional Instructions for LOE Engineering Services Labor Rate Tables and LOE Placeholders for Out-Year Completion CLIN Conversion Place Holders."

57 Section L Appendix 5 Worksheets L-J, L-I and L-H

Should Worksheets L-I and L-H solely be used for Material and ODC costs for CLINs 1000 – 1004?

Please clarify. The Government has reviewed the comment and request Offerors fully review all rows of the spreadsheet:

L-H: Scroll down the spreadsheet for the labor inputs.

L-I: See "Instructions: - The Offeror shall add additional columns for additional labor material and sub-contractor costs as required."

58 Section L, page 251 1.0, 5th paragraph The RFP states: "Access to classified and other restricted information being made available to this solicitation can be obtained by submitting a written request to the Contract Specialist Courtney Ryan at Courtney.ryan@navy.mil. The written request must include data on the company facility and specific individual(s) requiring access . . .".

Since the classified documents to be provided the Contractor are unknown prior to receipt, it is difficult to identify in advance which subject matter expert(s) will need to see and review the classified document(s). The classified documentation provided with the Draft RFP did not have this requirement.

Recommend deleting requirement to identify specific individuals that will review the classified information and use the Bidder's Library Terms of Use Agreement to identify Contractor requirements for control of classified information.

The Government has reviewed the Offeror comment and has revised the Section L instructions.

59 Section L, page 251 1.0, 5th paragraph The RFP does not state the classification level of the classified documentation to be provided. Knowing this in advance will be helpful to ensure properly classified employees are assigned to the proposal effort.

Please identify the classification level of the classified data to be provided. The Government has reviewed the comment and offerors are referred to Attachment J-

03 - DD-254.

60 SOW/121 SOW 3.2.2.8 SOW states "The incumbent will support an effective transition of the in-service SSDS builds delivered by the Government to the Contractor as GFP."

Please define "effective" The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has amended the term "effective" in Section C.

61 ACB20 ICS SEP Rev 0(a) -signed.pdf/11

N/A The document in question references “ACB Delivery Plan”, signed 22 September 2016. The current bidders library version is 13 May 2016

Please provide the updated document for analysis. The Government has posted additional documentation in the Bidders Library to address the Offeror's question.

62 J-07, J-08, J-09 N/A Is the GFP/GFI/CAP a complete list of all the hardware and software required to stand up a completely functioning integration lab for both completion efforts and LOE tasks?

The provided GFI and GFP is the list of property and information available from the Government. The CAP list will be procured by the CSEA. The Government has no intention to dictate how the Offeror shall stand up a "completely functioning integration lab for both completion efforts and LOE tasks."

63 SOW/56 1.0 The RFP requires support for Builds 6, 9, 10 and 11. Is LOE support required for other legacy Builds?

The CSEA is required to support only the Legacy Builds provided in the solicitation.

64 SOW/142 3.3.3 In order to effectively bid the completion efforts (CLIN 1000-1004), a complete list of all sensors and weapons on LPD 29, LHA 8, CVN 72, LHD 2, LHD 6, LPD 23, LHD 3, LPD 21, CVN 70 and LHD 8 is required.

Request the government post a complete combat systems configuration list for the referenced hulls to the Bidders Library

The Government has posted additional documentation in the Bidders Library to address the Offeror's question.

65 SOW/142 3.3.3 Please provide schedules for EASR, SEWIP B3, IFF MODE 5 and ESSM development and installations to support preparation of the program level IMS and Build Plans for each completion task required with proposal submission.

The Government has reviewed the comment and has uploaded additional information to the Bidder Library. The Government has removed CLIN 1004 as a requirement from this solicitation.

66 SOW/56 1.0 When will the CSEA sustainment of Builds 6, 9, 10 and 11 begin? The CSEA will provide engineering support sustainment under Level of Effort (LOE) tasking (CLINs 0010 through 0059) in accordance with NAVSEA 5252.242-9115 TECHNICAL INSTRUCTIONS (APR 1999) in Section H of this contract as directed via Task Instructions under CLINS 0010-0059.

67 J-09 GFP, J-10

GFF/Serially Managed Items many Column "O" shows a GFP delivery date of 12/31/2020 for most items. This date is after the completion date of Build 6 for LPD-21 and CVN-70 (CLIN 1004) and after the first delivery of Build 12 (CLIN 1000). How will the government guarantee the required time to integrate and test the SW?

