20201218--20R5602_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

N0002420R5602\0003 Offeror's Questions and Government Responses

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

1 RFP N0002420R5602

Section B, Note A, Table 2 Section B, Note F, Tables 2/3/4/5/6

N/A For each cell in the step ladder pricing tables for Note A and Note F, can the Government clarify whether the cell is to contain 1) the unit price per shipset at the quantity identified in the column header or 2) the total price for all quantity of the shipsets identified in the column header (e.g. the per unit cost multiplied by the quantity).

Each cell in the step ladder pricing tables for Note A and Note F shall contain the proposed unit price per shipset at the quantity identified in the header. Note A and Note F have been updated to clarify.

2 RFP N0002420R5602

Section B, CLINs X001, X002 and X005

System/Hardware for SSDS MK2/ SSDS MK2 EQUIPMENT

FFP

Not to exceed 3 shipsets Not to exceed 5 shipsets Not to exceed 5 shipsets

Notes A,F, & G… The respective Section B amounts under each CLIN shall be established through unilateral modification in accordance with Section I clause FAR 52.217‐7 and the stepladder pricing in Table 2

3.6.3 Section 1 – Section B Pricing

Section 1 shall contain a copy of the completed Section B CLINs displaying the Offeror’s proposed cost and fee or price values for each applicable CLIN, including completed stepladder pricing tables. The Offeror shall propose prices for each CLIN in whole dollars only.

Section B Notes A, F and G and Section 3.6.3 of the RFP appear to be inconsistent. Notes A/F/G,and section 3.6.3 request contractors to provide Firm Fixed Prices based on different number of shipsets in the stepladder table 2.

Notes A, F & G also state that the Section B amounts will be established through modification, while section 3.6.3 states we need to provide Section B pricing for each CLIN including the stepladder tables. Please confirm that the Section B CLIN prices for the FFP CLINs X001, X002, and X005 do not need to be provided, instead of the CLIN pricing for these FFP CLINs we need to provide only the stepladder tables 2 in Notes A, F, and G.

If Section B pricing for the FFP CLINs X001, X002, and X005 need to be submitted, please clarify which shipsets quantities for each CLIN should be used to fill the Section B CLIN structure pricing?

Confirmed. As the pricing for CLINs X001,X002, and X005 may vary based upon (a) the quantity ordered, or (b) the configuration ordered, it is desired that offerors complete the tables in Notes A, F, and G of Section B. Pricing for CLINs CLINs X001,X002, and X005 does not need to be provided in the listing of contract line items that preceeds the tables.

3 RFP N0002420R5602 N/A

CLIN 1 and CLIN 5 NTE exceed quantities are identical for each CLIN year except for year 2

Should the bidder assume the same quantity of shipsets will be ordered from CLIN 5 as the government orders from CLIN 1 within a CLIN year?

Quantities in Section B tables have been updated to reflect matching NTE values

4 RFP N0002420R5602 Page 1, Section 9

Sealed offers in original and 1 copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if hand‐carried, in the depository located in Section L until 03:00 PM local time 04 Dec 2020.

This solicitation requires a significant quantity of material, including material from specialized and/or directed sources. Furthermore, the variable quantity of shipsets and configurations create multiple combinations in the requested step pricing. In order to provide the Government with the most optimal pricing, we request a 4 week extension to 4 January 2021. This request also takes into consideration the major holidays during the time period where many companies are closed. Additionally, we anticipate that the COVID pandemic may introduce unexpected impacts in vendors’ ability to respond in an expedited manner.

The proposal due date was extended to 04 January 2021 on 21 November 2020.

5 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L, 3.6.2, Page 133, Cover Letter

1) The proposal is valid for 360 calendar days following the due date for receipt of proposals

This section requires 360 days validity of the proposal from the due date, however, Section L 1.0 states the estimated award date is July 2021. Is the 360 validity period correctly stated?

The solicitation validity period and estimated date of contract award are both correctly stated

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

6 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L, Page 109, J Attachments Attachments J‐06A, J‐06B, J‐07A, J‐07B, J‐08A, J‐08B, J‐09A and J‐09B were not included with the RFP documents.

Request the Government please provide.

Templates are provided as embedded attachments to this .pdf file. These templates are not mandatory; however, the offeror must comply with the requirements in DFARS 252.227‐ 7017 and DFARS 252.227‐7028.

7 Exhibit A All CDRLs

BLK 14: Electronic Media: First choice of format is by electronic mail with the report as an attachment in Microsoft Office 2016 application (or earlier). Second choice of format is by Digital Versatile Disc (DVD) or Compact Disc (CD) media in Microsoft Office 2016 application (or earlier). Unclassified reports may be delivered in either format; classified reports must be delivered only in the second (portable media) format. When using the second method, each recipient of the distribution shall receive his/her own separate DVD or CD with Email notification to the Contracting Officer's Representative (COR).

BLK 14 states "first choice of format is by electronic mail" Second choice is DVD or CD. Since nearly all CDRLs are Distribution D most bidder companies will prohibit distribution via electronic mail that is not encrypted.

However, encryption has typically resulted in problems with distributions to multple receipients due to frequent changes in PKI signatures and email applications. Is it acceptable to plan to post CDRLs to a mutually agreeable IDE site vs. email?

An IDE is not established at this time for CDRL deliverables. Electronic delivery will be required as stated in the CDRLs

8 RFP N0002420R5602 Section C, 3.2.6, page 30

3.2.6 Integrated Master Schedule (IMS). The Contractor shall

develop and maintain a production IMS for production units and Engineering tasking under this contract, as part of the CWBS (CDRL A003). The schedule shall include all major tasks, milestones and events.

