Amendment_4_for_release.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

The purpose of this amendment is to answ er questions from industry.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 11

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 05-Aug-2014

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X N00174-14-R-0006

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

26-Jun-2014

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer is extended, X is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN

REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

05-Aug-2014

CODE

NSWC IHEODTD

ATTN: OMAR ROQUE

OMAR.ROQUE@NAVY.MIL

4072 NORTH JACKSON RD

INDIAN HEAD MD 20640-5115

N00174 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N00174-14-R-0006

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

*SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The purpose of this amendment is to answer additional questions from industry. There are no additional unanswered questions. Accordingly, subject RFP is hereby updated as follows:

1. The following are questions submitted by industry and the Government responses:

Q1: Clarification on Section 14 - In regards to MIL-STD-464C, Table 4, is the intention to test the entire frequency from 10kHz to 50GHz at the specified levels, or is there a specific range that needs to be tested ?

The intention is to test the entire frequency range from 10kHz to 50GHz at the specified levels.

Q2: Clarification on Section 14 – In regards to HERP and HERO, can results from MIL-STD- 461F RE102 testing be used to verify HERP and HERO compliance?

Yes

Q3: Clarification on Section 14 – What methods of MIL-STD-461F are to be tested? Assuming same Methods as the sub assemblies which include CE101, CE102, CS101, CS106, CS114, CS115, CS116, RE101, RE102, RS101 and RS103.

The guidance in MIL-STD-461F has been tailored for the AEODRS program. As stated in section 14 of the the Increment 1 System Performance Specification, the Dismounted Operations System shall be safely operable in the electromagnetic radiation environment defined in MIL-STD-464C, Table 4, as well as in the HERP and HERO environment. To confirm compliance with these requirements, the radiated emissions (RE101 and RE102 in MIL-STD-461F) and the radiated susceptibility (RS101 and RS103 in MIL-STD-461F) of the Dismounted Operations System will be characterized by testing.

Each subsystem and capability module have their own conducted emissions, conducted susceptibility, radiated emissions, and radiated susceptibility requirements that are documented in their respective module performance specifications. These requirements are in place to help ensure electromagnetic compatibility amongst the subsystems and capability modules that will be produced by various subcontractors.

Q4: Clarification on section 12.4 – Vibration levels after 2000Hz are relatively low, values are less than 10-6. Is there a specific need/reason to test the frequencies from 2000Hz to 10000Hz or will testing to 2000Hz be acceptable?

Section 12.4 Operational Vibration states that the system will be tested in accordance with MIL-STD-810G, 514.6, Procedure I – General Vibration, which as stated in the standard is tailorable. The parameters of the testing may be tailored provided adequate justification from the PSI. The justification shall be based upon the final configuration of the system.

Q5: Clarification on Section 12.3 – States to test AEODRS in a humidity environment. Are there any specific levels that need testing to? Mil-std-810G has multiple profiles that vary in duration along with varying temperatures and humidity levels.

Clarification of Section 12.3. The Dismounted Operations System shall operate at full functionality with no degradation below threshold levels at a humidity level of 100% in a condensing environment per MIL-STD-810G, Method 507.5, Procedure I for operation in a 100% humidity environment.

Q6: Reference Amendment 2 Dated 16-Jun-2014, Question 42:

Q42: Will the Government Furnished CM-AB software be fully compliant with V1.4 of the AEODRS spec?

A: Yes

Will the supplied software be compliant to Threshold requirements or Objective Requirements, and who is responsible for modifying the software to meet the objective CM-AB software requirements in the event the supplied software is only compliant to the threshold requirements?

The answer to Q42 in Amendment 2 was with respect to the Autonomous Capability Suite software. CM-AB will use ACS like a library - any other software in CM-AB is the responsibility of the PSI and can be completely proprietary. The CM-AB reference design that was provided to the offerors should be considered prototypical and for information purposes only, not "build-to-print", with refinement necessary in order for it to completely comply with ICD-AEODRS-INC1-AB and MPS-AEODRS-INC1-AB.

