20-R-5211 SSC CS SIT QA4.pdf

Solicitation #: NAVSEA POC

Name/Title Phone Sheila Utz 202‐781‐2486

Ann Tompson 202‐781‐0844 Kevin Richter 202‐781‐4211

E‐Mail sheila.utz1@navy.mil ann.e.thompson1@navy.mil kevin.richter@navy.mil

Question # Source Document Page # Item Excerpt of Content Question Government Response

QA 1

1 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

200 Section L, 3.5 The Offeror shall discuss past performance in the implementation of form-fit-function replacement solutions similar to that proposed for its Replacement Transmit and Receive Module solution in Volume I

Will the Government remove this statement from the RFP as it appears to be in error as it does not apply to this RFP?

The Government concurs. Amendment 0001 removes the statement that references the implementation of form-fit-function replacement solutions.

2 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

94 Sectioon C, 1.1, CLIN 0002, CLIN 0002- LCS Freedom Develop CS Test Procedures, CS Test Sequence Network (TSN), & CS Master Test Plan (MTP), in accordance with Paragraph 3.2: The Contractor shall develop, modify, and update the CS Test Procedures, MTP, and TSN.

CLIN 0003 - LCS Independence Develop CS Test Procedures, CS Test Sequence Network, & CS Master Test Plan, in accordance with Paragraph 3.2: The Contractor shall develop, modify, and update the CS Test Procedures, MTP, and TSN

Will the Government provide a Test Index or Test Stages Matrix in order for the Offeror to adequately bid the CS Test Procedures, CS Test Sequence Network (TSN), & CS Master Test Plan (MTP) scope as part of an RFP update?

The Government clarifies that the intent is for Offerors to develop the CS Test Proceedures, CS Test Sequence Network (TSN) & CS Master Test Plan (MTP) IAW with the Test Index Numbering System, CDRLs A027/A028, and the guidance in Appendix B of S9095-AD-TRQ- 010/TSTP as mentioned in Section 3.2 of the SOW.

3 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

170 Section I, 52.217-7 CLINs 0022-0024, 1022-1024, 2022-2024, 3022-3024, 4022-4024, 5022- 5024, 6022-6024, 7022-7024, 8022-024, and 9022-9024 are missing from the table of latest option exercise dates that begins on page 170.

Please add latest option exercise dates for CLINs 0022-0024 as 6 months after contract award, CLINs 1022-1024 as 14 months after contract award, CLINs 2022-2024 as 28 months after contract award, CLINs 3022-3024 as 42 months after contract award, CLINs 4022-4024 as 56 months after contract award, CLINs 5022-5024 as 70 months after contract award, CLINs 6022-6024 as 84 months after contract award, CLINs 7022-7024 as 98 months after contract award, CLINs 8022-8024 as 112 months after contract award, and CLINs 9022-9024 as 120 months after contract award so that they align with option exercise dates of their respective and corresponding CS Waterfront Integration & Test CLIN.

The Government concurs. Amendment 0001 adds the option exercise dates for CLINs 0022-0024 as 6 months after contract award, CLINs 1022-1024 as 14 months after contract award, CLINs 2022-2024 as 28 months after contract award, CLINs 3022-3024 as 42 months after contract award, CLINs 4022-4024 as 56 months after contract award, CLINs 5022-5024 as 70 months after contract award, CLINs 6022-6024 as 84 months after contract award, CLINs 7022-7024 as 98 months after contract award, CLINs 8022-8024 as 112 months after contract award, and CLINs 9022-9024 as 120 months after contract award

4 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

209 Section L, 3.7.3 Per page 209, paragraph 3.7.3 "The Offeror shall provide the following completed attachments, which will be incorporated into the contract at award:… Attachment J-26, Small Business Subcontracting Plan"

Should the Offeror expect a template to be provided for Attachment J-26 (Small Business Subcontracting Plan) or should the Offeror submit their own DCMA approved Small Business Subcontracting Plan?

The Government's intent is for Offerors to submit its own DCMA-approved Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Amendment 0001 revises Section L 3.7.3 from "Attachment J-26 Small Business Subcontracting Plan" to "Attachment J-26 Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Offeror's format"

5 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

173 Section J, Attachment J-30 Per page 173, Section J - List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments, Attachment J-30 (Past Performance Questionnaire) template has been provided in the Bidders Library.

