N6660418R1436_Amend_0005.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 respond to questions submitted in response to this solicitation. See page 2 for details.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 35

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

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 06-May-2019

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 N6660418R1436

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

22-Mar-2019

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 1 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

06-May-2019

CODE

NAVAL UNDERSEA WARFARE CENTER

KAITLIN SIMOES, CODE 0221

CONTRACTS DEPARTMENT

1176 HOWELL STREET

NEWPORT RI 02841-1708

N66604 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

N6660418R1436

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been added by full text:

GENERAL INFORMATION

The purpose of Amendment 0005 is to:

1. Answer questions submitted in response to this solicitation. Questions 29 through 44 are answered in this amendment.

2. Revise Provision UW L-2-0001 as detailed below.

3. Update the version date for Applicable Document 3.1.2, MIL-STD-31000A - Department of Defense

Standard Practice, Technical Data Packages as detailed below.

4. Update Clause 52.211-14 to show the contract resulting from this solicitation shall be a DO-C9 rated order.

# Question Response

1 Where should the contractor place the Plan for

Obtaining Clearances and the

OCI Mitigation Plan (Pass/Fail requirements)?

The contractor shall include the Pass/Fail requirements identified in Provision UW L-2-0001, Section 2.0 of the solicitation as Volume VI.

2 Clause HQ C-2-0037(e): What is the

Government's intent for application of this clause? Does it apply only to specific tasks under this procurement or extend further in impact to preclude companies from being able to build ships?

The Government's intent for the application of this clause is to ensure a separation of functions and that the Government receives unbiased recommendations.

An example where this clause could apply is if a contractor were to test a prototype that they also developed. The intent of this clause is not to preclude contractors from shipbuilding on other Government contracts.

3 Do we not have to do a cost volume for the hypothetical tasks? On page 108 it says "there is no volume associated with this factor" for

Cost/Price but the earlier table with page counts says that the cost volume has unlimited pages

(Page 103).

No, there is no cost volume associated with hypothetical tasks. The only items to be included in the Cost/Price Volume (which is Volume V of the table located at Provision UW L-2-0001 Section

1.3(c)) are the items identified at UW L-2-0001

Section 4.0.

4 We were only planning on submitting task orders for 4.1 and 4.2 however the hypothetical tasking mentions Ship Alterations which is handled in task order 4.3, can we still respond to the hypothetical task and only do work that corresponds to tasks 4.1 and 4.2 (Concept

Design Analysis and Assessment Studies and

Prototype Design, Fabrication, Integration, and

Test)?

Offerors shall not submit proposals for individual sub-sections of Statement of Work (SOW) Section 4.0, but rather for some or all of the six (6) Prototype Topic listed in SOW sub-sections 2.01 through 2.06, and listed again in Provision UW L-2-0001 Section 3.1.

As stated in Provision UW L-2-0001 Section 3.1.1, for each Prototype Topic being proposed, the Offeror shall provide a detailed response for each hypothetical task. The offeror must complete all instructions indicated in UW L-2-0001 Section 3.1.1. Factor 1 –

Hypothetical Tasks.

5 The government provided estimated hours for The Government will not be providing estimated

CPFF CLINs 0004 and 0006. CLIN 0002 also has Labor and is CPFF but does not have an estimated number of hours. Question: Will the government provide estimated hours for CLIN

0002? (Page 99, Note 5) hours for CLIN 0002. Please note Offerors shall use the Government provided ceiling numbers listed in

Provision UW L-2-0001, paragraph 5, in its pricing proposal.

6 The government did not include NUWC eCRAFT LCATs. Per Volume 1, a Labor

Matrix with LCATs is to be completed.

Question: Can contractors use their companies

LCATs to complete the labor matrix or do we need to use the LCATs listed on the NUWC eCRAFT website? (Page 83, Section J)

Contractors shall use the labor categories listed on the

NUWC eCRAFT website:

https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Home/Warfare-

Centers/NUWC-Newport/Partnerships/Commercial-

Contracts/Labor-Categories/

7 The governments notes that submissions will be made via email. Understand that the government has file size restriction for emails.

Question: If true, what is the email files size restrictions, and can we submit multiple emails with various attachments if the files size is exceeded? (Page 100, para 1.2, Submission

Requirements)

Generally, Government file size restrictions are limited to 10MB per email. The Contractor may submit multiple emails with various attachments if the file size is exceeded. However, page limitations identified in UW L-2-0001 shall be strictly adhered to across multiple attachments associated with the same section.

8 Page 103, para (e) – States, “Offerors shall provide fill-in information for all clauses/provisions that require it.” Question:

What volume should all of the required fill-ins, Representations and Certifications, and other information be contained in and does it count against page count?

Clauses/provisions requiring fill in are not to be submitted as a volume, and as such do not count against the identified page count for any of the volumes; Clauses/Provisions requiring fill-ins shall be submitted as an individual attachment.

9 Page 36, HQ E-2-0015, QUALITY

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

REQUIREMENTS (NAVSEA) (APR 2017) –

This clause states, “The Contractor shall provide and maintain a quality management system that, as a minimum, adheres to the requirements of ANSI/ISO/ASQ 9001-2015

Quality Management Systems and supplemental requirements imposed by this contract. Question: Please confirm that a

Quality Management System does not need to be provided as part of the proposal, but covered in the Management Plan.