Q7: Section 5.4 – Is there an approved snow substitute that can be used for testing?

No.

Q8: Reference Section 9.1.6.1: The primary video system shall provide a panoramic field of view that is 360 degrees in azimuth and plus or minus forty-five (±45) degrees in elevation.

Is this requirement intended for the Increment 1 system? The requirement does not seem to align with the other video system requirements.

Section 9.1.6 of the System Performance Specification is being updated to read:

9.1.6 Field of View

The requirements in this section describe capability regarding field of view for situational awareness.

9.1.6.1 Dismounted Operations System Requirements

(T) The color video shall have a horizontal field of view of 90degrees (-45degrees to +45degrees)

(O) Threshold and Objective values are identical for this requirement.

Q9: CPFF CLIN 0068 references Paragraph 3.2.25 as follows:

. Engineering support during Government Testing - Within two (2) business days of a request from the Government, the Contractor shall provide on-site engineering support during Government Testing being conducted at NSWC IHEODTD.

. Engineering support during User Evaluations - The Contractor shall provide continuous on-site engineering support during the course of User Evaluations which will be held non-concurrently at Norfolk, VA and China Lake, CA. The period of performance for the evaluations has not yet been determined, but each evaluation is expected to last no longer than 21 calendar days. Additionally, work days are not expected to exceed 8 hour per day.

The first bullet has no reference to the actual level of effort required. No problem here.

The second bullet specifies a level of effort of approximately 240 hours.

Navy Marine Corps Acquisition Regulation Supplement Clause 5252.216-9122, Level of Effort, on RFP page 103 of 181 states:

5252.216-9122 LEVEL OF EFFORT (DEC 2000)

(a) The Contractor agrees to provide the total level of effort specified in the next sentence in performance of the work described in Sections B and C of this contract. The total level of effort for the performance of this contract shall be 160 total man-hours of direct labor, including subcontractor direct labor for those subcontractors specifically identified in the Contractor's proposal as having hours included in the proposed level of effort.

Please note that in Para (a), it is stated that "The total level of effort for the performance of this contract shall be 160 total man-hours."

The Clause states that the level of effort cannot be more than 160 total man hours and CPFF CLIN 0068 requires 240 man-hours at Norfolk and China Lake.

Because there seems to be a contradiction in the hours stated in the Clause and actual hours required to work, how would you like the Vendor to price the CPFF work?

SOW section 3.2.25 calls out the level of effort for on-site Interim support, CLIN 0020 User Evaluation. Clause 5252.216-9122, Level of Effort, on RFP page 103 of 181 calls out LOE for Government Testing on-call Interim support, CLIN 0068.

Q10: Several of the AEODRS Increment 1 specifications appear to have been modified as noted in the responses to Questions #22 (CM-MAN, CM-EEF, CM-VIS), #37 (CM-MOB) and #42 (CM-MAS) provided by the Government in Amendment 0003 dated 7/25/2014. We would like to request copies of these modified documents if they are available. Can copies be provided via FTP like you did for our initial requests for these documents?

The update to version 1.4 documents is in process and will not be available until after the RFP has closed.

Q11: Offeror notes response received to Question 18 contained in Amendment 0002 to the solicitation which states that the Government can still require Certified Cost and Pricing Data from all Subcontractors even though it is anticipated that there will be competition in response to the solicitation. Can the Government further clarify if certified cost or pricing data from subcontractors is required with an Offeror’s initial proposal submission? Or would it only be required if the Government received only one proposal is response to the solicitation as noted in Clause 252.215-7008 Only One Offer (OCT 2013) contained in Section I?”

Certified Cost and Pricing Data would only be required if the Government received only one proposal.

Q12: Answer #29 from Amendment 0004 of the prior solicitation (No. N00174-13-R-0043) provided Offerors with the direction to transmit the proposal to the attention of Omar Roque, Building 1558 at NSWC-Indian Head. This direction is confirmed for the new solicitation via information contained in Block 9 of the SF33. Offeror notes that proposals may be handcarried for delivery to Mr. Roque. Can the Government please advise if a visit request is required in order to deliver the proposal and if so, please provide specific instruction on how to obtain this approval?