Please confirm that the J-30 Attachment Past Performance Questionnaire is intended for NAVSEA use to assess offerors performance with outside assessors and not to be filled out by the offerers.

The Government clarifies that the past performance questionnaire is for Offerors to provide a self assessment. Ammendment 0001 revises the solicitation and Attachment J-30 accordingly.

6 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

190 Section L, 2.5 Per page 190, Section L - 2.5 Proposal Submission instructions, the preferred method of response is by overnight delivery service, such as FedEx, UPS, or DHL.

Understanding the preferred method of response is by overnight delivery services, such as FedEx, UPS, or DHL; given recent commercial delivery challenges due to the COVID-19 epedimic, will the Government accept direct, in person delivery of the response to the Government by the offeror?

At this time, in person delivery of proposals is not possible due to COVID-19 restictions.

7 RFP P. 214

and P.

L-209-H009 and L 3.3.5 L-209-H009, "Notification of Potential Organizational Conflict(s) of Interest (NAVSEA)(DEC 2018)", paragraph (b) states: "If a potential conflict of interest exists at any tier, each potential prime offeror shall notify the

Contracting Officer within 14 days of the date of this solicitation."

Section L.3.3.5 "Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan (If Applicable)" states: "If the Offeror intending to submit a proposal in response to the SSC CS SI&T solicitation has also submitted a proposal under the LUSV conceptual design solicitation, the Offeror shall provide an OCI Mitigation Plan as part of their proposal (Volume III)."

There is a 14-day notification requirement in paragraph (b) of L- 209-H009, "Notification of Potential Organizational Conflict(s) of Interest (NAVSEA)(DEC 2018)". Please confirm this notification timeline does not apply to the submittal of an OCI Mitigation Plan required by L.3.3.5 for Offerors who have also submitted a proposal under the LUSV conceptual design solicitation.

The Government clarifies that the 14 day notification requirement in paragraph (b) of L-209- H009, "Notification of Potential Organizational Conflict(s) of Interest (NAVSEA)(DEC 2018)" applies to all potential OCIs. Offerors have two choices of when to submit the OCI Mitigation Plan. Offerors may: (1) within 14 days of the date of the solicitation, submit the information set forth in paragraph (b) in order for the Government to make an OCI determination within the time period stated in paragraph (c); or (2) submit the information set forth in paragraph (b) at the time of proposal submission as detailed in Sec. L 3.3.5. Please note, electing to submit the mitigation plan in accordance with L-209-H009, will not extend the proposal due date.

QA 2

Solicitation Questions and Government Responses N00024-21-R-5211 Small Surface Combatant (SSC) Combat System (CS) Ship Integration & Test (SI&T)

The following are answers to questions received from parties interested in the solicitation. The answers provide clarification only and DO NOT constitute an amendment to the solicitation.

8 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

122 Section C, 3.7.2.4 Per page 122 Section 3.7.2.4 says "If a contractor independently uses any data tools for data analysis, they must provide a copy of the data analysis tool(s) and a license(s)to the Government (NSWC Corona) or provide timely data conversion in less than two hours into a common format that can be utilized by Phoenix Open Architecture or other NSWC Corona specified analysis tool." This section falls within section 3.7 and is therefore "Applicable to Option CLINs 2014, 2015, 2016, 0020 and associated Option CLINs [3014-9014], [3015-9015], [3016-9016] if exercised" in accordance with page 120, yet 3rd party software licenses in support of CLINS 2014 - 9014, 2015-9015, and 2016-9016 would fall within CLIN 0018 and Option CLINs 1018-9018 in accordance with paragraph 3 9 on page 123

Please consider updating page 122 Section 3.7.2.4 to say "If a contractor independently uses any data tools for data analysis, they must provide a copy of the data analysis tool(s) and a license(s) (accounted for in CLIN 0018 and Option CLINs 1018- 9018 in accordance with paragraph 3.9) to the Government (NSWC Corona) or provide timely data conversion in less than two hours into a common format that can be utilized by Phoenix Open Architecture or other NSWC Corona specified analysis tool."

The effort associated in this section falls within the CLINs mentioned in Section 3.7. If a third party license was presented and approved for use, the cost associated would be billed against CLIN 0018. This will be a post-award action "IF" the Government decides to use a different tool, and it should not affect the Offeror's proposal. The solicitation is amended via A002 to clarify that the costs associated with any such license, if approved, will be captured under the X018 CLIN series.