On page 30, the solicitation states in section 3.2.6: "The Contractor shall develop and maintain a production IMS for production units and Engineering tasking under this contract, as part of the CWBS (CDRL A003)." The DID statement on that CDRL (DI‐MGMT‐81334D) does not contain any IMS specific delivery requirements other than that the WBS should be mapped within the IMS.

Exhibit A, CDRLs were updated and posted on Bidder's Library on 11/24

9 RFP N0002420R5602

Section B, page 6, CLIN 1001 And page 17, Note A

Not to exceed 5 shipsets See Notes A, C, and J

Section B states the NTE shipsets for CLIN 1001 is 5. However Note A ‐ table 2 only includes 3 shipset blocks.

Does the Government wish to have pricing for quanties 1 through 5 or 1 through 3?

Section B, Note A Table 2 has been updated to reflect the NTE values

10 RFP N0002420R5602 Section C, 3.2.18, page 37

Any license agreement governing the use of any computer software/hardware or computer software/hardware documentation delivered to the Government as a result of this contract must be paid‐up, irrevocable, world‐wide, royalty‐free, perpetual and flexible user licenses transferable among Government employees and personnel under Government contract (CDRL A023).

This paragraph requires all license agreements for any delivered hardware be delivered as perpetual licenses.

What should a bidder price if a supplier does not offer a perpetual licensing agreement? Typically COTS suppliers offer 1 year licenses with an ongoing subscription cost to the end user.

Section 3.2.18 has been updated and CDRL was removed.

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

11 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L, 3.6 Total Evaluated Cost/Price

N/A How should the offerors respond if any items in the TDP are found to be end of sale?

Added (l) to 3.1.1 in Section L to add "Provide a draft of CDRL A017, DMSMS Health Status Report, to identify any End of Life (EOL) items in the TDP"

12 Exhibit A CDRL DD Form 1423, CDRL A007 BLK 12: Document will be submitted with Contractor’s proposal.

Government will provide comments upon contract award for Contractor to revise document.

Will the Government please clarify if a separate Manufacturing/Production Plan is required to be submitted in addition to the Offeror’s Volume I Technical Approach?

Yes, the Manufacturing/Production Plan should be submitted with Factor 1 Technical Approach.

13 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L, 3.6.1, page 132

3.6.1 COST OR PRICING DATA

Certified cost or pricing data is not required to be submitted with this cost/price proposal. The cost estimates, rationale and supporting cost information to support the pricing offered is required in accordance with L.3.5, but will not be certified at the time of proposal submission.

Section 3.6.1 Cost or Pricing Data states "The cost estimates, rationale and supporting cost information to support the pricing offered is required in accordance with L.3.5, but will not be certified at the time of proposal submission". Section L.3.5 references Volume V: Factor 4 ‐ Data Rights. Is that the government's intended section reference?

Section 3.6.1 in Section L has been updated to correctly reference L.3.6 rather than L.3.5.

14 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L, 3.6.3.1, page 134

3.6.3.1 LIMITATIONS ON PROPOSED FIXED FEE RATES

The Offeror shall propose a fixed fee rate for cost‐plus‐fixed‐fee CLIN 0003 and option CLINs 1003, 2003, 3003, and 4003. The proposed fee rate shall not exceed 6%.

The offeror believes setting a maximum fee limits our flexibility in defining a best value offering. Would the Government consider removing this limitation on maximum fixed fee?

Following evaluation and consultation with the requiring activity, the Government declines to change the requirement that the proposed fee rate shall not exceed 6%.

15 RFP N0002420R5602 Section C, 3.2.10.2, page 33

3.2.10.2 Engineering Change Proposal (ECP). The Contractor shall generate ECPs in accordance with C‐243‐ H003 CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT and deliver ECPs in accordance with CDRL A010.

The contractor shall submit Requests for Variance (RFV) in accordance with C‐243‐H003 CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT and deliver in accordance with CDRL A011.

Can the Government please provide the referenced document C‐243‐H003 Configuration Management?

3.2.10.2 in the SOW has been updated to remove the clause and instead reference the SSDS Configuration Management Plan.

16 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L, 3.6.1, Page 132

COST OR PRICING DATA

If it is determined that adequate price competition does not exist, Offerors may be required to provide certified current, complete and accurate cost and pricing data within 30 calendar days after receipt of the Contracting Officer’s request. In this event, a Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data will be required immediately after agreement on cost/price is reached. Submission of certified cost or pricing data is not considered “discussions” under FAR Part 15.

Would the Government consider extending the submittal date of cost or pricing data to 90 calendar days after receipt of request, to allow sufficient time for the contractor to compile the necessary information and perform the proper analysis?

Due to fleet requirements, the Government is unwilling to adjust the requirements of Section L, paragraph 3.6.1 at this time.

17 RFP N0002420R5602 Section C N/A

We are assuming the following elements will be under FPP for engineering services:

‐ ECP Development/Submissions (Section 3.2.10.2) ‐ Affordability Based CM (Section 3.2.10.4) ‐ Specification Change Notices (Section 3.2.10.5) ‐ DMSMS resolutions (Section 3.2.11) ‐ DMSMS Identification (Section 3.2.11.2) ‐ TDP (Section 3.3.1) ‐ Might have to make part of FFP for initial TDP and then changes thereafter fall under Eng.

Services ‐ Section 3.5 Eng. Services for obvious reasons

Request the Government update the RFP to outline SOW elements that will be considered Firm Fixed Price (FFP).

