20210416_Bidders_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

N0002421R5208 Offeror's Questions and Government Responses

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

1 N/A N/A N/A

We recommend the Management section of the proposal has an adjectival rating in Section L vs pass or fail.

Given the vast scope of work (four contracts being combined into one) and the Navy’s expectations for total management of this contract through collaboration with the CEC Design Agent, the bidder should be able to demonstrate their ability to manage complex scope. A pass/fail rating does not lend credibility to the Contractor’s ability to manage the magnitude of this scope.

Thank you for your input, the Government will look into the recommendation.

2 Draft RFP CLIN 0008

AN/USG‐4B SYSTEM

FFP

AN/USG‐4B CEC SYSTEM MINUS THE CSSA, CSSA POWER SUPPLY AND

SDP. SECTION J Attachment XX TDP REFERENCE 8423589‐001, PRODUCT STRUCTURE, USMC AN/USG‐4B AND PL8423544‐001, PROCESSING SET, COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT TRANSMISSION, AN/USG‐

4B (IGNORE CSSA UNIT 27, CSSA POWER SUPPLY UNIT 28, SDP UNIT 39

AND Controller, Power Supply 8240795)

The RFP states to ignore CSSA, CSSA Power Supply, SDP, and Power Supply Controller 8240795. This is the same part number for the PS Controller that goes in the ECSC. The Power Supply Controller is not part of the USG‐4B system. We recommend updating CLIN 0008.

Concur. The Government will amend CLIN 0008 for the final solicitation.

3 Draft RFP CLIN 0020

SIGNAL DATA PROCESSOR ‐ NEXT (SDP‐NEXT)

CPIF

COOPERATIVE ENGAGEMENT CAPABILITY (CEC) SIGNAL DATA

PROCESSOR (SDP) ASSEMBLY WITH TRANSIT CASE (PART NUMBER TBD).

SHALL BE DELIVERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE TECHNICAL DATA

PACKAGE AND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CONTRACT

CLIN 0020 Signal Data Processor – NEXT is titled ‘SDP with transit case.’ And is required to be delivered in accordance with the TBD TDP. During the Industry Day briefing and follow‐on 1‐1 conversations, the government indicated that the scope of this CLIN is the ‘transition to production’ effort. This aligns with the UNITs being set to hours. We recommend changing the title of the CLIN to align to the Government’s expectations. Further, we recommend the Government include a paragraph in the SOW that addresses the specific work required to be performed on this CLIN. We recommend this SOW section include language to clarify whether or not the Contractor will participate in design and development of the TDP and what level of TDP the contract can expect to receive.

Concur. The Government will amend CLIN 0020 for the final solicitation.

Additionally, Section C will be amended to include additional verbiage expanding on the NRE services CLIN and will be released as part of final solicitation.

4 Draft RFP 3.2.9

The Contractor shall develop, maintain, and submit a Program Protection Implementation Plan (PPIP) in accordance with CDRL A017. As part of the PPIP, the Contractor shall notify the Government of any part, information, material, or labor not provided by a Trusted Source and must obtain specific written authorization from the COR and IWS 6 Security Manager to proceed with its use. A Trusted Source is defined as a source that has the Government’s confidence in the source's ability to secure national security systems by assessing the integrity of the people and processes used to design, generate, manufacture, and distribute national security critical components. The Contractor shall flow down the Trusted Sources and export control requirements of this paragraph to all subcontractors performing under this contract.

When will the USG provide the Program Protection Plan (PPP) to support the Program Protection Implementation Plan? Will the USG also provide the supporting Critical Item List?

The Government intends to have all GFI available to bidders as soon as possible but not later than the time the solicitation is released.

The Government will look into providing the supporting Critical Item List.