The proposals may be handcarried but they can also be shipped to Mr. Roque at that address. A visit request need not be obtained. If the offeror calls Mr. Roque at 301-744- 6607 or call 301-744-6601 or 6633 from the pass office, Mr. Roque or someone from the contracts department will retrieve the package. The proposal is not considered delivered until the time it is received. Please ensure that you initial the package and delivery time along with the person that retrieves it.

Q13: Offeror requests additional clarification to the answer to Question #47 in Amendment 0003, with respect to Government Purpose Rights (GPR). As the Government is aware, numerous components of the Capability Modules/Subsystems are commercial items. Pursuant to paragraph 5.2.3 (Limited design disclosure models) of MIL-STD31000A, dated 26 February 2013: “When a 3D TDP is required and a subcomponent to the end item does not require complete design disclosure (such as a commercial item, purchased item, etc.), a 3D digital model of the subcomponent shall be provided. The subcomponent’s 3D digital model need not be fully defined, but shall be sufficient to provide adequate visualization, interface characteristics, accurate weight and center of gravity information as required (i.e. cosmetic model) (see para 3.1.21).”

Additionally, Section 4.4 of the MIL-STD indicates that Commercial drawings/models and associated lists are an acceptable element of a TDP. Paragraph 5.3.3.4 defines Commercial drawings/models and associated lists as:”Commercial drawings/models and associated lists provide engineering and technical information in support of end products, or designated portions thereof, which are commercially developed items, commercial off-the-shelf items (COTS), or items not developed at Government expense. These data and lists shall be in accordance with the commercial design documentation practices of the contractor or supplier of the item.”

Based on the above, and the fact that GPR is a rights category typically provided for non-commercial items (and not or such commercial items as those produced by Intel, for example), is the Government asking for GPR only on the limited design disclosure/Commercial drawings/models and associated lists of the highest level of commercial assembly or part, in accordance with the supplier’s standard practices, or is the Government expecting complete, detailed design disclosure and seeking GPR on the complete disclosure?

The Government would like to clarify the response to Question 9 and Question 47 of amendment 3. Data rights are governed by the relevant DFARs clauses in the solicitation.

Offerors are only required to deliver data in accordance with the DFARS and will not be evaluated unfavorably for delivery of data rights that are in compliance with the DFARS.

However, the Government desires a higher level of rights, specifically, Government Purpose Rights where feasible. The evaluation factors allow offerors to be evaluated more favorably if they choose to deliver data with a higher level of rights than those the Government is entitled to under the DFARS. It is the offeror's responsibility to determine which level of rights it is willing to provide (if higher than that of the DFARS) and to which assembly component(s). An edit to Section M Subfactor 1 and Cost volume has been made.

Q14: Can you please confirm that the TDP for the production version of the EEIF will be provided by the government on contract award?

The Government will release the EEIF documents to the PSI once a contract is awarded.

Q15: Can you please confirm that the EEIF meets the environmental and other performance specifications in MPS-AEODRS-INC1-MAN?

Government testing of the EEIF is ongoing. Test results will be provided to the successful offorer.

Q16: Respectfully request that you identify the total budget available for contract award on the subject solicitation The guaranteed minimum is identified in Section B. The total budget will not be disclosed.

Q17: System Performance Specification 6.1.5.1 Remove Blasting Cap requires the system to be able to remove a blasting cap from a constrained block of HE. How is the blasting cap removed (i.e. unscrewed, pulled, etc)? What are the required forces?

Removal of the blasting cap requires a linear pulling action. The minimum pulling force required is 9 lbf.

Q18: System Performance Specification 6.2.2 Reach Extension requires the system to be able to reach 24” or 125% of the vehicle length whichever is greater from an edge of the vehicle. The manipulator MPS specifies that the humeral link is to be 14” +/-.5” and the forearm link to be 10” +/-.5”. With the mounting location specified in the ICD’s for the MAN reaching 24” or 125% of the length from an edge if the vehicle is not possible. How should this be handled?