The Quality Management System Requirements identified in Clause HQ E-2-0015 does not require the

Contractor to submit any documentation as part of their proposal for this solicitation.

10 Page 103, Section L, Para. 1.0 –

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE SUBMISSION

OF PROPOSAL; Subpara. 1.3(c) – Proposal

Format; indicates that offerors are required to submitted their proposals in separate volumes to include a “Volume V”, “Cost/Price Proposal

– Factor 5”. However, Para 4.0 –

COST/PRICE indicates “There is no volume associated with this factor. Compliance with these instructions is mandatory and failure to comply may result in rejection of your proposal. Offerors shall not submit data beyond that required by these instructions.”

Question: Please confirm if the Cost/Price is volume 5 and what it needs to include?

The only items to be included in the Cost/Price

Volume (which is Volume V of the table located at

Provision UW L-2-0001 Section 1.3(c)) are the items identified at UW L-2-0001 Section 4.0. Please also see response to Question #3.

https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Home/Warfare-Centers/NUWC-Newport/Partnerships/Commercial-Contracts/Labor-Categories/ https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Home/Warfare-Centers/NUWC-Newport/Partnerships/Commercial-Contracts/Labor-Categories/ https://www.navsea.navy.mil/Home/Warfare-Centers/NUWC-Newport/Partnerships/Commercial-Contracts/Labor-Categories/

11 If an offeror submits against more hypothetical tasks then they are found acceptable in, will the government award the offeror a contract for the task areas found acceptable or will the government find the contractor unacceptable in all task areas and not receive an award?

As stated in Provision UW L-2-0001 Section 3.1.1, for each Prototype Topic being proposed, the Offeror shall provide a detailed response for the associated hypothetical task. The offeror must complete all instructions indicated in UW L-2-0001 Section 3.1.1.

Factor 1 – Hypothetical Tasks. If the offeror is proposing for multiple Prototype Topic areas and its proposal for one Prototype Topic area is determined to be Unacceptable, but its proposal for another

Prototype Topic area is determined to be Acceptable, the offeror may receive an award for only the

Prototype Topic area(s) for which it submitted an

Acceptable proposal.

12 Will the government permit the addition of other Subcontractors post-award since we are unsure of the extent and type of work that will be placed on this contract?

The Government will consider the addition of other

Subcontractors post-award, if all requirements for adding a subcontractor are met and approved by the

Government.

13 Does participation in this Prototyping contract create an OCI issue for participation in any follow-on production contracts resulting from a successful prototyping effort?

All OCI or potential OCI issues will be evaluated at time of occurrence. Given there are currently no production plans as of yet for undeveloped prototypes, the Government cannot comment further on whether or not an OCI will exist in the future.

14 RFP states that 1) offeror shall submit a description of previous relevant experience…, and 2) Offerors shall also describe any previous relevant CMMI or equivalent model-based maturity appraisals… These two requirements are part of the overall page count, but the RFP does not state where these sections should be placed in the proposal. Please clarify. (Pg 98, HW L-2-0017(a) and (b)

If the Offeror is proposing on any of the following prototype topics, Payload Launch and Retrieval

Systems (SOW Task 2.1.1), Payload Integration

Systems and Payload Stowage / Handling Equipment

(SOW Task 2.1.2), and Simulators and Electronic

Equipment (SOW Task 2.1.5), the Offeror shall provide an initial Software Development Plan, in accordance with NAVSEA provision HQ L-2-0016 and a description of relevant Software Development experience, in accordance with NAVSEA provision

HQ L-2-0017. Only one submittal is required regardless of the number of prototype topics being proposed. The Software Development Plan shall be submitted as Volume III, Section 1.2 of the proposal.

15 RFP section HQ L-2-0017(b) RFP states that

Offerors shall describe any previous relevant

CMMI or equivalent model-based maturity appraisals performed within the past 24 months.

RFP Section M, (2.0)(c)(3) states that offerors will be evaluated on results of any relevant standard model-based process maturity appraisals performed within 36 months. Please clarify whether the time period is 24 or 36 months. 36 months would make the most sense since CMMI appraisals are conducted every 3 years. (pg 98 & 110, HW L-2-0017(b) and

M(2.0)(c)(3))

The Government will evaluate the offerors previous relevant experience in CMMI or equivalent model-based maturity appraisals performed within the past

36 months; Clause HQ L-2-0017 is modified to be consistent with the 36 months stated in Provision UW

M-2-0001 Section 2.0(c)(3).

16 Page 4 and 8, Section B, CLIN 0005 is contradictorily priced as FFP and at Cost between pages 4 and 8. Please update.

CLIN 0005 is changed in Section B from FFP to Cost.

17 Page 101, Section L, 1.3(c). For the required labor matrix, can the two-page limit be utilized by submitting one (1) 11"x17" foldout page?

Yes, one (1) 11”x17” foldout page is acceptable for the labor matrix submittal.

18 Page 101, Section L, 1.3(a). The RFP states no pictures are allowed. Are diagrams, illustrations and drawings still permitted?