Only paragraphs 3.5 and 3.9 are cost reimbursable. All items under paragraph 3.2 are included in the firm fixed price line items, with the exception of out‐of‐cycle technical data package updates. These updates may be included under the cost‐reimbursable engineering services line item at the sole discretion of the Government. Out of cycle as defined here are deliveries in addition to the delivery requirements discussed in CDRL A025.

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

18 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L N/A

There appears to be a fair amount of documentation that is duplicated across the volumes. For Instance, Volume V: Data Rights Assertion Lists are required but the same assertion list in the form of Attachments J‐06a, 06b, and 07a are also required in Volume VII.

Request the Government only require one set of Data Rights documents for the final response. This will reduce the opportunity for any discrepancy between the same kinds of data being presented twice.

Documentation required within the SF‐33 and in other places in the offeror's proposal may be omitted from the completed SF‐33. Any item(s) omitted from the offeror's SF‐33 and included elsewhere in the offeror's proposal shall be considered to be included in both the SF‐33 and in the other places the item(s) are called for in the offerors proposal.

Additionally, Section L.3.7.3 has been updated to clarify which volume the data rights information shall be included

19 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L N/A

Given the extensive requirements for the volumes, would adding an in‐volume cross reference table be helpful for reviewers? Please see fictional example provided [in sheet "Question 19 ‐ Supplemental"].

Request the RFP Section L be updated to state that should an in‐volume cross reference table be provided, it will not be included in the page count.

Section L.3.4.6 has been added and requires a proposal cross‐reference matrix.

20 RFP N0002420R5602 N/A N/A

Given the extensive cross‐volume referencing required, would adding a volume‐to‐volume cross reference index table be helpful for reviewers? Please see fictional example provided [in sheet "Question 20 ‐ Supplemental"].

Request the RFP Section L be updated to state that, should a volume‐to‐volume cross reference index table be provided, it will not be included in the page count.

Section L.3.4.6 has been added and requires a proposal cross‐reference matrix.

21 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L N/A

Section L has no reference to requiring a list of figures (to include tables and graphic figures). Would this be helpful for reviewers?

Request the RFP Section L be updated to state that, should a volume‐to‐volume cross reference index table be provided, it will not be included in the page count.

Section L.3.4.6 has been added and requires a proposal cross‐reference matrix.

22 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L, 2.1 Offerors shall organize proposal content sections using index pages or tabbed index divider pages with clear cross‐referencing to the table of contents.

As this is an electronic submission, are index pages or tabbed index divider pages required? If so, please provide detail on how the Government expects to see these delivered in this electronic submission.

Request the RFP Section L be updated to remove "using index pages or tabbed index divider pages" and add cross‐ reference index tables as noted in previous questions.

Section L 2.1 has been updated to remove reference to tabbed dividers

23 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L, 2.1

Offerors shall structure proposal submittals such that the required content is organized as follows:

Management Approach, 25‐page limit

Given the extensive requirements for this volume, we respectfully request a page count extension of 20 pages.

Request the RFP Section L be updated to state that Volume III ‐ Management Approach page limit is 45 pages.

The page limit has been increased to 35 pages

Attachment J‐03 Spares Price List

N/A N/A

The following Part Numbers were identified in Attachment J‐03 and were not able to be found in Attachment J‐02 provided with the TDP. Can the Government please provide the following associated drawings to these Part Numbers?

• P/N 8479962 – ATCA Switch Blade

• P/N N146523‐2 – Console Infrastructure Module (CIM

• P/N LT‐20000450‐04 – VDAD2

• P/N 8601116‐850 – OL‐802 Video Card

• P/N 8601113‐495 – Digital I/O Card

• P/N 8601113‐287 – Power Distribution Controller

• P/N 8601115‐492 – IRIG Card

• P/N LT‐2000372‐16 – IRIS VP‐B12 w/Single RSWD

• P/N LT‐2000372‐17 – IRIS VP‐B12 w/Dual RSWD

• P/N 8623366 – Lifting Straps

The bidder's library was updated on 23 November 202 to provide the missing drawings.

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

25 Attachment J‐11A N/A "Upon completion please submit to at least 10 days prior to the close of the solicitation."

In section 3.2.1 of the solicitation, the Offeror is directed to submit completed Past Performance References directly to the Government using Attachment J‐11A. Attachment J‐11A directs the Offeror: "Upon completion please submit to at least 10 days prior to the close of the solicitation." Cell A6 of Attachment J‐11A lists email addresses. Please confirm that the Offeror shall complete Attachment J‐11A and send to the email contacts in Cell A6 of Attachment J‐11A.

Request the Government update the noted excerpt after "to" and before "at" to explicitly state where to send the completed J‐11A documents.

In response to several questions received regarding past performance, the approach to evaluating past performance has been revised.

Please see the updated solicitation for details.

26 RFP N0002420R5602

Section 3.2.1; Section 3.2.2; Att J‐ 11a; and, Att J‐11B

"submit completed Self‐Assessments directly to the Government."

Attachment J‐11A and Attachment J‐11B, including "Self‐Assessment Information" would seem to be relevant as part of the Volume II submission. Please clarify the relationship of Attachment J‐11A and J‐11B to the directions in Section 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 and what specific information the offeror should provide Government as part of its 5 page limit past performance volume submitted with the final proposal, as referenced in Section 2.1, Note 1. If the offeror is requested to include, "Self‐assessment information from Attachment J‐11B as part of the past performance volume, please consider increasing page limit to at least 10 pages.