5 N/A Recommended Sample Questions N/A

1. Successful operation of the CEC systems depend on proper sub‐system and system level RF calibration in order to interact and operate at all frequencies and operating conditions. Describe the steps you would take during SFAT to ensure proper communications between a newly produced AN/USG‐3B system and other GFE antennas on the contractor’s outdoor range. Similar tasking is describe in Section C, paragraphs 3.5.3.3

2. When the fleet encounters a failure of a CEC end item, it is returned to the contractor’s facility and authorization is given to conduct initial testing and inspection. This tasking is described in Section C, paragraph 3.6.1. Describe, in detail, the testing and inspection activities you would employ upon receipt of a failed SDP‐S unit with a failure condition of (such as) Emcon Failures, Power Supply Faults, cross talk or loopback issues, to return it to A‐Condition.

3. When a unit is returned to the Production and Repairs contractor, work authorization for that repair is provided via Technical Instructions. This tasking is described in Section C, paragraph 3.6.1.2. What processes, tools, and methods would you employ to financially manage 10 simultaneous repairs and accurately track, forecast, and report these metrics to the government.

4. The scope of the Design Agent / Engineering Services contract includes maintaining and updating the overall hardware configuration baseline. The EFA antenna contains parts (TBD parts) that are nearing end of life. What enhancements to the hardware baseline would you recommend? Describe the process by which you would coordinate with the CEC Design Agent to propose those enhancements. Similar tasking is described in Section C, paragraph 3.3.2, 3.3.3, and 3.3.4

5. The current SDP terminal will not support all of the requirements in BLK II and the future DMO demands.

The terminal is currently being redesigned to satisfy a new set of requirements. This contract will contain the scope to transition the new SDP NEXT to production. This scope is reflected in CLIN 0020 and Section C, paragraph TBD. Describe the process and testing methodologies you would use to ensure that the SDP NEXT product satisfies the all requirements, including terminal level and CEC System Spec.

Thank you for the input

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

6 Draft RFP SOW Sec 3.3.3. Obsolescence Management

The Contractor shall initiate actions to resolve obsolescence management issues with sufficient lead‐time to preclude impact to Government delivery requirements (including production and fleet requisitions) while meeting the other requirements of this SOW.

Recommend updating the obsolescence language in Section C, 3.3.3 Management of the contract to clarify resolution and funding of solutions

From The Contractor shall initiate actions to resolve obsolescence management issues with sufficient lead‐time to preclude impact to Government delivery requirements (including production and fleet requisitions) while meeting the other requirements of this SOW.

To The Contractor shall initiate actions to resolve obsolescence management issues as directed by the Government via Technical Instructions with sufficient lead‐time to preclude or mitigate impacts to Government delivery requirements (including production and fleet requisitions) to the best of the Contractor’s ability while meeting the other requirements of this SOW.

Thank you for your input, the Government will look into the recommendations.

7 Draft RFP SOW Sec 3.3.3. Obsolescence Management

The Contractor shall initiate actions to resolve obsolescence management issues with sufficient lead‐time to preclude impact to Government delivery requirements (including production and fleet requisitions) while meeting the other requirements of this SOW.

We recommend adding this section which is found in another NAVSEA Production contract

Obsolescence Solution Implementation In the event that the Contractor determines that one or more parts involved in the procurement and/or production of any of the requirements contained in this contract are obsolete, the Contractor shall provide written initial notice to the Contracting Officer per section X.X.X above, after discovering the DMSMS/obsolescence. The contractor’s initial notice shall include an analysis for performance of the requirements of the contract addressing the DMSMS/obsolescence issue including the following information

1. A description of the difference between the existing contractual requirement and the contractor’s recommendation to correct the problem, the comparative advantages and disadvantages of each, a justification when the proposed solution uses an item that has a function or characteristics that are different from the DMSMS/obsolete item, the effect of the change on the end item’s performance, and any pertinent objective test data.

2. A preliminary list and analysis of the contract requirements that must be changed if the contractor’s recommendation is accepted, including any suggested specification revisions.

3. Identification of the unit to which the change applies.

4. A budgetary cost estimate for the affected portions of the existing contract requirement. The cost impact associated shall take into account the Contractor’s allowable development and implementation costs, including any amount attributable to subcontracts under the Subcontracts paragraph of this clause.