Diagrams, illustrations and drawings are permitted in accordance with Provision UW L-2-0001 Section

1.3(a).

19 Page 103, Section L, 1.3(c). SOW task #s in the** note at the end of the table do not align with the numbering of SOW tasks in Section C.

Please update.

The Software Development Plan note at the bottom of

Provision UW L-2-0001 Section 1.3(c) and Provision

HQ C-2-0065 are modified to include the correct

Statement of Work Task numbers.

20 Page 105 and 106, General, Small Business

Participation. How should utilization of small businesses for procurement of supplies/materials be applied towards small business participation percentage if the labor matrix accounts for hours and not $ value?

Please see response to question 26.

21 Page 98, HQ L-2-0016 and HQ L-2-0017.

How will offeror’s “or equivalent process” be evaluated towards meeting CMMI requirements? Can a non-CMMI appraised offeror have a CMMI-appraised subcontractor conduct tasks requiring CMMI?

Yes – an offeror may propose a subcontractor to perform the SDP tasking and, therefore, use the subcontractor’s CMMI appraisal to satisfy the requirements of HQ L-2-0017. Please see Provision

UW M-2-0001, Section 2.0(c) for guidance on how the Government shall evaluate the Software

Development Plan.

22 HQ L-2-0016(b) states that offerors shall also submit an SDP rationale (if responding to SOW tasks 2.1.1, 2.1.2, or 2.1.5). It further states that the SDP rationale is subject to the technical proposal page limitation of the solicitation and shall not exceed 3 pages. Section M states that the SDP rationale shall be evaluated as part of

Volume VI Pass/Fail which isn’t identified as part of the technical proposal. Please clarify where in the overall proposal the SDP rationale should be located?

Please see response to question 25.

23 HQ L-2-0017(a) and (b) state that offerors shall

(a) submit a description of previous relevant experience within the past 36 months in developing software of similar size and complexity, and (b) describe any previous relevant CMMI experience performed within the past 36 months. Please clarify where in the overall proposal these sections should be located.

The submissions required by Provision HQ L-2-

0017(a) and (b) shall be submitted with the SDP as part of Volume VI Pass/Fail Requirements. Please see response to question 28 for further details.

24 UW L-2-0001 Section 4.0(b)(1) FCCOM. The last sentence states, “Additional narrative may be submitted as a separate document, if necessary, to describe derivation of labor rates, use of uncompensated overtime pools to which indirect rates are applied, etc.” Question(s):

How do offerors determine if additional narrative if necessary? Is this information required in an unpriced proposal? What content does the term ‘etc.’ include?

The additional narrative noted in UW L-2-0001

Section 4.0(b)(1) is not required for an unpriced proposal; however, a CASB-CMF shall still be required if FCCOM is being proposed.

25 Please confirm the content and page count of

Volume III, Technical Proposal – Factor 3

Management Approach. Volume III shall include the following:

a. Management Approach – 8 pages

The SDP shall be submitted as part of Volume VI

Pass/Fail Requirements and not part of Volume III;

the table located at Provision UW L-2-0001 Section

1.3(c) has been modified to reflect this change. The

SDP Submission consists of four parts, which shall all

b. Senior Technical Resume – 2 pages

c. Software Development Plan, HQ L-2-0016 –

No page limit

i. The SDP shall also include a

SDP Rationale equivalent to those articulated by CMMI capability level 3 – 3 pages

ii. HQ L-2-0017 – Subject to the technical proposal page limitations of the solicitation

a) Previous relevant experience, within the past 36-months in developing software of the similar size and complexity– no page limit

b) Previous relevant CMMI or equivalent model-based process maturity appraisals performed within the past

36-months – 3 pages be submitted as part of Volume VI, and have the following page limitations:

• Software Development Plan (initial submission):

No page limit;

• SDP Rationale: Three (3) page limit;

• Previous relevant SDP experience: No page limit;

•CMMI or equivalent: Three (3) page limit.

26 52.219-9 SMALL BUSINESS

SUBCONTRACTING PLAN (DEVIATION

2018-O0018) (AUG 2018) Offerors are instructed to represent goals expressed in terms of percentages of total planned subcontracting dollars, and Small Business Goals are addressed within each topic response. Question:

Shall the Small Business Individual and Master

Subcontracting Plan itself be addressed in terms of intended percentage utilization only (no dollars), and in which volume should the Plan be placed?

Volume II, Technical Proposal – Factor 2 Technical

Capability shall contain the Small Business

Participation submittal outlined in Provision UW L-2-

0001 Section 3.1.2.2, and is separate from the Small

Business Subcontracting Plan identified in Provisions

52.219-9 and HQ L-2-0009. The Small Business

Subcontracting Plan shall be submitted as Volume

VII. The table located at Provision UW L-2-0001

Section 1.3(c) has been modified to reflect this change. As indicated in UW L-2-0001 Section

3.1.2.2(a), “The Offeror shall propose a Small

Business Participation percentage for each Prototype

Topic. A Small Business Offeroror shall indicate the percentage of work performed by themselves, as well as by any Small Business Subcontractors.” The Small

Business Subcontracting Plan identified in Provisions

52.219-9 and HQ L-2-0009 shall also propose in terms of percentages as opposed to dollars.