Please specify the information Offeror shall include as part of its 5‐page limit past performance volume and consider increasing page count from 5 to 10

In response to several questions received regarding past performance, the approach to evaluating past performance has been revised.

Please see the updated solicitation for details.

27 RFP N0002420R5602

Section 3.2.1; Section 3.2.2; Att J‐ 11a; and, Att J‐11B

"submit completed Self‐Assessments directly to the Government."

In section 3.2.1 of the solicitation, the Offeror is directed to use Past Performance References (Attachment J‐11A) to "submit completed Self‐Assessments directly to the Government." However, only Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment J‐11B) contains the section titled, "Self‐Assessment information." Attachment J‐11B is referenced in section 3.2.2 and within this section, the offeror is directed to "complete the Contract Information portion of the Past Performance Questionnaire only…" and, "shall not complete any other section of the Past Performance Questionnaire." These directions seem contradictory in regards to the term, "Self‐Assessment."

Please clarify the use of the term, "Self‐Assessment." in regards to Section 3.2.1 and Attachment J‐11B, as well as the the past 5 page limt performance volume referenced in Section 2.1, Note 1.

In response to several questions received regarding past performance, the approach to evaluating past performance has been revised.

Please see the updated solicitation for details.

28 RFP N0002420R5602

Volume II: Factor 2 ‐ Past Performance

"submit completed Self‐Assessments directly to the Government."

In section 3.2.1 of the solicitation, the Offeror is asked to complete Attachment J‐11A for each referenced contract. Are the completed Attachment J‐11A to be submitted as the 5‐page limit past performance volume, as referenced in Section 2.1, Note 1?

Please clarify the relationship of the information Offerors shall submit on Attachment J‐11A and the information requested in the 5 page past performance volume referenced in Section 2.1, Note 1.

In response to several questions received regarding past performance, the approach to evaluating past performance has been revised.

Please see the updated solicitation for details.

29 RFP N0002420R5602 Section 3.2.20 N/A

Section 3.2.20.1 is missing from the RFP

Request the Government provide the associated SOW text or mark the missing section as "Reserved", if not required.

The section numbering has been updated/corrected.

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

30 RFP N0002420R5602 Section 3 Note A, page 16‐17

“If this quantity increase occurs within a 60‐day period of other quantities procured under any of these CLINs, then pricing for all hardware under these line items procured within this 60‐day period shall be adjusted to the unit price from the stepladder pricing appropriate for the total quantity being procured, regardless of the configuration and individual quantity per CLIN being procured”

Offer requests Government modify language from

“If this quantity increase occurs within a 60‐day period of other quantities procured under any of these CLINs, then pricing for all hardware under these line items procured within this 60‐day period shall be adjusted to the unit price from the stepladder pricing appropriate for the total quantity being procured, regardless of the configuration and individual quantity per CLIN being procured”

To

“If a quantity increase occurs for a specific configuration within a 60 day period of other quantities of the same configuration, then pricing for all hardware under these line items shall be adjusted to the unit price from the stepladder pricing appropriate for the total quantity of the configuration being procured.”

The Government does not concur with revising the language.

31 RFP N0002420R5602

Section C Sections 3.3.4, 3.3.5, 3.3.6

Exhibit A

CDRL A029 Block 6 calls out SOW Section 3.3.3.

CDRL A031 Block 6 calls out SOW Section 3.3.4.

CDRL A034 Block 6 calls out SOW Section 3.3.6.

Section C of the RFP lists CDRL A029 in Section 3.3.4 Section C of the RFP lists CDRL A031 in Section 3.3.5 Section C of the RFP lists CDRL A034 in Section 3.3.8

Request Government provide corrected DD‐1423‐1 for CDRLS A029, A031, A034

Exhibit A, CDRLs were updated and posted on Bidder's Library on 24 November 2020

32 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L

2.1 2.1PROPOSAL STRUCTURE,

FORMAT, AND PAGE COUNTS

Pg 120 of 155

N/A Request clarification on page count limitation. Is the Technical Approach total page count of 100 pages inclusive of the 30 pages for Element C, Sample Problem, leaving 70 pages to address Elements A, B, and D? Or are there 100 pages available to address Elements A, B, and D and Element C does not count against the 100‐page limit?

The 100 page limit applies to the Technical Approach volume in totality. Element C is limited to no more than 30 pages of the 100 page allocation with Elements A, B, and D comprising the remainder without specific allocation except the overall not‐to‐exceed 100 pages.

33 RFP N0002420R5602

Section C

3.2.10.2 Engineering Change

Proposal (ECP) Pg 33 of 155

3.2.9.1 The Contractor shall generate ECPs in accordance with C‐ 243‐ H003 CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT and deliver ECPs in accordance with CDRL A010. The contractor shall submit Requests for Variance (RFV) in accordance with C‐243‐H003 CONFIGURATION MANAGEMENT and deliver in accordance with

CDRL A011.

Will the Government add the use of the Engineering Change Request (ECR) to the ECP and RFV? The ECR is used for documentation changes only when the change is an administrative change such as an OEM/Vendor Part Number change, to update Source of Supply information, or other changes which are no‐cost and do not impact the technical or configuration aspects of the drawing.

For the purposes of this SOW, ECPs and ECRs are synonymous

34 RFP N0002420R5602

Section B NOTE F ‐ Table 1 Pg. 18 of 155

Attachment J‐02 GFI TDP Drawing 8499592

Note F – Table 1 lists the Color Medium Screen Display (CMSD)

The GFI TDP in folder CLIN_X005 contains a sub‐folder labeled CMSD_7‐May‐20. However, the folders contained in the CMSD_7‐May‐20 folder all refer to the Large Screen Color Display (LSCD). Drawing 8499592 is titled ASSEMBLY, 42 INCH LARGE SCREEN COLOR DISPLAY. Request the Government confirm this is the assembly called out in Note F – Table 1?

