Draft_RFP_QA_-_Batch_2_-_FBO_Posted_6-9-17.pdf

FBO POSTING

DATE

FBO

Question

(Batch # ‐

Question #) DRAFT RFP REFERENCE/DISCUSSION (if necessary) QUESTION ANSWER

6/9/2017 2‐001 N/A Will the contractors proposed solution have to identify 3rd party system component names and manufacturer origin?

Yes, reference SOW paragraph

4.1.6.1.

6/9/2017 2‐002 N/A Do HMI reviews need to be conducted on both Surface and

Submarine users/use cases?

See SOW paragraph 4.2.2.4. HMI reviews need to be conducted to support the software design regardless of the end user. HMI

Reviews will include both surface and submarine users.

6/9/2017 2‐003 4.1.5.1 In reference to section 4.1.5.1 Software Deficiency/Problem

Corrections ‐ When is the “Contractor Testing” requirement in effect? Once the software baseline is established, according to section 4.1.5?

See revision to SOW Section 4 of the final RFP.

6/9/2017 2‐004 4.1.3 Hardware Integration If not all platform configurations are required to be supported by the ECDIS SW 1.0 Production Build, what is the plan to incrementally support platform configurations until all are included?

ECDIS SW 1.0 Production Build must comply with all requirements in the SRD, including all platform configurations identified in SRD

Appendix A.

6/9/2017 2‐005 4.1.3 Hardware Integration Will Government Furnished simulation tools be provided to support platform configuration and interface testing?

No simulation tools will be provided as GFP/GFE to this contract. However, government‐ owed simulation and testing tools will be available for use at government testing facilities IAW

SOW paragraph 4.1.7.

6/9/2017 2‐006 CLIN 0001 is “Development and delivery of the Navy

ECDIS 1.0 Production Build .” SOW paragraph

4.1.6.9 states: “The contractor shall deliver the initial Navy ECDIS production Build 1.0 once the contractor and government testing is completed and the software is approved for Full Rate

Production .”

a. Per paragraph 4.1.6.9, the CLIN 0001 POP is 24 months including Navy lab testing. Since the contractor does not control Navy lab testing schedules, how will Navy Lab testing time be accounted for in the CLIN 0001 POP and later in option CLINs 1001 and 2001?

c. When in the 24 month development schedule is Navy ECDIS software delivery required?

d. Will CDRLs be put in place for delivery of development software to the Navy for testing at some pre‐determined point in CLIN 0001? Will there be a similar CDRL delivery point for developmental software in option CLINs 1001 and

2001 for the Maintenance builds?

a). Navy lab testing shall be included within the CLIN 0001 PoP and each maintenance build PoP.

The contractor shall identify proposed dates for testing of the developmental software at government testing labs within the offeror's IMS. The government testing labs will be made available to accommodate the awardee's testing schedule IAW the

Government approved IMS. b). N/A c). NAVY ECDIS SW delivery is required to be delivered at the end of the 24 month POP. d) No additional CDRLs will be required for delivery of development software prior to testing. The contractor shall identify proposed dates for testing of the developmental software at government testing labs within the

IMS.

Navy ECDIS Software Draft Solicitation N00024‐17‐R‐5216 Questions & Answers

6/9/2017 2‐007 In SOW Section 5.0 (Engineering Services …), item

(a)(2) discusses resolution of deficiencies with

GFE/GFI. GFE and GFI listings have been deleted from SOW Section 4. Section J references a "GFI

Library" attachment, but that attachment was not provided.

Please specify the GFE/GFI to be provided. GFE/GFI outlined in Section J will be provided to eligible offeror's in the final RFP. GFE/GFI provided for ESS efforts will be defined as part of

Technical Instructions (TI) issued during the performance of this contract.

6/9/2017 2‐008 SOW Section 4.1.7, Software FQT, states: "Other

Government testing that the Contractor will not be able to witness includes cybersecurity assessments of all source code and executable software applications to be installed on U.S. Navy Platforms."

Are these additional "Other Government" tests considered to be part of the Contractor FQT period? If so, for scheduling purposes, how much time does the government require to perform these 'Other Tests'?

Is the Contractor responsible for preparing the test procedures to be used for the "Other Government testing", including cybersecurity assessments? If not, will these test procedures be made available to the Contractor?

See revision to SOW paragraph

4.1.7 in final RFP. The Contractor is required to include its own cybersecurity assessment as part of its FQT to verify cybersecurity requirements in the SOW and SRD.

The other government testing will be conducted in parallel with the

Contractor's FQT. The contractor does not need to include this

"Other Government testing" in the proposed IMS or provide test procedures. The other government test procedures will not be made available to the Contractor.

6/9/2017 2‐009 Note A in Section B reads as follows: "Minimum fee shall be zero percent (0%). Maximum fee shall be eleven percent (11%). Target fee shall not be greater than nine (9%). Additionally, these fee maximums apply to all subcontractors when CPIF type subcontracts are proposed ."

Please confirm that these percentages are relative to target cost.

See Section L of the final RFP.

6/9/2017 2‐010 In Section H, the identifying number of clause LEVEL

OF EFFORT – ALTERNATE I (MAY 2010) is missing.

Two NAVSEA clauses / provisions related to LOE are cited elsewhere in the RFP. NAVSEA 5252.216‐9133 is cited in Section B, Note E. NAVSEA 5252.216‐

9122 is referenced in the text added to FAR 52.217‐

9 in Section I. The text of these clauses is not included in the RFP, unless one of them is the unidentified clause in Section H.

a. Please provide the identifying number of the LOE clause included in Section H.

b. Please provide the full text of all NAVSEA clauses and provisions to be included in the RFP, including the two cited here.