27 Section I - 52.219-9 and HQ L-2-0009 SMALL

BUSINESS SUBCONTRACTING PLAN

(NAVSEA) (JUN 1999): Offeror shall submit as part of its proposal a written proposed subcontracting plan in accordance with the clause entitled "SMALL BUSINESS

SUBCONTRACTING PLAN" (FAR 52.219-

9). The plan shall include the Congressionally mandated five percent (5%) goal for small disadvantaged business concerns or a detailed explanation as to why the goal cannot be included in the plan. The RFP does not provide guidance as to where in the proposal the SB

Subcontracting Plan should be included.

Should Offerors include the SB Plan in Volume

VI, Pass/Fail?

Please see response to question 26.

28 Section L, 1.0 Instructions for Submission of

Proposal, pg 100. May offerors include a

Offerors shall adhere to the two (2) page limitation for the Cover Page indicated in the table of Provision UW

Cover Page, Table of Contents and Acronym

List outside of government-specified page limitations?

L-2-0001, Section 1.3(c). No pages outside of the

Government specified page limitations shall be accepted.

29 Page 12, Applicable Document 3.1.2. MIL-

STD-31000B was promulgated in Oct of 2018;

should Applicable Document 3.1.2 be updated to REV B?

Correct. The Department of Defense announced

November 2, 2018 the release of an update to the

Standard Practice Technical Data Packages. MIL-

STD-31000B 31 October 2018 supersedes MIL-STD-

31000A 26 February 2013. Amendment 0005 updates the revision for Applicable Document 3.1.2.

30 Page 105, 3.1.1, "Payload Launch/Retrieval

Systems". Should SOW 4.3 "Ship alteration and prototype installation" be addressed for

Hypothetical Task 1? Launch and Recovery system likely to have implodable volumes, ship interfaces, and thus constitute a TEMPALT.

Hypothetical Task 1 requests only the process to develop a prototype system to be employed in a performance demonstration at a land-based test facility. Items such as implodable volumes and ship interfaces should be addressed under applicable section 4.1 (Conceptual Design), and section 4.2

(Prototype Design, Fabrication, Integration & Test).

31 P105, Hypothetical Tasks. Can the

Government provide dimensions and details for platform interfaces dealing with the

Hypothetical tasks (e.g. TDU, VA Class handling/loading path drawings, etc)?

The Government will not be providing further details for the hypothetical tasks.

32 In Amendment 0002, Question #6, Government indicated that contractors shall use eCRAFT labor categories from NUWC website. During performance of this contract, offeror proposes to use labor categories (e.g. technicians) not listed on NUWC eCRAFT website. Please advise how to handle for required hypothetical task labor matrices?

Please utilize the SCA Directory of Occupations or eCRAFT labor categories for the labor matrices. Both lists are available at the link in response to Question

#6. If the labor category proposed is not an exact match, please choose the SCA or eCRAFT labor category that is most similar to the labor category being proposed. Please note there are technician labor categories listed in the SCA Directory of Occupations

33 Amendment 0003 Q&A #26 states “The Small

Business Subcontracting Plan identified in

Provisions 52.219-9 and HQ L-2-0009 shall also propose in terms of percentages as opposed to dollars.” However, per FAR 52.219-9 (d)(2) on page 60 - 61 of the RFP, offeror’s are to provide a statement of total dollars planned for each small business category in addition to goal percentages. A Small Business Subcontracting

Plan that does not contain dollars by small business category is not compliant with the

FAR. We ask that you allow both percentages and dollars by small business category in the

Small Business Subcontracting Plan.

Offerors shall propose in terms of percentages and dollars for the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. In order to derive the dollars, offerors should apply the percentages to the total ceiling values listed in

Provision UW L-2-0001, paragraph 5.

34 Per Amendment 03 response to Question 25, and the new Volume Table (Paragraph 1.3(c)) that shows only 1.0 SDP as part of Volume VI), please confirm Volume VI is to include:

1.0 SDP including:

1) Section M Factor A – Software

Development approach (Section L-2-0016

(b)) – Rationale with approach

2) Section M Factor B - Software development experience (Section L-2-0017

(a)) - Experience

Volume VI shall include the SDP, inclusive of the requirements noted in Provisions L-2-0016 and L-2-

0017 and the SDP Rationale and Experience noted in

Provision UW M-2-0001, Section 2.0 (c). As indicated in the table located at Provision UW L-2-

0001 Section 1.3(c), there is no page limitation for the

Rationale and Experience portion of the SDP identified in Provision UW M-2-0001, Section 2.0 (c).

This part of the SDP is separate from Provisions L-2-

0016 and L-2-0017.

Volume VI shall include the complete SDP, the

3) Section M Factor C - Software development process experience including appraisal (Section L-2-0017 (b)) – CMMI

2.0 Plan for Obtaining Clearances

1) Personnel Clearances

2) Proof of a Facility Clearance

3.0 Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

Mitigation Plan

Clearance Requirements, and the Organizational

Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan.