Assuming 8499592 is the CMSD, request the Government specify if 8499592‐1 or 8499592‐2 configuration is utilized for the LSD ship class?

Government confirmed Large Screen Color Display (LSCD) Drawing number 8499592 is the same as CMSD as called out in Note F Table 1.

Note F Table 1 has been updated to include all Top Level drawing numbers.

The (‐1) and the (‐2) at the end of the drawing number 8499592 designates the mounting options that is at the discretion of the installation team.

The CSMD used to be called the LSCD (Large Screen Color Display) before TVs were made larger than 42 inches. This may be some of the confusion. CMSD = LSCD (42”) and the CLSD

Attachment J‐05 GFI Technical Data Package N/A N/A

[Sheet "Question 35 ‐ Supplemental" contains a list of] drawings which are not included in the Attachment J‐02 GFI TDP. Request these drawings be provided as soon as practical. The lack of these drawings precludes completion pricing.

Missing drawings have been addressed on Question 35 supplemental information, embedded within this .pdf file.

Attachment J‐05 Personnel Definitions

Key Personnel

Cell B4: Production – Operations Manager

Cell D4: Substantial experience producing combat management system hardware. A Bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university in an engineering, scientific, or technical discipline.

PMP qualification and Navy experience.

Request the Government change the requirement for the Production – Operations Manager so that years of experience may count in lieu of a Bachelor’s degree and / or PMP certification.

As stated in Section L.3.4.2, [a]ll Key Personnel must posess a secret security clearance no later than 60 days after contract award. All other Key Personnel attributes are desired and are listed in the desired attributes column (Column D) of Attachment J‐05

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

Attachment J‐05 Personnel Definitions

Key Personnel

Cell B5: Supply Chain Manager

Cell D5: Substantial experience producing combat management system hardware. A Bachelor’s degree from an accredited college or university in an engineering, scientific, or technical discipline.

PMP qualification and Navy experience.

Request the Government change the requirement for the Supply Chain Manager so that years of experience may count in lieu of a Bachelor’s degree and / or PMP certification.

As stated in Section L.3.4.2, [a]ll Key Personnel must posess a secret security clearance no later than 60 days after contract award. All other Key Personnel attributes are desired and are listed in the desired attributes column (Column D) of Attachment J‐05

38 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L

3.1.1 ELEMENT A:

MANUFACTURING/PRODUCTION

PLAN (Page 123)

The IMS shall be submitted as supplemental information in Volume IV as an appendix to the Manufacturing/Production Plan.

The referenced section directs the IMS to be submitted in Volume IV Factors 1 & 3 Supplemental Information.

However, Section L3.4 does not indicate the placement of the IMS in Volume IV. Request the Government stipulate a revised outline for Volume IV which includes the IMS.

L.3.4.5 has been added to clarify the placement of the IMS.

39 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L

2.1 2.1 PROPOSAL STRUCTURE,

FORMAT, AND PAGE COUNTS

Note 1 (Pg. 120‐155)

3.2.1 RECENT AND RELEVANT PAST

PERFORMANCE REFERENCES WITH

CONTRACTING EFFORT NARRATIVES

(Pg. 126‐155)

2.1 (Page 120) ‐ Note 1: The total page limit for this volume will vary depending on the number of subcontractors for which the Offeror must provide past performance information. The past performance narrative for the Offeror shall not exceed five (5) pages in length. The past performance narrative for applicable subcontractors shall not exceed two (2) pages in length for each subcontractor. Therefore, the page limit for this volume shall be (5 + 2x), where x represents the number of applicable subcontractors.

For further details, see the instructions for Volume II.

3.2.1 (Page 126) ‐ The Offeror shall provide a minimum of three (3) Recent and Relevant Prime Past Performance References with its proposal to include references from the past three (3) Government fiscal years that reflects relevant experience using the format provided as Attachment J‐11A.

Is the Offeror and major subcontractor narratives referenced in 2.1 (Page 120) separate from the Past Performance References (Attachment J‐11A) referenced in 3.2 (Page 126) or do narratives include Past Performance References’? Please clarify.

If the narratives include the Past Performance References, request that the Offeror requirement be changed to ‘shall not exceed two (2) pages in length for each of the (minimum of three (3)) Recent and Relevant Prime Past Performance References’.

In response to several questions received regarding past performance, the approach to evaluating past performance has been revised.

Please see the updated solicitation for details.

40 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L

3.6.3.4 PROPOSED PRICING FOR

PROVISIONED ITEMS ORDERS

(Pg. 134 of 155)

For firm‐fixed‐price CLIN 0004 and cost‐plus‐fixed‐fee CLIN 0006, the Offeror shall propose the Government cost estimates of $20,950,000 for CLIN 0004 and $41,070,000 for CLIN 0006, and a profit/fee rate to be applied to the Government cost estimate. The proposed profit/fee rate shall not exceed 5%

Request the Government clarify whether the offerors are also permitted to burden the government estimates with indirect costs as applicable or are the estimates provided inclusive of indirect costs?

The total values of CLINs 0004 and 0006 are inclusive of burdens and profit; the total values represent the maximum/ceiling amount of these CLINs.