The constraint stated in the SPS "(not including the end effector)" is an error. The reach extension requires the use of the end effector. 6.2.2 should read as follows:

"Reach/Extension is defined as the ability of the manipulator arm to reach items at a safe standoff distance to permit gross robot vehicle approach without item disruption. The reach is defined as the length of the arm (including the end-effector) or percentage of vehicle length that the manipulator arm can reach or extend from the edge of vehicle. The vehicle length referred to in the definition does not include stability devices such as flippers, outriggers, and articulators."

Q19: System Performance Specification 6.2.3 Range of Motion requires that the manipulator reach from minimum through full extension +/-90 azimuth and +/-90 degrees of elevation. Due to the required mounting of the manipulator in the ICD’s -90 degrees would require the humeral link to go through the chassis which is directly beneath it. How should this be handled?

Clarification. The +/- degrees of elevation are measured from the platforms vertical.

Q20: System Performance Specification 7.1 Localization and Self-Reporting requires the positioning error to be less than 3 meters (9.8425 ft). The requirement from the autonomous behaviors module is an error of 18.25ft or less. Should the system specification be relaxed to equal the module requirement?

The SPS requirement specification will be relaxed to the error referenced in the Autonomous Behaviors Capability Module MPS (i.e. 18.25 ft).

Q21: System Performance Specification 8.2 Interoperability requires the handheld controller to provide fundamental control of both the Tactical Operations and Base/Infrastructure Platforms through a fixed subset of functions featured on the AEODRS Common OCU. This capability shall be facilitated through the use of a similar user interface on both the Handheld Controller and AEODRS Common OCU. The Tactical Operations and Base/Infrastructure platforms have not been developed nor has the Common OCU. How can compliance with this be measured or assured?

Compliance with SPS 8.2 will be deferred till the Tactical and Base/Infrastructure Platforms, as well as, the Common OCU and/or test bed is mature enough to support testing. Interoperability is assured via adherence to the AEODRS Architecture.

Q22: System Performance Specification 8.3.1.1 requires (Threshold): The Handheld controller shall provide controls for driving through direct tele-operation. The Handheld controller shall also provide the ability to select navigation waypoints through:

Designation on a 2-D geographic map Designation from the Primary (color) video feed Text Entry of Latitude and Longitude Coordinates Text Entry of Military Grid Reference System (MGRS) Coordinates

The OCU performance specifications has: The HOCU software shall provide the operator the ability to select navigation waypoints through designation from the Primary (color) video feed, as an objective. Should the system requirement for bullet 2 be an objective? If not how should this be handled?

SPS 8.3.1.1 will be modified to make bullet 2 (i.e. Designation from the Primary (color) video feed) an objective. This modification to the SPS resolves the conflict between the SPS and OCU MPS.

Q23: System Performance Specification 8.3.3.7 as a Threshold requires the Handheld controller to: Provide the ability to designate points and conduct linear measurement from a 2-D geographic map or the primary (color) video feed. In the Handheld MPS: (O) The HOCU software shall provide the ability to designate discrete points (not continuously tracking) and measure the linear distance between the selected points from the primary (color) video feed is an objective requirement. How should this be handled?

SPS 8.3.3.1 will be modified to relax threshold bullet 5 to read "Provide the ability to designate points and conduct linear measurement from a 2-D geographic map."

Measurement from the primary (color) video feed will be an objective. This modification to the SPS resolves the conflict between the SPS and OCU MPS.

Q24: System Performance Specification 8.3.5.1 states:

(T) The Handheld controller shall provide the ability for the operator to:

Simultaneously control mobility, manipulation, and sensor articulation Save and retrieve customizable user profiles which specify the “screen view” preferences of the user Save and retrieve customizable user profiles which specify the robot platform specific preferences of the user. These items include camera positions and manipulator positions

Activate and deactivate lost communications protocols

Bullets 2 and 3 are objectives in the OCU module performance specifications. How should this be handled?