35 Pg 10 and 105; The Hypothetical tasks in

Section 2.0 of the SOW are significantly different, in technical details than the

Hypothetical tasks listed in Section L of the solicitation. Which tasking list is preferred?

Contractor is assuming Section L, unless otherwise stated.

Section 2.0 of the Statement of Work does not contain hypothetical tasks, it contains prototype topic areas.

The hypothetical tasks in Section L are to be utilized.

36 Pg 101; Last paragraph states no pictures are allowed in the proposal. Pictures can be integral to the proposal process. Is there a size limitation that could be levied instead of simply no pictures allowed?

No Pictures shall be accepted as part of the proposal.

37 Will section M PASS/FAIL criteria be updated to include evaluation of the SDP, since it currently appears to be silent on this issue?

Section M does include the evaluation of the SDP, and can be found at Provision UW M-2-0001, Section 2.0

(c).

38 With respect to a contractor’s obligations under

HQ C-2-0011, our understanding is that computer software and/or computer databases will be free of viruses at the time of delivery as demonstrated by the results of scans performed by current, commercially available antivirus tools. Please confirm that this is an acceptable method for meeting the requirements of this section.

The Government confirms this is an acceptable method for meeting the requirements of this section.

39 In response to question 28, the Government indicates that the ‘Cover Page’ is limited to two pages. Section 1.3(c) addresses the Cover

Letter, which is differentiated in industry from the Cover Page. Would you kindly confirm that the two-page limit refers to the Cover

Letter?

The 2-page limitation indicated in Provision UW L-2-

0001 Section 1.3(c) refers to the Cover Letter, which is considered to be synonymous with a Cover Page for purposes of this solicitation.

40 Does the Government intend to flow-down the

FAR clause 52.250-1 INDEMNIFICATTION

UNDER PUBLIC LAW 85-804 (APR 1984)?

The Government does not currently intend to include

FAR Clause 52.250-1.

41 Pg 46 and 48; The Solicitation currently contains FAR Clause 52.202-1 - Definition

(NOV 2013) which indicates the following:

“When a solicitation provision or contract clause uses a word or term that is defined in the

Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), the word or term has the same meaning as the definition in FAR 2.101 in effect at the time the solicitation was issued, unless--

Class Deviation- 2018-O0018 does not apply to the change requested; the $3,500 threshold noted in

Section H, Ordering Process, paragraph A and paragraph B(3)(g) is the ordering threshold for

Multiple Award Contracts, not the micro-purchase threshold.

(a) The solicitation, or amended solicitation, provides a different definition;

(b) The contracting parties agree to a different definition;

(c) The part, subpart, or section of the FAR where the provision or clause is prescribed provides a different meaning; or

(d) The word or term is defined in FAR Part 31, for use in the cost principles and procedures."

Congress has approved two increases to the micro-purchase threshold: to $10,000 mandated by the 2019 NDAA

(https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5515/text#toc-

H0B8AA87F6B45452A803290F9F47BAB8D).

Would NUWC consider approving a definition update on page 46, Section A, General and

Letter (g) Competition on page 48 from $3,500 to $10,000?

42 Pg 96:

The SF-33 indicates the resultant contract will be rated DO-C9, though FAR Clause 52.211-14 does not contain a corresponding fill-in. Would the Government please confirm the anticipated

DPAS rating?

Provision 52.211-14 is updated to show the resulting contract shall be a DO-C9 rated order.

43 Reference Amendment 0003, Response to

Question 26, Pg 6 and 12:

Would NUWC please confirm that there is no page limit for the Volume VII Small Business

Subcontracting Plan? “****” within the Page

Limit column indicates that requirements are within Provisions 52.219-9 and HQ L-2-0009.

There are no page limitation requirements for the

Subcontracting Plan.

44 Does the Government intend to issue a final conformed RFP once all bidders questions have been answered? This would assist bidders in streamlining the offerors fill-in sections as required for final proposal submission.

A conformed copy will not be provided, as offerors are required to submit a signed copy of all issued amendments with their proposal.

SECTION C:

1. Statement of Work, Section 3.0, Applicable Document 3.1.2, “MIL-STD-31000A - Department of Defense

Standard Practice, Technical Data Packages” version date is updated from February 2013 to October 2018.

SECTION L:

1. Provision 52.211-14 is updated to show the resulting contract shall be a DO-C9 rated order.

2. Provision UW L-2-0001, Section 1.3(c) table is modified as follows:

a. The **** Small Business Subcontracting Plan Note at the bottom of the table is modified to state that offerors shall propose in terms of percentages and dollars. Offerors should apply the proposed percentages to the total ceiling values listed in Provision UW L-2-0001, paragraph 5.

All other solicitation terms and conditions remain unchanged.

The following have been deleted:

GENERAL

INFORMATION

GENERAL INFORMATION MAR 2017

SECTION C - DESCRIPTIONS AND SPECIFICATIONS

The following have been modified:

STATEMENT OF WORK

1.0 Background

The Platform and Payload Integration Department, Code 40, of the Naval Undersea Warfare Center (NUWC)

Division Newport is responsible for a full spectrum of engineering and research efforts pertaining to submarine, surface ship, and autonomous vehicle payload launch and recovery systems, and submarine-launched missile systems. Code 40 is involved in every aspect and every phase of the engineering life cycle as it applies to submarine and surface ship payload launch / recovery systems, and submarine-launched missile systems. Platforms include submarines, surface ships, and autonomous vehicles.