9 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

9, 95 CLIN 0018 (Section B, Section C)

(Section B) Page 9 states "In support of CLINs 0001 through 0013, and 0017"

(Section C) Page 95 shows CLIN 0018 (1018 - 9018) is "for work performed under CLINs 0004, 0005, 0006, 0007, 0008, 0009, 0010, 0011, 0012, 0013, 0017, and Option CLINs if exercised, 1004-6004, 1005-9005, 1006-9006, 1007-9007, 1008-9008, 1009-9009, 1010-9010, 1011-9011, 1012-9012, 1013-9013, 1017-9017, 2014-9014, 2015-9015, and 2016- 9016."

Please confirm that ODCs include CLINs 0001, 0002, and 0003.

If so, please correct page 95 to include CLINs 0001, 0002, and 0003.

ODC CLINs X018 include work performed under CLINs X004-X0013, X017, not 0001-0003.

Any ODC costs associated with CLINs 0001-0003 should be incorporated into the proposed price for CLINs 0001-0003, not under any X018 CLIN. Section B of the solicitation will be amended in A002 to reflect that CLIN 0018 does not include CLINs 0001-0003.

10 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

191 Section L, 3.1.1, a Demonstrate the process for providing resolution of element, multi-element, and CS hardware, and interface and conducting engineering analyses and performance of CS related specialized testing, which includes, but is not limited to: antenna array, signal processor, Topside structure, Electro Magnetic Interface (EMI)/EMC, Radiation Hazard (RADHAZ), and safety.

Is this statement incomplete? Is the word "issues" missing after "Demonstrate the process for providing resolution of element, multi-element, and CS hardware, and interface"?

The solicitation is amended in A002 to add the word "issues."

11 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

193, 173 3.1.4, J-27, J-33, J-34 c. The Government recommends the use of the Notional Labor Mix Category chart below in configuring the proper mix for each LOE CLIN.

The Offeror can deviate from the chart below, but the Offeror shall provide a narrative for each of the CLINs being deviated to support the proposed mix and explain how the deviated mix meets the requirements.

However, the Offeror shall not deviate from the labor categories listed below and the skill level requirements provided in Attachment J-27. The Offeror shall also use the Position Title as listed in Attachment J-27. If the Offeror has a different labor category or position title, the Offeror shall use the closest category/position title provided by the Government.

Given the complexity of work scope and commensurate skill levels defined in the RFP, would the Government please confirm the following items:

a) That the Offeror shall not deviate from the Grade Level / Experience assigned to each Position Title by the Government in attachment J-27 (Personnel Definitions)

b) That the Offeror shall not deviate from the Government Categories (combination of Grade Level / Experience and Position Title) pre-populated by the Government in the Labor Mix

Tab of J-34 (Pricing Evaluation Wkbk).

c) That the Offeror’s J-33 (Sample Staffing Plan) Skill Mix and Proposed Position Title shall strictly align to J-27 (Personnel

Definitions) Grade Level / Experience and Position Title

As such, the Offeror shall only bid Mid-Level and Senior Level labor, as referenced in J-27 (Personnel Definitions), as part of this solicitation.

The Government clarifies:

a) That the Offeror shall not deviate from the Grade Level / Experience assigned to each

Position Title by the Government in attachment J-27 (Personnel Definitions)

b) That the Offeror shall not deviate from the Government Categories (combination of Grade Level / Experience and Position Title) pre-populated by the Government in the Labor Mix Tab of J-34 (Pricing Evaluation Workbook).

c) That the Offeror’s J-33 (Sample Staffing Plan) Skill Mix and Proposed Position Title shall strictly align to J-27 (Personnel Definitions) Grade Level / Experience and Position Title

As such, the Offeror shall only bid Mid-Level and Senior Level labor, as referenced in J-27 (Personnel Definitions), as part of this solicitation.

12 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

173 J-27, 3.6.3 3.6.3 SSC COMBAT SYSTEM ALIGNMENT

The Contractor shall perform the tasks for LCS in accordance with SW225-AF-CSA-020/LCS-2 CL (Shipboard Combat System Alignment Manual (CSAM) for LCS-2 Class) and SW225-AF-CSA-020/LCS-1 CL (Shipboard Combat System Alignment Manual (CSAM) for LCS-1 Class).