NAVSEA 5252.216‐9122 is cited in full text in Section H. Reference to

5252.216‐9133 was removed from the final RFP. All applicable

NAVSEA clauses and provisions will be included in the final RFP.

6/9/2017 2‐011 4.1.7.3 Test Readiness Review Within how many days after contract award must TRR start? 90 days before the start of FQT.

6/9/2017 2‐012 4.1.7 Software Formal Qualification Test Within how many days after contract award must FQT start? The Contractor will determine FQT start based on a 24 month PoP.

6/9/2017 2‐013 N/A When is the final RFP release date? See Answer 1‐009 6/9/2017 2‐014 N/A Are there any anticipated changes to the SRD and will a revised SRD be released prior to issuing the RFP?

The Government anticipates an

SRD revision to be released in the

Competition Library of the final

RFP. No revised SRD will be released prior to issuing the final

RFP

6/9/2017 2‐015 N/A Will sections L&M be released for review prior to final RFP release?

No

6/9/2017 2‐016 Synopsis

"Contract will be awarded to the Offeror whose proposal represents the Best Value to the

Government (FAR 15.101‐1). The Best Value to the

Government is that proposal which meets the requirements of this Solicitation and which is determined to be the most advantageous to the

Government considering all factors."

What are the factors that will be considered in the evaluation of each offer to determine best value and how will those factors be weighted? How will the determination for what is

"most advantageous to the Government" be made?

See Sections L & M of the final RFP.

6/9/2017 2‐017 Page 19, Section 4.1.6.9

"The Contractor shall provide to the Government all necessary COTS based software products, along with supporting documentation and all fully paid licenses. This software shall include all COTS software incorporated into the software baseline as well as software packages utilized to generate the software baseline and application software but not incorporated into the operating environment (OE).

The Contractor shall ensure interoperability of such software with the OE and shall document any interdependencies (such as minimal revision required) in the appropriate Software Version

Description(s) (SVD). All licensing requirements/restrictions for each COTS product shall be provided as part of the SVD. This documentation requirement includes all delivered software licenses necessary to provide the Navy

ECDIS SW capabilities and support full lifecycle implementation."

Who will provide the Red Hat LINUX licenses? The contract awardee is responsible for the Red Hat Linux licenses they need to support the development and testing. The government will be able to procure the licenses for Government based testing and fielding of the software.

6/9/2017 2‐018 CLIN 1003, Section 4.1.6.9 and Note H

With reference to CLIN 1003, Note H states, "...prices for conversion of the deliverable data rights to GPR shall be included in CLIN 1003."

Somewhat similarly, Section 4.1.6.9 states, "The

Contractor shall provide a Government Purpose

Rights (GPR) for all Contractor developed software."

However, 10 USC 2320 (a)(2)(H) provides that a contractor (or a prospective contractor) may not be required, as a condition of being responsive to a solicitation or as a condition for the award of a contract‐‐

(i) to sell or otherwise relinquish to the United

States any rights in technical data .... or

(ii) to refrain from offering to use, or from using, an item or process to which the contractor is entitled to restrict rights

Please clarify Section 4.1.6.9, CLIN 1003 and Note H, its reference to Attachment J‐8 and the scope of the requirement of the RFP regarding Government Purpose

Rights. Is GPR required? If so, to what?

See revisions to the final RFP.

6/9/2017 2‐019 CLIN 1003, Section 4.1.6.9, Section 8 and Note H 10 USC 2377 mandates a preference for commercial items including market research and defining requirements so that commercial items may be procured. Has the Government's market research indicated commercial ECDIS computer software licenses available with Government Purpose Rights?

If so, please provide examples.

See revisions to the final RFP.

6/9/2017 2‐020 CLIN 1003, Section 4.1.6.9, Section 8 and Note H

CLIN 1003, Section 4.1.6.9 and 8 and Note H do not appear to exclude applicability to commercial computer software, but do not appear aligned with

DoD regulations/policy. DFARS 227.7202‐3 provides that (a) The Government shall have only the rights specified in the license under which the commercial computer software or commercial computer software documentation was obtained. and (b) If the Government has a need for rights not conveyed under the license customarily provided to the public, the Government must negotiate with the contractor to determine if there are acceptable terms for transferring such rights. The specific rights granted to the Government shall be enumerated in the contract license agreement or an addendum thereto. Furthermore, DFARS 227.7202‐1(c) provides, "Offerors and contractors shall not be required to—(1) Furnish technical information related to commercial computer software or commercial computer software documentation that is not customarily provided to the public except for information documenting the specific modifications made at Government expense to such software or documentation to meet the requirements of a

Government solicitation; or (2) Relinquish to, or otherwise provide, the Government rights to use, d f d l f d l

Please clarify CLIN 1003, Section 4.1.6.9 and 8 and Note H do not pertain to commercial computer software or explain compliance to DFARS references listed.

See revisions to the final RFP.

6/9/2017 2‐021 Section 8

"Where less than GPR are being provided to the

Government, the Government requests that the

Offeror provide the price of buy‐out options for

GPR, and/or all software licensing costs in support of ship and shore installations."

Please clarify the scope/tasks relevant to software 'in support of' ship and shore installations.

Please explain the technical baseline, such as existing OS, etc.

applicable to the referenced 2,500 (ship) and 1,700 (shore) applications and what portions of such technical baseline will be GFE.

Please clarify this Section 8 language relative to CLIN 1003, in that CLIN 1003 purports to mandate GPR, making the 'or all software licensing costs' alternative inapplicable.

See revisions to the final RFP.