2.0 Scope

The contractor shall design, develop, fabricate, test, install, analyze, document and deliver rapid prototype solutions associated with Code 40 products, systems, subsystems, support equipment and associated capabilities outlined in section 2.0. These solutions are intended to allow Code 40 to develop a sufficient understanding of alternative solution sets that are deemed critical in providing improved performance, accelerated operational capability or response to an identified emergent threat. Prototypes shall be employed in performance demonstrations to assess their operational utility, explore and inform Concept of

Operations development, mature technology, refine requirements and otherwise reduce the risk of current or anticipated capability gaps.

There are two types of technical efforts anticipated under this contract, full project orders and stand alone task orders. Full project orders require technical support for all areas in the Statement of Work (SOW)

(tasks 4.1 through 4.5 inclusive) during the development of a prototype system. Stand alone task orders are for technical support specifically for applicable task areas described in the SOW (4.1: Conceptual design, 4.2: Prototype design, fabrication integration & test, 4.3: Ship Alteration & Prototype Installation, and 4.4:

Test & Evaluation. No stand alone task orders are anticipated for task 4.5: Transition to Production.

For a full project order, a phased approach will be employed during the task execution of a prototype development effort. A contractor shall not proceed to a subsequent development task without receiving approval from the Government that all key milestones required have been successfully achieved for the current phase of the development effort. Initiation of any technical efforts on the next development phase without Government concurrence is prohibited.

2.01 Payload Launch / Retrieval Systems

This topic area includes the development of equipment and systems for launch and retrieval of payloads, autonomous vehicles, towed bodies, and measurement devices. Enhancements are needed to increase capability, improve safety, reduce required manning, improve control, improve reliability, improve manufacturability, reduce size, weight, and required power, reduce maintenance responsibilities, ensure compliance with applicable survivability requirements and reduce total ownership cost.

2.02 Payload Stowage / Handling Equipment and Payload Integration Systems

This topic area includes the development and modification of systems for shipping, stowage and handling of payloads, autonomous vehicles, towed bodies, and off-board payload integration systems. Enhancements are needed to increase capability, improve safety, reduce required manning, improve control, improve reliability, improve manufacturability, reduce size, weight, reduce maintenance responsibilities, ensure compliance with applicable survivability requirements, reduce unique interfaces to submarine systems, increase interoperability with onboard submarine systems, and reduce the unique maintenance requirements for fleet personnel.

2.03 Hatches, Trunks, and Closures Equipment

This topic area includes the development of equipment for hatches, trunks and closures for platform access.

Enhancements are needed to increase capability, improve safety including SUBSAFE, reduce required manning, improve control, improve reliability, improve manufacturability, reduce size, weight, ensure compliance with applicable survivability requirements and required power and reduce total ownership cost.

2.04 Payload Encapsulation Systems

This topic area includes the development of methods and equipment to encapsulate weapons and other payloads to interface with and enable operation from various environments, such as surface ship and submarine launching systems. This topic includes mechanical and electrical design, fabrication, integration, modification, testing, documentation, material analysis, safety, launch envelope analysis, and shock analysis/mitigation.

2.05 Simulators and Electronic Equipment

This topic area includes mechanical and electrical equipment, circuit cards, computers and software to simulate missiles, payloads, and their associated electrical and mechanical interfaces and properties. This topic includes the design, development, documentation, fabrication, modification, evaluation, and support of missile simulator equipment as well as any associated test and evaluation equipment. This effort includes any required material analysis, safety analysis, and shock analysis/mitigation. This topic area also includes the development of test and evaluation tools that improve the government’s ability to test, reconstruct, analyze, assess and evaluate payload launch and recovery systems, and submarine-launched missile systems. Prototypes may include data gathering systems, innovative mass storage techniques and real-time playback.

2.06 Cables, Coatings and Materials

This topic area includes the development and evaluation of alternate materials, coatings and manufacturing processes for inboard and outboard cables, connectors, and assemblies to improve reliability, conductor density, manufacturability, delivery times and reductions in total ownership costs. This topic includes improved potting for long-term deep submergence applications, new hose wall material or coatings to improve resistance against water saturation, ruggedize coating on cables to resist penetration, and to prevent damage when in contact with maintenance personnel. This topic area includes development and characterization of specialized, functional coatings, materials and polymers to protect hardware from corrosion and biofouling.