5. A prediction of any collateral affects the recommended change would have to the agency.

6. A statement of the time by which a contract modification accepting the change must be issued in order to achieve the maximum cost reduction, noting any effect on the contract completion time or delivery schedule.

7. Identification of any previous submissions of a proposal to address the DMSMS/obsolescence issue, including the dates submitted, the agencies and contract numbers involved, and previous Government actions, if known.

Thank you for your input, the Government will look into the recommendations.

Cont'd

Approval/Rejection Requirements – The Government will either approve or reject the initial notice of DMSMS/obsolescence by providing written notice to the Contractor within twenty‐five (25) workdays after receipt of the initial notice by the Contracting Officer. The Government will provide explanation for any rejection. Where the Contracting Officer provides notification of approval, the Contractor’s obligations relating to such DMSMS/obsolescence recommendation shall be discharged to the extent that the deficiency is corrected. If the incorporation of such approved DMSMS/obsolescence change does not correct the deficiency, the Contractor shall remain responsible for resubmitting and obtaining acceptance of a follow‐on recommendation to resolve the DMSMS/obsolescence issue.

DMSMS/Obsolescence Disputes – Failure of the parties to agree upon any determination of the necessity for, or the designation of, a change to be made under this provision shall be a dispute within the meaning of the “Disputes” clause of this contract.

Rights and Remedies – The rights and remedies of the Government provided in this provision are in addition to and do not limit any rights afforded to the Government by any other clause of this contract.

Subcontracts – The terms and conditions of this clause flow down to all relevant subcontracts.

Resolution and Funding – If the Government approves the recommendation made in the Contractor’s initial notification, any changes to the effort associated with the resolution of DMSMS/obsolescence issues arising under this special contract provision that causes an increase or decrease in the cost of, or the time required for, performance of any part of the work under this contract, the provisions of FAR 52.243‐1 CHANGES – FIXEDPRICE or 52.243‐2 CHANGES – COST REIMBURSEMENT (as applicable) shall be followed.

Thank you for your input, the Government will look into the recommendations.

8 Draft RFP SOW N/A

It is critical to the success of the program that contractors across the Navy’s CEC program portfolio closely collaborate on enhancements impacting the system’s baseline. To this end, we recommend the inclusion of the following language in the Production and Repairs Statement of Work “The Contractor shall work in conjunction with other organizations or contractors, including the Design Agent and TDA to propose enhancements impacting the CEC System baseline.”

Thank you for your input, the Government will look into the recommendations.

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

9 Draft+N0002421R5208 Section B, SOW paragraph 3.5.3.3 ATP 8423557‐001‐REV E Not downloadable

Per Draft Section B, SOW paragraph 3.5.3.3 – System Final Acceptance Testing (SFAT); the government requires completion of the SFAT ATP that conforms to the outside range specifications, both of which are GFI. The SFAT ATP is not downloadable in the Technical Data Package (TDP) provided with the draft RFP.

Will the government provide that information to industry so that we can ensure we can meet the outdoor range requirements per the SOW? (“Acceptance Test Procedure for the Cooperative Engagement Capability ANUSG‐2B, ANUSG‐3B, ANUSG‐4B, ANUSG‐5B, ANUSG‐7B, 8423557‐001 – REV E.pdf”)

The Government intends to have all GFI available to bidders as soon as possible but not later than the time the solicitation is released.

10 Draft+N0002421R5208 TDP TDP Marking All SDP related drawing are marked with a Raytheon copyright. Will this marking be retained in the TDP delivered to the successful offeror?

The TDP and related drawings are not restricted. The Government will work to have all drawings appropriately marked for RFP release.

11 Industry Day N/A Consolidation At Industry Day, it was mentioned that four contracts are being consolidated. What four contracts does this include?

This contract is actually a consolidation of three contracts CEC Production Contract (N00024‐15‐C‐5228) SDP‐S Production Contract (N00024‐17‐C‐5201) BRAVO Repair Contract (N00024‐17‐C‐5200)