For LUSV, the Contractor shall support the CSAM execution and also perform the tasks in accordance with NAVSEINST 8225.1, Shipboard Combat System Alignment Policy and Responsibilities. The Contractor shall also maintain a database that is to be shared with the Government, which maintains configuration of the adaptation data parameters for all LCS and LUSV Ships. This effort shall be coordinated with the applicable Government activities and interface with any Government data systems employed. In addition, the Contractor shall review the alignment surveys, provide technical support on alignment verification issues, provide recommendations to resolve alignment problems as necessary as part of Mechanical Battery Alignment and CS integration, and shall support the updating and revision of the SSC CS Test Procedures, as part of CS integration. Moreover, the Contractor shall provide Combat System Alignment Verification (CSAV) testing support, including participating in testing, analysis of test data, and providing recommendations to resolve alignment problems discovered during testing and provide Operational Alignment Verification (OAV) testing support. The Contractor shall report on the results and maintain records of test data for analysis of trends and historical reference in accordance with CDRL A026.

Request the Government include a position, in J-27 and J-34, for Combat System Alignment Engineer with requisite Grade / Experience Level to enable staffing allocation for Section C SOW section 3.6.3 SSC Combat System Alignment.

The solicitation will not be amended to include "Combat System Alignment Engineer."

Section C, SOW section 3.6.3 SSC Combat System Alignment, requests support of efforts as the Government has a designated Combat System Alignment team that will request contractor support for combat system inputs versus providing expertise on specific alignment activities.

13 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

173 Section J Per page 173, Section J - List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments, Attachment J-36 (DD Form 1921) and J-37 (DD Form 1921-

1) are "to be removed at award" templates have not been provided in the Bidders Library.

When does the Government intend to send Attachments J-36 (DD Form 1921) and J-37 (DD Form 1921-1) so the Offeror can provide as part of their submittal?

DD Forms 1921 & 1921-1 have been replaced with FlexFile and Quantity Data Reports as provided in CDRL A010. The solicitation is revised via A002 to reflect this change.

14 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

173 Section J Attachments J-1 and J-2 Schedules for LCS Freedom and Independence Class Variants only go out partially into FY2028 and the contract goes through FY2031. Will the Government provide a completed notional schedule for both the Freedom and Independence Class Variant?

Updated schedules will be provided after award.

15 RFP N00024-21-R-

206 3.6.4.1 Supporting data shall be included for subcontractors with cost or pricing data exceeding the $2,000,000 cost or pricing data threshold defined in FAR 15.403-3 “Requiring Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data”.

If the prime Offeror challenges the proposed cost/pricing supplied by a subcontractor, the Offeror shall submit a cost and pricing analysis.

Certified Cost and Pricing Data is not required while in the competitive stage of an RFP. Request the Government remove this requirement or clarify that this statement is only applicable to a sole-source situation?

The Government clarifies that FAR 15.403-3 (Requiring data other than certified cost or pricing data) applies to both prime and subcontractors, and further applies to "other than certified cost and pricing data" versus "certified cost and pricing data." In accordance with FAR 15.402(a)(2), Contracting Officers shall obtain data other than certified cost or pricing data as necessary to establish a fair and reasonable price when certified cost or pricing data are not required by FAR 15.403-4. The solicitation remains unchanged.

16 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

190, 200 2.6, 3.5 2.6 For the purposes of this solicitation, major subcontractors are defined as a supplier or subcontractor who is responsible for or whose effort is proposed to be 10 percent or greater of any contract line item. Major subcontractors may submit proposals or supporting information directly to the Government. The prime Offeror shall be responsible for the timeliness of any major subcontractor submissions. Failure to submit major subcontractor proposals by the proposal due date may render the entire proposal, including the prime Offeror's proposal unacceptable. All subcontractors that do not meet the definition of major subcontractor are minor subcontractors

3.5 Additionally, the Offeror must also submit past performance information associated with at least one (1) recent and relevant contract effort for each proposed subcontractor that will perform more than ten percent (10%) of the total contract effort based on the Offeror’s total proposal price. The information submitted for each subcontractor shall not exceed two (2) pages in length

Request the Government modify this statement to reflect major subcontractors are defined as those > 10% of the total Proposal Value/Cost (consistent with Past Performance Volume Threshold).