2.07 Specific program/systems supported by this contract:

Submarine Horizontal Launch Systems

Submarine Three-Inch Launcher Systems

Submarine External Countermeasure Launch Systems

Submarine and Surface Ship Weapon Shipping, Stowage, and Handling Systems

Submarine Vertical Launch Systems

Submarine Trash Disposal Units

Submarine Virginia Payload Tube and Virginia Payload Module

Submarine Multi-Mission Platform (MMP) Payload Handling System

Submarine Ordnance, Stowage, Handling, and Shipping Equipment

Surface Ship Torpedo Launch Systems and Associated Systems and Technologies

Submarine Hatches, Trunks, and Closures

Encapsulated Harpoon Weapon System and Associated Subsystems

Submarine Launched Tomahawk Weapon System and Associated Subsystems

Sea Dragon Weapon System and Associated Subsystems

Submarine Electronic Missile Simulators

Submarine Air Expulsion Launch System

Undersea Warfare (USW) Payload Integration with Stowage and Launch Systems on Submarines or

Surface Ships

Integration of Payload Encapsulation Systems with USW Launcher and Handling Systems

USW Payload Integration Middleware

Submarine Dry Deck Shelter and Associated Subsystems

Shock and Survivability Modeling and Simulation

Launch Dynamics and Trajectory Modeling and Simulation

Implosion Modeling and Simulation

Weapon and Launcher Test Set (WALTS)

2.1 Places of Performance

The following places of performance are anticipated for technical services under this contract:

Contractor Site (70%)

Government-Site (15%)

Shipyards / Navy Bases / Platforms (15%)

2.2 Authorized Users

The following departments are anticipated to require technical services under this contract:

Code 25, Undersea Warfare Combat Systems Department

Code 40, Platform and Payload Integration Department

Code 85, Undersea Warfare Weapons, Vehicles, and Defensive Systems Department

2.3 Sponsors

The following sponsors are anticipated to provide tasking that will require technical services under this contract:

PMS 326, International Fleet Support

PMS 391, Submarine Escape and Rescue

PMS 392, Strategic and Attack Submarines

PMS394, Advanced Undersea Systems

PMS 397, Columbia Class Submarine

PMS 399, Special Operating Forces

PMS 404, Undersea Weapons

PMS 406, Unmanned Maritime Systems

PMS 407, Surface Ships Modernization

PMS 415, Undersea Defensive Warfare Systems

PMS 420, Littoral Combat Ship Mission Modules

PMS 450, VIRGINIA Class Submarine

PMS 485, Maritime Surveillance Systems

PMS 495, Mine Warfare

PMS 501, Littoral Combat Ship

PMA 201, Precision Strike Weapons

PMA 280, Tomahawk Weapon Systems

PMW 120, Battlespace Awareness & Information Operations

PMW 160, Networks, Informational Assurance & Enterprise Services

PMW 770, Submarine Integration

United States Navy (USN) Fleet Forces

SEA05, Naval Systems Engineering

SEA07, Undersea Warfare

Strategic Systems Programs (SSP)

Submarine Learning Center (SLC)

Supply Systems Command (NAVSUP)

DARPA, Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency

FMS, Foreign Military Sales Program Office

IWS 5, Undersea Systems

ONI, Office of Naval Intelligence

ONR, Office of Navy Research

Naval Research Laboratory (NRL)

University Affiliated Research Center (UARC)

Strategic Capabilities Office (SCO)

UCTO NAVSEA073R

2.4 Types of Funding

The following funding types are anticipated to be used under this contract:

Operation and Maintenance, Navy (O&MN)

Shipbuilding and Conversion, Navy (SCN)

Other Procurement, Navy (OPN)

Research, Development, Test & Evaluation (RDT&E)

Research, Development, Test & Evaluation, Defense Agencies (RDDA)

Weapon Procurement, Navy (WPN)

Service Cost Center (SCC)

Foreign Military Sales (FMS)

3.0 Applicable Documents

The contractor shall perform the tasking required in Section 4.0 in accordance with the below Applicable

Documents. At the individual order level, additional specific sections of the below documents may be identified as appropriate.

NUMBER TITLE TASK NUMBER

3.1 DoD Issuances

3.1.1 DoD Test and Evaluation Management Guide (6

th

Edition) 4.2, 4.3, 4.4

3.1.2 MIL-STD-31000A - Department of Defense Standard Practice, Technical Data Packages (October 2018)

4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.5

3.1.3 MIL-STD-46855A, Human Engineering Requirements for

Military Systems, Equipment, and Facilities (February 2016)

4.1, 4.2

3.1.4 MIL-HDBK-454B – DoD Handbook General Guide for

Electronic Equipment (April 2007)

4.1, 4.2, 4.5

3.1.5 MIL-S-901D, Military Specification: Shock tests. Requirements for High-Impact Shipboard Machinery, Equipment, and Systems.

(March 1989)

4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4

3.1.6 MIL-STD-3022 (w/ Change-1) - Documentation of Verification, Validation, and Accreditation (VV&A) for Models and

Simulations (April 2012)

4.1, 4.2

3.2 Navy Issuances

3.2.1 NAVSEA 5100.12 – Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA)

System Safety Engineering (SSE) Policy (August 2011)

All

3.2.2 NAVSEA 0924-062-0010 - Submarine Safety (SUBSAFE)

Requirements Manual (Revision C)

4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5

3.2.3 NAVSEA SS800-AG-MAN-010/P-9290 - System Certification

Procedures and Criteria Manual for Deep Submergence Systems

(Revision A)

4.1, 4.2, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5

3.2.4 NAVSEA S9070-AA-MME-010/SSN/SSBN - Technical

Requirements Manual for Temporary Submarine Alterations

(Third Revision)