41 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L

3.6.4 SECTION 2 – COST/PRICE

PROPOSAL RATE SUPPORT

(Pg. 135 of 155)

For each proposed indirect or G&A rate that is lower than the corresponding actual, the Offeror shall provide incurred rates billed in the last five years by five percentage points or more, provide a derivation—including assumptions, calculations and substantiating evidence—of its estimation of that rate's annual cost pools and base volumes for each year of contract performance

Request the Government clarify the meaning of “five percentage points.”

L.3.6.4 has been updated to clairfy the information that is required.

42 RFP N0002420R5602

Section B Note A Table 1 (Pg. 17 of 155)

Note F Table 1 (Pg. 18 of 155)

Note A Table 1 presents the units which comprise the shipset for CLIN 0001 and option CLINS 1001, 2001, 3001, 4001.

Note F Table 1 presents the quantities of assembles and / or equipment which comprise a ship set.

Both of the referenced tables use nomenclature only to refer to systems and / or assemblies. Without the association to the specific part number contained in the TDP, there may be ambiguity generating the complete and accurate Bill of Material (BOM). This leads to an unfair advantage to the incumbent(s) who possess an in‐ depth knowledge of the drawing package. Request the Government revise these tables to include the part number associated with each nomenclature.

Section B Note A, Table 1 and Note F, Table 1 have been updated to identify the nomenclature as listed on the J‐02

43 RFP N0002420R5602

Section B

B‐215‐H002 REFUNDS (SPARES AND

SUPPORT EQUIPMENT) (NAVSEA)

(OCT 2018)

(Pg. 21 of 155)

(a) In the event that the price of a spare part or item of support equipment delivered under this contract significantly exceeds its intrinsic value, the Contractor agrees to refund the difference. Refunds will not be made to recoup the amount of cost decreases that occur over time due to productivity gains (excluding economic purchase quantity considerations) or changes in market conditions

How is provision B‐215‐H002 exercised? Request the Government provide an example of how this provision would be invoked so that offerors can adequately allow, plan for risk or avoidance of this issue. This is a GFI TDP with many components specifically limited to sole or single source or limited distributors.

The Government is unable to provide hypothetical examples.

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

44 RFP N0002420R5602

Section C

1.1 Scope

(Pg. 25 of 155)

Section L

3.1.4 ELEMENT D: PERSONNEL

(Pg. 126 of 155)

The Government has identified the Program Manager, Production Operations Manager and Supply Chain Manager as Key Personnel, all of whom shall be 100% dedicated to the contract.

The NOTIONAL LABOR CATEGORY MIX (X003 SERIES CLINS) table lists:

Senior Program Manager (Key) – 480 LOE per year Senior Production – Operations Manager (Key) ‐ 480 LOE per year Mid‐Level Supply Chain Manager (Key) ‐ 480 LOE per year

In Section C1.1 the Government has identified the Program Manager, Production Operations Manager and Supply Chain Manager as Key Personnel, all of whom shall be 100% dedicated to the contract.

However, in Section L3.1.4 these key personnel are limited to LOE services CLIN = 480 hours (25%) Request the Government clarify what role on the production CLINs are envisioned to require the other 75% engagement of the listed roles? A minimum guarantee is not provided in this RFP so it is not reasonable to guarantee a production facility 100% dedicated to a single contract absent a reciprocal guarantee.

The Program Manager shall perform the duties defined in 3.2.2 of the SOW and manage all other tasking as referenced in the SOW.

45 RFP N0002420R5602

Section C

3.2.17 Risk Assessment and

Management (Pg. 37 of 155)

The Contractor shall develop, implement, and maintain a Contractor’s Risk Management Plan (CDRL A022) that meets the requirements of the PEO IWS 10 CVN 78 Combat System Risk Management Plan (Attachment J‐02) and includes a process that identifies, evaluates, and mitigates program risks including technical environmental, safety, cost, and schedule components. Risks shall be evaluated as to their impact on reliability, safety, supportability, affordability, schedule, and technical performance objectives. The Contractor shall implement mitigation plans that will reduce the risks to an acceptable management level for those risks with the highest probability to occur. Mitigation plans shall be managed and updated as contract performance proceeds. All risks shall be identified and reported to the Government and briefed during each program review and monthly interchange meetings.

The report shall include risk identification, risk assessment, risk ranking, risk trends, risk mitigation, human, hardware, and software performance analysis and tradeoffs, risk monitoring.

In order to enable rapid ramp up of risk identification and implementation of risk avoidance and to allow for fair and equitable competition, request the Government provide available documentation or a summary of outstanding problem reports from incumbent OEMs that are not resolved via ECP including any redlines available.

The current DMS report was provided to the Bidder's library on 03 December 2020

46 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L

2.4 2.4 MAJOR SUBCONTRACTOR

PROPOSALS

(Pg. 122 of 155)

Section L

3.2.1 RECENT AND RELEVANT PAST

PERFORMANCE REFERENCES WITH

CONTRACTING EFFORT NARRATIVES

(Pg. 126 of 155)

From Section 2.4: For…this solicitation, major subcontractors are defined as any cost‐reimbursement subcontractor proposed to perform 10% or more of the total engineering services hours under CLINs X003. However,…minor subcontractors cumulatively perform more than 10% or more of the total engineering services hours under CLINs X003, all subcontractors performing under cost‐ reimbursable arrangements are considered major subcontractors and must propose as such.

From 3.2.1: Furthermore, an Offeror proposing Subcontractor(s) who will perform 10% or more of the total proposed contract efforts shall also submit one (1) Past Performance Reference for said Subcontractor(s) using the format provided as Attachment J‐ 11A.