Section 2.6 provides the definition of a major subcontractor. Section 3.5 specifies the past performance submission requirement for subcontractors (not necessarily major subcontractors). The solicitation remains unchanged.

17 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

108, 109, 3.2.1d, 3.3.1d, 3.1.1, 3.1.2 Section C

3.2.1d. Examples of this testing scope includes Integrated Combat System Operational Demonstration; Integrated Training System Operational Demonstration; Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) Operational Demonstration; Anti-Air Warfare (AAW); Surface Warfare (SUW) and Strike Warfare (STW) Operational Demonstration; Multi-Function Radar Operational Demonstration; CS Survivability Demonstration Test; Exterior Communications System At-Sea Demonstration.

3.3.1d. Examples of this testing scope includes Integrated Combat System Operational Demonstration; Integrated Training System Operational Demonstration; Surface Warfare (SUW) and Strike Warfare (STW) Operational Demonstration; CS Survivability Demonstration Test;

Cooperative Engagement Conditions (CEC) At-Sea Operational Verification Test; and Exterior Communications System At-Sea Demonstration.

Section L

3.1.1 It will be the responsibility of the SSC CS SI&T Contractor to integrate components for the following warfare areas:

- Anti-Air Warfare (AAW)

- Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW)

- Anti-Surface Warfare (ASUW)

- Command, Control, & Communication (CCC)

3.1.2 As a result, the Government will expect the successful Offeror to deliver, at the end of the test program, a warship fully capable in the following warfare areas:

- Air Warfare (AW)

A ti S b i W f (ASW)

The RFP has inconsistent Warfare Areas in Section C and Section L. Can the Government clarify the inconsistency?

The solicitation is amended via A002. Section L 3.1.2 is revised to include "Anti-Air Warfare (AAW)" versus "Air Warfare (AW)."

18 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

187 2.1 Technical Approach Elements 1-4 In order to adequately provide a technical response that covers three ship platforms, the Offeror requests the Government to increase page count for the Technical Volume to seventy-five

(75) pages.

The solicitation is amended via A002 to increase the Technical Volume page limit to seventy

(70) pages.

19 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

206 3.6.4.2 Offerors and major subcontractors are not required to submit Cost Narrative or BOE information for CLINs 0004,0005, 0006, 0007, 0008, 0009, 0010, 0011, 0012, 0013 and Option CLINs 1004-6004, 1005-9005, 1006-9006, 1007-9007, 1008-9008, 1009-9009, 1010-9010, 1011-9011, 1012-9012, 1013-9013, 2014-9014, 2015-9015, 2016-9016, and 0020 (Data).

Since Section 3.6.4.2 of the RFP does not require BOEs for LOE CLINs, is it an acceptable approach to address cost realism in the cost substantiation narrative section?

It is appropriate to address cost realism in the cost substantiation narrative. The solicitation is amended via A002 from "Offerors and major subcontractors are not required to submit Cost Narrative or BOE information for CLINs...." to "Offerors and major subcontractors are not required to submit BOE information for CLINs..."

20 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

119 3.6.3 The Contractor shall perform the tasks for LCS in accordance with SW225-AF-CSA-020/LCS-2 CL (Shipboard Combat System Alignment Manual (CSAM) for LCS-2 Class) and SW225-AF-CSA-020/LCS-1 CL (Shipboard Combat System Alignment Manual (CSAM) for LCS-1 Class).

SW225-AF-CSA-020/LCS-1 CL (Shipboard Combat System Alignment Manual (CSAM) for LCS-1 Class) is listed in error and should be SW225-AF-CSA-010/LCS-1 CL.W225-AF-CSA- 010/LCS-1 CL. Recommend the Government change in any subsequent RFP amendment. This document was provided in DRAFT format in the Bidders Library; request the Government provide a final copy if available.

The solicitation is amended via A002. Section 3.6.3 is revised from "The Contractor shall perform the tasks for LCS in accordance with SW225-AF-CSA-020/LCS-2 CL (Shipboard Combat System Alignment Manual (CSAM) for LCS-2 Class) and SW225-AF-CSA-020/LCS-1 CL (Shipboard Combat System Alignment Manual (CSAM) for LCS-1 Class)," to "The Contractor shall perform the tasks for LCS in accordance with SW225-AF-CSA-020/LCS-2 CL (Shipboard Combat System Alignment Manual (CSAM) for LCS-2 Class) and SSW225-AF- CSA-010/LCS-1 CL.W225-AF-CSA-010/LCS-1 CL(Shipboard Combat System Alignment Manual (CSAM) for LCS-1 Class)."