The OCU MPS will be modified to make the following a threshold:

(T) The HOCU software shall provide the ability for the operator to save and retrieve customizable user profiles which specify the screen view preferences of the user.

The SPS will be modified to make the following an objective:

"Save and retrieve customizable user profiles which specify the robot platform specific preferences of the user. These items include camera positions and manipulator positions."

This modification resolves the conflicts between the SPS and OCU MPS documents.

Q25: System Performance Specification 12.4 states:

(T) In its operational configuration, the Dismounted Operations System shall withstand negative effects from exposure to vibration and be tested in accordance with MIL-STD- 810G.4 Operational vibration testing shall follow Procedure I – General Vibration for Operational Service as directed in Method 514.6. The test duration shall be consistent with the operational mission profile for the Dismounted Operations System (3 hrs). The vibration level shall be derived from the profile in Figure 7.

The system includes the OCU in the definition however in the MPS for CM-OCU there is not vibration requirement. Is the OCU to be included in this system test?

The OCU will not be required to withstand the operational profile depicted in SPS 12.4.

The SPS will be modified to include this caveat.

Q26: System Performance Specification 12.5 states:

(T) System shall be operable after decontamination with a five percent bleach solution.

The OCU MPS has no decontamination requirements and is included in the definition of the system in the SPS. Is the OCU required to be decontaminated with five percent bleach solution?

The SPS 12.5 will be modified to read "Vehicle" rather than "System". The OCU is not required to be decontaminated with a five percent bleach solution.

Q27: System Performance Specification 13.6 states:

Hot Swap is defined as replacing a battery while the system power remains on. This will allow battery change out without waiting for the system to re-boot.

(T) Batteries shall be capable of being hot swapped within two (2) minutes without the use of tools.

The Power module performance spec only states the batteries are to be changed within 2 minutes with no tools. There is no requirement for hot swapping the batteries. Is hot swap a requirement for the power module batteries?

Hot swapping is a requirement for the power module batteries. The following requirement is included in the Power MPS:

"(T) The Dismounted Operations Power System CM shall be capable of operating on a single battery while maintaining connectivity to the Intra-Subsystem Network, and providing reduced peak power to the robot."

This was intended to convey the hot swap requirement from the SPS. The Power MPS will be modified to clarify the hot swap requirement.

Q28: System Performance Specifications 14 states:

(T) The Dismounted Operations System shall be safely operable in the following environments:

Electromagnetic Radiation environments defined in MIL-STD-464C5, Table 4, tailored for ground systems.

(T) Dismounted Operations System radio transmissions shall comply with Hazards of Electromagnetic Radiation to Personnel (HERP) guidance that ensures safety of personnel who might be inches away from transmitters and antennas. The Dismounted Operations System may be required to carry HERO susceptible Electro-Explosive Devices (EEDs) on the vehicle. The radio frequency (RF) field must be tested, measured, and documented for government comparison to known military approved HERO susceptible initiators.

These requirements are not in the module performance requirements. Should these requirements be flowed to the modules? If so can you please specify the modules and the requirement to be flowed down?

Please see the response to question 12 above.

Q29: We intend to hand deliver copies of our response to the AEODRS Inc. 1 RFP. I was informed by the Pass Office that visitors are not allowed past the gate without having prior approval – via a visitor request form and vetting form – coordinated by a POC. Can you please advise on the appropriate steps that we need to take in order to be able to hand deliver on August 11th?

Please see response to question 12 above.

Q30: Do we need to call you in advance and set up a delivery time or make an appointment since we plan on delivery in person?

Please see response to question 12 above.

Q31: I am trying to interpret the Price Redetermination - Prospective clause, FAR 52.216-5. My interpretation is that the Navy is providing one opportunity for price redetermination between Phase I and Phase II. Is this a correct interpretation? If not, please explain.

That is correct.

2. All industry submitted questions have now been posted and responses have been provided.

3. Questions regarding this amendment should be direct to Omar Roque at omar.roque@navy.mil

4. (End of Summary of Changes)