Section L2.4 indicates subcontractors are considered major with 10% of the CLINS X003 CPFF. Section L3.2 indicates an Offeror proposing Subcontractor(s) who will perform 10% or more of the total proposed contract efforts shall also submit one (1) Past Performance Reference for said Subcontractor(s) using the format provided as Attachment J‐11A. Request the Government clarify the delineation of a Major subcontractor and what cost information is to be provided based on criterion.

L.2.4 has been updated to clarify that cost information is required from all subcontractors

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

47 RFP N0002420R5602

N0002420R5602 Solicitation Section C

3.2.11 Diminishing Manufacturing

Sources and Material Shortages (DMSMS) Management.

(Pg. 34 of 155)

Section L

L‐211‐W003 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL –

SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS –

SUPERSEDING PART NUMBERS

(NAVSEA) (OCT 2018)

(Pg. 122 of 155)

From C3.2.11: The Contractor shall identify, plan for and resolve DMSMS and obsolescence issues. The Contractor's DMSMS monitoring program shall include all material including parts and components provided by subcontractors…Contractor shall identify the occurrence of a DMSMS or obsolescence situation to the Government as early as possible and provide a proposed resolution plan that may include product upgrade, technology refresh, life time buys, bridge buys and/or a redesign to meet the requirements of the contract.

From L‐211‐W003: If any part number shown is obsolete, has been or is being changed, or is considered by the manufacturer to be incorrect or unavailable for any reason, then it is requested the offeror so indicate in its proposal/quotation and furnish, for the superseding part number, each of the following:

(a) installation drawing;

(b) assembly drawing;

(c) manufacturer's test report;

(d) complete set of performance data; and

(e) explanatory information setting forth in detail differences between the item specified and the one being offered.

The incumbent’s knowledge of current Obsolescence / DMSMS issues provides a clear advantage in responding to the solicitation’s requirement for DMSMS Management and compliance with L‐211‐W003. In order to provide a level playing‐field, request the Government provide the current COTS Health Chart or a listing of all currently known Obsolete / DMSMS parts as an addition to Attachment J‐02 GFI.

The current DMS report was provided to the Bidder's library on 03 December 2020

Section L

1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION

Pg 117 of 155

From 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION: In order to be considered for contract award under this procurement, the Offeror shall possess a Defense Security Service SECRET facility clearance with SECRET personnel clearances and SECRET safeguarding capability, all issued by the United States Government. SECRET facility physical construction must meet the requirements as defined in DoD 5205.07‐M Vol 3.

The language in Section L, 1.0 GENERAL INFORMATION indicates a firm submitting a proposal must have a Defense Security Service SECRET facility clearance and Secret safeguarding capability at the time of proposal submission. We have discussed with our DSS representative and been advised that the facility safeguarding capability can be provided if we will be receiving classified material in order to review and draft our proposal submission; otherwise this is activated upon award. Please advise if offerors will receive classified material during the proposal submission phase. If not, please advise if the Government will revise to state “SECRET safeguarding capability” will be required upon award as opposed to in order to be considered for contract award (proposal).

Section L has been updated to remove this language

Attachment J‐02 GFI Technical Data Package N/A N/A

The drawings provided by the Government to support this solicitation contain sole source drawings from Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, and/or DRS. These drawings include but are not limited to [the drawings listed in sheet "Question 49 ‐ Supplemental"

Offeror contends that this provides an unfair competitive advantage to these offerors (contractors). OCI generally prevails due to (1) biased ground rules; (2) impaired objectivity; or (3) unequal access to information which is nonpublic information. Will the Government release key information that appears to be the cause of OCI to all offerors competing for this federal contract to negate any competitive advantage held by one or more offerors (contractors) with unfair access to the information? Will the Government provide the subject assemblies/parts as Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) to equalize the playing field and provide for full and open competition among all offerors?

The Government has provided all additional drawings that it has sufficient license rights to disclose; please refer to the Bidders' Library. The Government is unable to release drawings for which we do not hold sufficient license rights.

The Government will not provide additional Government Furnished Property at this time. The Government expects offerors to provide parts in accordance with the Government TDP. If the offeror is unable to manufacture a component, the component shall be procured from a qualified source. The Government will continue to monitor this risk and shall take additional actions as appropriate.

50 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L

3.4.4 BILL OF MATERIAL (BOM)

(FACTOR 1)

(Pg. 130 of 155)

The Offeror shall submit a detailed Bill of Material (BOM) for one shipset under CLIN 0001. The BOM shall not be priced. The Offeror’s BOM shall demonstrate a complete technical understanding of the SSDS MK2 TDPs.

The documents provided in Attachment J‐02 GFI did not include a BOM. The creation of a BOM from the drawing package is a laborious effort and one which puts non‐incumbent offerors at a significant disadvantage. Request the Government provide the current indentured BOM in electronic format, in either Microsoft Excel (.xlxs) or Adobe Acrobat (.pdf).

The drawing index has been provided in Attachment J‐02; the drawings contain the parts list

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

51 RFP N0002420R5602 N/A N/A

Offeror is requesting an extension to this solicitation respond by date. This request is predicated on several critical factors to include:

• The impact of the COVID‐19 on suppliers of equipment and / or components which has significantly slowed the rate of response to Requests for Quotes (RFQ) making the development of the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) impossible in the current 30‐day response time; as well as

• Several drawings list Lockheed Martin, DRS Technologies, or Raytheon as the sole source of supply for several parts (asked in a separate question)

• There appear to be approximately 20 drawings missing from the Attachment J‐05 GFI TDP (asked in a separate question)

• The lack of drawing numbers associated with the nomenclature items listed in Note A and Note F (asked in a separate question)

• The incumbent Lockheed Martin has a distinct advantage in that they already have the information required to accurately price the Bill of Material (BOM)

Once these missing drawings are received, additional time will be required to integrate changes into the Technical Volume, BOM and to adequately price. Incumbents referenced above have a distinct advantage in that they already have the information requested and necessary to adequately prepare their proposal submissions.