21 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

114 3.5.1.1 b. EMC: (EMI/Interactive Multimedia Instruction (IMI), source/victim, mitigation), The RFP states "Interactive Multimedia Instruction" on page 114.

Should this read "Intermodular Interference"?

The solicitation is amended via A002. Section 3.5.1.1 is revised from "b. EMC:

(EMI/Interactive Multimedia Instruction (IMI), source/victim, mitigation)," to read: "b. EMC:

(EMI/Intermodular Interference, source/victim, mitigation)."

22 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

173 J-3 J-3 Attachment (Notional LUSV Procurement Schedule) references Overlord and Iron Maiden Ship Sets.

Request the Government clarify that LUSV procurement for the scope of this solicitation does NOT include Overloard and Iron Maiden Ship Sets.

The Government clarifies that the LUSV procurement for the scope of this solicitation does NOT include Overloard and Iron Maiden Ship Sets. Attachment J-3 will be amended via A002 accordingly.

23 RFP N00024-21-R-

Section L Section L, 3.6.4 Section 2 shall contain the Offeror’s BOEs supporting the prices provided in the proposal and substantiating cost narrative and information. The BOEs will be used by the Government to evaluate the Offeror’s Cost/Price Proposal. BOEs and applicable supporting documents are also required for subcontractor costs. BOE tasking shall be traceable to the Volume I Technical Approach Integrated Master Schedule (IMS) and Work Breakdown Structure (WBS), and the Attachment J-34 Pricing Evaluation Workbook, tabs “Completion CLIN Cost Breakdowns by WBS,” “Detailed Cost Summaries for Completion CLINs,” and “Labor Mix.”

The IMS and WBS are not located in Volume I: Technical Approach. Can the Government clarify the intent of what the BOE tasking needs to be traceable to?

The solicitation is revised via amendment A002 to state that the BOE tasking shall be traceable to the WBS, and shall reflect the content of the Technical Proposal.

24 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 dated 22 May

221 Section M, 1.5.1 Total Evaluated Price Table Total Evaluated Price (TEP) table contains two errors: “0010:

[1010-9011]” should instead show as “0010: [1010-9010]” and "024-9024" should instead show as "0024-9024".

The solicitation is amended via A002 to reflect "0010: [1010-9010]” and "0024-9024."

25 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A001 dated 04 June 2020

91 B-215-H002 B-215-H002 REFUNDS (SPARES AND SUPPORT EQUIPMENT)

(NAVSEA) (OCT 2018) OCT 2018

Will the Government provide the full text for this clause? The solicitation is amended via A002 to include the full text of the clause.

26 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A001 dated 04 June 2020

136 C-237-H002 (b) All proposed substitutes shall have qualifications equal to or higher than the qualifications of the person to be replaced. The Contracting Officer shall be notified in writing of any proposed substitution at least forty-five (45) days, or ninety (90) days if a security clearance is to be obtained, in advance of the proposed substitution. Such notification shall include: (1) an explanation of the circumstances necessitating the substitution; (2) a complete resume of the proposed substitute; (3) an explanation as to why the proposed substitute is considered to have equal or better qualifications than the person being replaced; (4) payroll record of the proposed replacement; and (5) any other information requested by the Contracting Officer to enable him/her to judge whether or not the Contractor is maintaining the same high quality of personnel that provided the partial basis for award.

In circumstances where key personnel leave the company with minimal notice this requirement may not be possible to comply.

The Offeror recommends that the Government remove the at least forty-five (45) days or ninety (90) days if a security clearance is to be obtained requirement.

As this is a required clause, the solicitation remains unchanged.

27 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A001 dated 04 June 2020

165 52.215-10 52.215-10 Price Reduction for Defective Certified Cost or Pricing Data

AUG 2011

The FAR clause 52.215-10 Price Reduction for Defective Certified Cost or Pricing Data is incorporated in Section I of the RFP. The Offeror believes this clause should not be present since this proposal is competitive and certified cost or pricing data isn't required.

Per DFARS, in the event competitive pricing cannot be determined, Certified Cost and Pricing Data may be required. The solicitation remains unchanged.