The Government has removed CLIN 1004 as a requirement from this solicitation.

68 Bidders' Library The Build 10.10.04 Software provided to date does not appear to be a full representation of the SSL. In order to facilitate analysis into the software architecture and to allow for informed decisions for improvements. Please provide the entire latest version of the SSL and associated build files available for review.

Add to Bidders Library The Government has reviewed the comment. Build 10.10.04 is the build that will be provided for this Solicitation.

69 SOW/142 3.3.3 Please provide details of all SSDS ACB 20 development efforts performed to date. This information is necessary to support proposal development for CLINs 1000-1003.

No SSDS ACB 20 development efforts have been started and no additional details are available to provide.

70 J-07-CAP Does the incumbent currently possess all or some of the equipment on the J- 07 CAP list?

If yes, please exclude all CAP related cost from the cost/price evaluation in order to facilitate a level competition for all bidders.

The Government has reviewed the Offeror comment and Offerors are required to price the entirety of the J-07 CAP list.

71 SOW/56 1.0 As Build 11 is still under development, when will the CSEA begin maintenance of Build 11?

The PSEA is responsible for fixes and maintenance until the final defined Build 11 configuration is provided to the CSEA.

72 SOW/69, 91, 123, 133,

146, 147, 148, 151, 152, 156, 157, 158, 161, 162,163, 166, 167, 168, 173, 174, 178, 179, 102,126, 160, 165, 172, 177, 283

3.1.1.3.3, 3.1.12, 3.3.2.1(i), 3.3.2.4.8,

3.3.3.1.2.1.2 (a-2,4, b -2,4,6, d-2),

3.3.3.1.2.2.2 (a-2,4, b -2,4,6, d-2),

3.3.3.1.2.3.2 (a-2,4, b -2,4,6, d-2), 3.3.3.2.3 (c-2,4, d-2,4,7, f-2),

3.3.3.3.3 (c-2,4, d- 2,4,7, f-2), 3.3.3.4.4 (c-2,4, d-2,4,6, f-2),

3.3.3.5.3 (a-2,4, b- 2,4,6, d-2), 3.2.2.3.2, 3.3.2.3.1, 3.3.3.2.3, 3.3.3.3.3, 3.3.3.4.4, 3.3.3.5.3, 4.6.5

Section 2.10 states that the TRM is used as guidance. Throughout the SOW statements such as: "in accordance with the PEO IWS TRM."; "as defined by the TRM"; "The Contractor shall follow the systems engineering process outlined in the PEO IWS/NAVSEA Technical Review Manual (TRM)."; and " dictated by the TRM." are used. These statements indicate that the TRM is a requirement. Is the TRM guidance or a requirement?

Please clarify The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has revised Section C with the TRM direction.

73 SOW/68 3.1.1.2 The SOW states: "The PMP shall also include updates, as dictated in CDRL A009, to the Open Systems Management Plan and Security Management Plan (SMP)", however there does not appear to be a DID for either the OSMP or the SMP.

Please provide the appropriate DIDs or the content expected in these deliverables The Government has reviewed the recommendation and has revised Section L.

74 SOW/79, 81, 135,262 3.1.7, 3.1.7.4,

3.3.2.4.12, 4.1.1

Please define "dead code". “Dead code” is referring to section in the source code of a program that is executed bu whose result is never used in any other computation. Code that is dead can be eliminated without affecting the behavior of the program.

75 SOW/89 3.1.10 (f) The SOW states: " For software modules already having a software model and for software modules with more than thirty (30) percent change in a new capability project or ECP, the Contractor shall document and model the system component…"

Please define how 30% is to be measured (source lines of code?, requirements? or others?)

The Government has reviewed the comment and the 30% will be measured by SLOC.

76 SOW/112 3.2.2.4.10 The SOW states: "Subsequent Government deliveries/drops of source code has additional changes (e.g., PSEA developed TR fixes…" Who is expected to fix Build 11 TRs during the period when PSEA and CSEA contracts overlap?

The Government has reviewed the comment. The PSEA is responsible for fixes/maintenance until the final defined Build 11 software is transitioned to the

CSEA.

77 SOW/142 3.3.3.1 Please define "TAAF" Government definition: Test, Analyze, and Fix (TAAF) process encompasses software TR analysis and correction from associated test event or source that generated the TR.

The TAAF period generally takes place following test events like FSIT, FQT and CST, which have not met the End State conditions regarding the TRs.