Therefore, to promote and provide for a full and open competition in soliciting offers and awarding the Government’s federally funded contracts which are consistent with fulfilling the requirements efficiently and preserve neutrality between Offerors, we respectfully request a due date extension of sixty (60) days, after receipt of all missing drawings.

The proposal due date was extended to 04 January 2021 on 21 November 2020.

52 RFP N0002420R5602 Note F ‐ Table 1

The Column labeled “Hardware” in Section B NOTES, NOTE F, Note F – Table 1 does not provide enough detail to determine the exact part number, including dash number, for the desired deliverables.

e respectfully request the Government update Note F – Table 1 to include the part number (Including the corresponding dash number) and associated hardware name as stated in the TDP.

Section B Note A, Table 1 and Note F, Table 1 have been updated to identify the nomenclature as listed on the J‐02

53 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L, 3.6.3 section 1‐ section B Pricing

"The Offeror shall submit a completed Attachment J‐03 for CLIN X002 pricing."

Attachment J‐03 appears to only have a tab for a single CLIN (0002), while there are no tabs for CLINs 1002, 2002, 3002, 4002.

The Offeror request the Government please expand J‐03 attachment table to a tab for all CLINs 1002, 2002, 3002, 4002.

Attachment J‐03 updated to add tabs for Option years. The updated attachment was posted to the bidder's library on 24 November 2020.

54 RFP N0002420R5602 Section 3.2.8 and 3.2.8.1

3.2.8 States

Meetings shall occur Semi‐Annually and Monthly. When the Semi‐ Annual Program Review and Monthly Interchange Meetings are coincident the Monthly interchange Meeting shall be replaced by the Semi‐Annual Program Review. The Semi‐Annual Program Reviews and Monthly Interchange Meetings shall be conducted at the Contractor’s facility.

3.2.8.1 states The Contractor shall conduct monthly Program Management Reviews (PMRs) beginning three (3) months after the award of

CLIN 0001.

Does the Government intend to have monthly or semi‐annual PMRs? Or, are the monthly Interchange meetings proposed supposed to have the same detail as PMRs and therefore are really program reviews?

The Offeror politely requests the Government update Sections 3.2.8 and 3.2.8.1 to state Monthly Interchange Meetings/Program Management Reviews will be conducted via WebEx and Semi‐Annual Program Reviews will be conducted at the contractor's facility.

No change is required. Meetings shall occur Semi‐ Annually and Monthly. When the Semi‐Annual Program Review and Monthly Interchange Meetings are coincident the Monthly interchange Meeting shall be replaced by the Semi‐Annual Program Review. The Semi‐Annual Program Reviews and Monthly Interchange Meetings shall be conducted at the Contractor’s facility.

55 RFP N0002420R5602 Section B, CLIN 1001 “Not to exceed 5 shipsets”

SECTION B NOTE A – Table 2 CLIN 1001 ‐ table has shipset 4 and shipset 5 cells shaded to prevent pricing from being entered.

Will the Government please unshade cells in table so Offeror’s pricing data can be entered if NTE is 5 shipsets for

CLIN 1001?

Section B, Note A, Table 2 has been updated to reflect 5 shipsets

56 RFP N0002420R5602 Section L, 2.2 Page Size and Format

“The narrative material in each proposal shall be single‐spaced, typed in 12‐point Times New Roman font……Text within tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material may use no smaller than 8‐ point font in Times New Roman or Arial typeface.”

Will the Government allow the Offeror to use 10pt font for the titles of figures/tables rather than the 12pt called out in Section L?

Yes, the font size of the titles may match the font inside the tables

Question Number: Source Document Reference Excerpt of Content Question: Government Response

57 RFP N0002420R5602

Section L, 1.4 Submission of Questions and Comments

“Offerors shall submit written questions and comments related to this solicitation using the Bidder’s Question Submittal Form (Attachment J‐12) for this solicitation. For ease of Government review and to minimize response time, Offerors shall submit this form in the original file format. Do not convert the form to Portable Document Format (PDF).”

In order to make the question and answer processes more efficient for both the Government and potential Offerors will the Government permit the Offerors to submit questions in the Excel format used previously on other NAVSEA proposals?

Given the time frame, Attachment J‐12 will not be updated for this solicitation.

58 DD254 Item 11(j), Page 3

Item: 11(j). Continued: Any attempt by unauthorized third parties to solicit, obtain, photograph, or record, or; incidents of loss/compromise of government Classified or CI, Business Sensitive and Company Proprietary information related to this contract or other programs must be immediately reported to the Facility Security Officer, DCSA and/or the Naval Criminal Investigative Service, and SEA 00P3. Questions concerning these requirements shall be directed to SEA 00P3.

The DD‐254 item 11(j) cites reporting requirements for contractor proprietary information and for “other programs”. Should the wording of this DD‐254 be adjusted as follows to clarify that the reporting requirements apply to this contract only and only applies to Classified, CUI and CI data?

Change :

Item: 11(j). Continued: Any attempt by unauthorized third parties to solicit, obtain, photograph, or record, or;

incidents of loss/compromise of government Classified or CI, Business Sensitive and Company Proprietary information related to…