28 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A001 dated 04 June 2020

167 252.209-7007 252.209-7007 Prohibited Financial Interests for Lead System Integrators

JUL 2009

Clause 252.209-7007 "Prohibited Financial Interests for Lead System Integrators" is applicable to contracts to perform acquisition functions closely associated with inherently governmental functions, similar to Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) contracts. Considering the scope of work being performed under this contract, the Offeror does not believe this clause should be included in this solicitation.

The clause is removed from the solicitation. The solicitation is amended via A002.

29 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A001 dated 04 June 2020

167 252.209-7009 252.209-7009 Organizational Conflict of Interest--Major Defense Acquisition Program MAY 2019

Clause 252.209-7009 "Organizational Conflict of Interest-Major Defense Acquisition Program" is applicable to Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) contracts. As prescribed in 209.571-7 and 209.571-8(b) this solicitation is not a SETA contract. The Offeror does not believe this clause should be included in this solicitation. Offeror requests that this clause be deleted.

The Government clarifies that because this acquisition is part of a larger Major Defense Acquisition Program, the clause is appropriate and will remain.

30 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A001 dated 04 June 2020

107 3.2 The Contractor shall modify and update the CS Test Procedures for LCS Freedom and Independence, Attachment J-22 and Attachment J-23 respectively. The Contractor shall develop any missing Test Procedures in accordance with the NAVSEAINST S9095 ADTRQ-010/TSTP - Total Ship Test Program Manual. In addition, the Contractor shall develop the CS MTPs in accordance with the MIL-STD-2106A. The Contractor shall also develop the CS TSNs and shall use the Index Numbering System in Appendix B of S9095-AD-TRQ-010/TSTP to generate the Test Index and to reference their CS TSN and CS Test Procedures. The Contractor shall support the Government Test Teams in developing CSSQTs, Developmental Testing (DT), Operational Test (OT), and CS modifications or special testing test documents.

"SOW Section 3.2 states that the contractor shall update the CS Test Procedures for LCS Freedom and Independence, J-22 and J-23 respectively." Additionally, "the Contractor shall develop any missing test procedures." J-22, LCS Freedom CS Cybersecurity Test Procedures and J-23, LCS Independence CS Cybersecurity test procedures, will be provided by the Government after Contract award.

Is it the Government’s intent to include all CS Test Procedures in their delivery of J-22 and J-23 or limit the contents to Cybersecurity Test Procedures only, as the J-Attachment title indicates? If not, how does the Government intend to provide the LCS Freedom and LCS Independence CS Test Procedures?

All applicable CS Test Procedures for LCS will be provided after award.

31 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A001 dated 04 June 2020

200 3.5 VOLUME V: FACTOR 4

– PAST PERFORMANCE

The Offeror shall provide a past performance narrative not to exceed five

(5) pages in length that addresses the following topics:

• The Offeror shall demonstrate its past performance in fulfilling critical requirements and processes and its ability to understand and resolve technical risk issues within its organizational structure, including interaction with its subcontractors.

• As required by DFARS 215.303(c)(i), the Offeror shall provide information on its past performance demonstrating compliance with the requirements of FAR 52.219-8 and FAR 52.219-9.

• A completed J-30 Past Performance Questionnaire for each past performance narrative submitted. (excluded from page count) Additionally, the Offeror must also submit past performance information associated with at least one (1) recent and relevant contract effort for each proposed subcontractor that will perform more than ten percent (10%) of the total contract effort based on the Offeror’s total proposal price. The information submitted for each subcontractor shall not exceed two (2) pages in length

Are subcontractor past performance volume submissions considered narratives? If so, Offerors will be required to fill out the J-30 for their subcontractors and include with their submission.

The J-30 is not considered part of a past performance narrative. Offerors are not required to submit a J-30 for subcontractors. The solicitation is revised for clarification via A002

32 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A001 dated 04 June 2020

200 3.5 VOLUME V: FACTOR 4

– PAST PERFORMANCE

The Offeror shall provide a past performance narrative not to exceed five

(5) pages in length that addresses the following topics:

• The Offeror shall demonstrate its past performance in fulfilling critical requirements and processes and its ability to understand and resolve technical risk issues within its organizational structure, including interaction with its subcontractors.

• As required by DFARS 215.303(c)(i), the Offeror shall provide information on its past performance demonstrating compliance with the requirements of FAR 52.219-8 and FAR 52.219-9.