78 SOW/143 Table 3 (second non-header row)

Should this be Software Specification Review (SSR) or System Requirement Review (SRR) or something else? The text does not match the acronym

The Government has reviewed the comment and has determined the correct acronym and definition should be SRR - System Requirements Review. The Government has revised Section C.

79 SF33/1 SF33 Block 9 The delivery date, 4 November 2017, is a Saturday. Will this date be revised to a weekday?

Revise proposal due date to 6 November 2017 The Government has amended the required proposal delivery date.

80 SOW/256 Section L Paragraph

3.1 Table

Volume V, Past Performance states the page limit is 5 pages plus 2 pages for each self assessment. Is the 5 page limit for each past performance citation or 5 pages in total for all past performance citations?

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section L.

81 SOW/278 Section L Paragraph 4.5

Offerors are to provide a minimum of 3 past performance citation with subcontractors providing a minimum of one each. Is there a limit to the total number of past performance citations that can be provided with the proposal?

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section L.

82 SOW/287 Section L Paragraph

3.1 Table and Section

L, Appendix 1

The Table in Paragraph 3.1 states Volume V, Past Performance, page limit is 5 pages plus 2 pages for each self assessment. Appendix 1 to Section L provides information to be provided for previous contracts and an address to submit this information to. Appendix 1 to Section L has no requirement for a self assessment.

Please clarify the relationship between the Table in paragraph 3.1 and the Appendix 1 to Section L. If the information in the appendix is to be submitted prior to proposal delivery, please provide the due date.

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section L.

83 SOW/203 Section F, CLINs 1000, 1001,1002 and

There is no PoP start date listed in the table. Since these CLINs are not option items should the contractor assume that the start date for these 4 CLINs is at contract award in March 2019?

The Government has reviewed the comment and CLINs 1000-1002 will initiate at award of the contract. CLIN 1003 is an Option.

84 SOW/203 and 225 Section F, CLINs 1003 and Section I Clause 52.217-9

CLIN1003

The delivery date in Section F for CLIN 1003 is 1 June 2023. The latest option exercise date in Section I for CLIN 1003 is the same date, 1 June 2023.

Please clarify/correct the dates. The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised CLIN 1003 to be an Option CLIN.

85 SOW/116 and 138 3.2.2.4.17 and 3.3.2.4.17

IEEE 828-1998 is superseded by 828-2012 Please Update the reference The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section C.

86 SOW, Section J, Exhibit A - CDRLs/79, 9

3.1.7.1.1, CDRL

A009

The SOW states: "...the Contractor shall document and implement a cybersecurity program within a Cybersecurity Implementation Plan (an annex of the

PPIP)..."

Section J, Exhibit A - CDRLs states: "Revisions shall be delivered when an event occurs that requires an update to the information contained within the PMP including the Open Systems Management Plan (OSMP), Cybersecurity Implementation Plan and Security Management Plan (SMP)."

Is the Cybersecurity Implementation Plan an annex of the PPIP or a subsection within the PMP?

Please clarify The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised the solicitation.

87 SOW/276 Section L, paragraph 4.3.10.3.1

SOW section 4.3.10.3.1 states that SLOC shall be counted using the Unified Code Count (UCC) model, release 2011.10 or CLOC v1.58 for programming languages that are not supported by UCC.

The versions of UCC release 2011.10 and CLOC v1.58 in Section C and L are inconsistent with the versions UCC release 2015.12 and CLOC v1.64 specified in Section J attachment J-24 “SLOC Table “, Instructions and Definitions tab.

Will the UCC and CLOC versions in Section C and L override those in Section J?

Please update the references to provide consistent versions of UCC and CLOC throughout the RFP.

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised the solicitation.

88 J-10 GFF Will the government provide access to contractor personnel at least 45 days prior to proposal submission at the sites listed in attachment J-10 in order to facilitate understanding of the capabilities available at these sites?

The Government has no intention to provide site visits to Government Furnished Facilities.

89 SOW Pricing requires that we estimate new, modified and reuse SLOC. For CLIN 1004 we are directed to use Build 6 for IFF Mode 5 completion; however, Build 6 is listed in J-08 GFI.xlsx as GFI that we will not receive until 60 DAC. Please provide Build 6 now so we can use it to as the basis of our estimate?

The Government has removed CLIN 1004 as a requirement from this solicitation.