• A completed J-30 Past Performance Questionnaire for each past performance narrative submitted. (excluded from page count) Additionally, the Offeror must also submit past performance information associated with at least one (1) recent and relevant contract effort for each proposed subcontractor that will perform more than ten percent (10%) of the total contract effort based on the Offeror’s total proposal price. The information submitted for each subcontractor shall not exceed two (2) pages in length

Is there a limit to the number of J-30 submissions? A J-30 is required for each contract referenced in its past performance narrative. The number of J-30s is limited to the number of contracts referenced in that narrative.

33 General N/A N/A N/A Should the contractor include anticipated COVID-related impacts in their initial offer to the Government? For example, potential increased costs related to restriction of movement for employees prior to arrival at a ship, personal protective equipment, health screening, etc.

The only COVID-related costs, whether direct or indirect, that must be included in contractor proposals is any PPE, testing, screening, or cleaning requirements that became OSHA standards prior to contract award or any additional COVID-related costs that the contractor had implemented as being appropriate for its employee’s working conditions prior to contract award. As these were in place prior to contract award, they will not be considered Government directed changes in a post-award environment.

34 General N/A N/A N/A Should the contractor include anticipated COVID-related impacts set by the Government, (i.e. Restriction On Movement (ROM)) in their initial offer to the Government?

No. The Government is not aware of the end of the ROM requirement, and therefore ROM will be settled through a Request for Change (RCC), on an as required basis.

35 General N/A N/A N/A Will the Government consider COVID related terms and conditions or reopener language allowing for insight into post-award adjudication of COVID impacts?

No, the Government will not include unique COVID related terms and conditions in the solicitation or resultant contract IAW ASN RDA’s March 26, 2020 Memo. In addition, existing clauses in the solicitation such as 52.249-14 and 252.243-7002 allow for post-award adjudication should the contractor demonstrate entitlement to an adjustment under the terms of the contract.

36 General N/A N/A N/A How should COVID related costs or schedule impacts be tracked and/or reported to the Government in a post-award environment?

The contractor should accumulate/charge iaw their CAS disclosure statement as applicable.

To facilitate future adjudication of costs being allowable and/or allocable direct or indirect costs, contractors are advised that any COVID related costs associated with potential future requests for adjustment should be clearly segregated and/or identifiable in contemporaneous records. Similarly, for any COVID related schedule delays, the contractor is advised to maintain records that enable future requests for excusable delay in accordance with the terms of the contract.

37 General N/A N/A N/A How will offers be treated that include estimated COVID related cost impacts and/or exceptions to terms and conditions due to projected COVID impacts?

The only COVID-related costs, whether direct or indirect, that should be included in contractor proposals is any PPE, testing, screening, or cleaning requirements that became OSHA standards prior to contract award or any additional COVID-related costs that the contractor had implemented as being appropriate for its employee’s working conditions prior to contract award. As these were in place prior to contract award, they will not be considered Government directed changes in a post-award environment. Offerors are cautioned that inclusion of any other estimated COVID related cost impacts other than those described above and/or exceptions to terms and conditions due to projected COVID impacts may result in the proposal being determined non-compliant. Offerors are reminded that the offer must manifest the Offeror’s assent without exception to the terms and conditions of the solicitation.

The Government may reject as non-compliant any proposal that takes exception to the terms and conditions in the solicitation.

QA 3

38 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A001 dated 04 June 2020 1 Standard Form 33, Block 9 Due Date of proposals is 3:00pm Local Time on 22 July 2020

Respectfully request an extenstion of 45 days to the due date of the proposal

Due to schedule constraints, a 45 day extension is not possible; however, the solicitation is amended via A003 to extend the proposal due date by 14 days.

QA 4

39 RFP N00024-21-R-

5211 +A003 dated 19 June 2020

168 252.209-7009 252.209-7009 Organizational Conflict of Interest--Major Defense Acquisition Program MAY 2019

If the Offeror is planning to submit an OCI Mitigation plan per Section L of the RFP, will that OCI Mitigation plan meet the requirements as stated in DFAR 252.209-7009 Organizational Conflict of Interest-Major Defense Acquisition Program, subsection d?

If Government determines the OCI Mitigation Plan to be acceptable, then yes, it would satisfy DFARS 252.209-7009(d).