90 Section B, Incentive Fee CLINs

Section B requires offerors to fill in Target Cost, Target Fee, Minimum Fee, Maximum Fee, Share Ratio Above Target and Share Ration Below Target.

The government has provided no guidelines nor instructions regarding the incentive fee. Are the offerors to determine the minimum and maximum fee percentages and the share ratios or is the government going to provide them?

The Government has provided details in Section L 4.6.3 and 4.6.4.

91 Section C, Page 142 Section C, P.3.3.3.1. "Contractor shall develop and incorporate ACB 20 capabilities of ESSM BLK 2, SEWIP BLK 3 and EASR on HTI16 configuration leveraging on Build 11, inserting these capabilities into the software resource library, and deliver a Build 12 running on HTI‐16. " The acceptance criteria is atated as "zero Risk Assessment levels R1 and R2 TRs" ‐ Government should clarify expectation of contractor if Build 11 contains R1 and R2 TRs, should this also say "new"?

Recommend Government update language to, "zero new Risk Assessment levels R1 and R2 TRs."

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section C.

92 3.3.3.1 ‐ Pg 142, 3.3.3.2 ‐ Pg 160, 3.3.3.3 ‐ Pg 165, 3.3.3.4 ‐ Pg 171, 3.3.3.5 ‐ Pg 177

Section C The TAAF milestone is cited as gating criteria for completion CLINs 1000 through 1004. However the RFP does not identify a definition for the TAAF milestone requirements nor the acronym definition. Please define the TAAF milestone and associated requirements.

Please provide definition and explanation of the requirements for the TAAF milestone. Government definition: Test, Analyze, and Fix (TAAF) process encompasses software TR analysis and correction from associated test event or source that generated the TR.

The TAAF period generally takes place following test events like FSIT, FQT and CST, which have not met the End State conditions regarding the TRs.

93 FedBizOpps attachment J‐03

DD254

FedBizOpps attachment J‐03 DD254

Request the Security Classification Guides referenced in the DD254 be provided to bidders.

Provide Security Classification Guides referenced in J‐03 DD254. The Government has posted additional documentation in the Bidders Library to address the Offeror's question.

94 Section F, p. 203 Section F Section F is missing start dates for the Period of Performance (PoP) for CLINs 1000, 1001, 1002, and 1004.

Request the Government update Section F to provide PoP start date for CLINs 1000, 1001, 1002 and 1004.

CLIN 1000, 1001, and 1002 are to initiate at award of the contract.

95 Section F, p. 203 Section F Section F is missing estimated start date for CLIN 1003. Request the Government provide an estimated start date for CLIN 1003. The Government has reviewed the comment and amended Section F to provide the latest option exercise date.

96 Section C, Page 91 3.1.12 Para 2 "Technical Development Reviews (All Labor CLINs, CLINs 0010 – 0059, 1000 – 1004, and 1010 ‐ 1090) The Contractor shall host and support technical development reviews in accordance with the TRM to meet the required end delivery dates specified within this contract. The Contractor shall develop a design review plan for the conduct of formal reviews and update the Systems Engineering Management Plan (SEMP), if required. "The Government tailoring of the TRM defines the applicable SSDS‐Element and Configuration Item TRM SETR reviews for LOE tasking as ITR, ASR, SRR, SFR, SSR, PDR, CDR, TRR, and SW IR, and the applicable SSDS‐Element and Configuration Item TRM SETR reviews for completion efforts as SRR, SFR, SSR, PDR, CDR, TRR, and SW IR. The Contractor shall address potential combat system certification issues and their resolution throughout these reviews.

Given the focused scope of the MODE 5 IFF capability introduction into Build 6, we recommend that this effort include an offeror‐proposed tailored set of reviews (including combining reviews for efficiency), which will be inclusive of all required design artifacts and information.

The Government has removed CLIN 1004 as a requirement from this solicitation.

97 4.3.10.2 Pg 274 Section C Section 4.3.10.2 Preliminary SCN states "The Offeror shall provide a preliminary list of all expected Specification Change Notification (SCN) changes at the lower level requirement specifications (e.g. SSDS SSS and SSDS SSDD)…". We interpret this requirement to be for a listing of potential SCNs.

Recommend Government update the language to remove the word, "changes" from the requirement.

The Government has reviewed the comment and has revised Section L.

98 Section C, Page 142 Section C, P.3.3.3.1. "CLIN 1000 End State: The Contractor shall establish a Laboratory setup for HTI‐ 16 and shared assets.