4.3, 4.4

3.2.5 NAVFAC P-307 – Weight Handling Program Management (June

2016)

4.3, 4.4

3.2.6 Technical Specification 9090-310D - Alterations to Ships

Accomplished by Alteration Installation Teams (February 2004)

4.3, 4.4

3.3 Industry Standards

3.3.1 IEEE Standard 12207 - Systems and Software Engineering, Software life cycle processes (2017 Revision)

4.1, 4.2, 4.5

3.3.2 ANSI/ISO/ASQ 9001 - Quality Management Systems (2015

Revision)

All

3.3.3 EIA-649-B - Configuration Management Standard (April 2011) All

4.0 Technical Requirements

The contractor shall perform the tasks in section 4.0 in accordance with the Applicable Documents in Section 3.0 and using GFI provided as part of the task order issuance. As required for stand-alone task orders, the Government will issue Technical Instructions to initiate and specify tasking, and will indicate Applicable Documents, systems and platforms, and GFI as it becomes available.

4.0.1 General Requirements: Program Management Reviews and Technical Interchange Meetings

4.0.1.1 Participate in Program Management Reviews (PMRs) and Technical Exchange Meetings (TIMs), including technical reviews, to provide technical status. The Government will establish meeting schedule and the agenda.

4.0.1.2 Provide presentation materials one day prior to PMRs, TIMs, and technical reviews. (CDRL A001 –

Meeting Report - DI-ADMN-81505)

4.0.2 General Requirements: Quality Assurance

4.0.2.1 Establish, implement, document, and maintain a quality system that ensures conformance to order requirements and meets the requirements of applicable document 3.3.2, or equivalent.

4.0.2.2 Generate a Quality Control Plan (QCP) for review and approval. The QCP shall describe the Quality

Management System methodology and approaches to be used under the contract. (CDRL A002 –

Quality Control Plan - DI-QCIC-81794)

4.0.3 General Requirements: Technical Data Packages

4.0.3.1 Develop Technical Data Packages (TDP) that define conceptual design, developmental prototype or limited production design, or the highest type of engineering drawing required for quantity production of the item or system. The contractor shall provide TDPs for all developmental efforts, unless otherwise directed, as defined in individual task orders. TDPs shall consist of one of three Levels: (1)

Conceptual Level, (2) Developmental Level, and (3) Production Level as defined by applicable document 3.1.2. Conceptual Level TDPs are applicable for tasks within section 4.1. Developmental

Level TDPs are applicable for tasks within sections 4.2 and 4.3. Production Level TDPs are applicable for tasks within section 4.5. (CDRL A003 – DI-SESS-80776A)

4.1 Conceptual Design

4.1.1 Concept Design Analysis and Assessment Studies

4.1.1.1 Perform engineering analysis, conceptual design studies, and assessment studies for prototype systems, system of systems, engineered material and electro-mechanical devices to meet system, operational and platform requirements defined in the individual orders.

4.1.1.2 Perform trade studies, technical investigations and reviews to compare the performance, cost and development time associated with the applicable prototype options. The contractor shall evaluate tradeoffs of various designs as a function of constraints and dependencies including performance metrics, environmental conditions, ergonomics, physical limits, complexity, material composition, structural integrity, hydrodynamic stability, special security and safety features associated with system operation, and compatibility with other proposed and existing systems, components, or devices.

4.1.1.3 Assess capability advantages and disadvantages, feasible alternatives, key assumptions, sensitivity to changes in variables and technology risk.

4.1.1.4 Document results of analysis, draft computer aided design models and engineering drawings including conceptual designs and system layouts and other findings in a technical report. (CDRL A003 –

Technical Data Package - DI-SESS-80776A)

4.1.2 Performance Predictions

4.1.2.1 Predict characteristics of the prototype set(s) using mathematical formulations describing the dependency of a particular system parameter to various external stimuli and operating conditions.

4.1.2.2 Simulate candidate implementations using computer based modeling tools and numerical methods appropriate for the specific application as defined in the individual orders.

4.1.2.3 Derive metrics that form the basis of comparisons and trade-offs and evaluate these metrics quantitatively as a function of the applicable trade-space.

4.1.2.4 Document results of analyses, including rationale for all findings and recommendations in a technical report. (CDRL A004 – Technical Report - DI-MISC-80508B)

4.1.3 Analysis of Operation

4.1.3.1 Conduct analyses of current and future operations and missions and make recommendations to develop new system or subsystem solutions taking into account existing fielded systems as a baseline before recommending the development of a new system or subsystem.

4.1.3.2 Document results of analysis detailing all system or subsystem solutions considered and shall provide detailed rationale for selection of the recommended solution in a technical report. (CDRL A004 –

Technical Report - DI-MISC-80508B)

4.1.4 Compatibility Analysis

4.1.4.1 Conduct compatibility studies and prepare drawings of proposed prototype solution sets to demonstrate compatibility with platform systems and their interfaces. Compatibility studies shall include analyses necessary to evaluate the performance of payload/platform interfaces to identify potential problems and recommend and develop changes to both the platform or payload system and shipboard procedures to overcome any incompatibilities/problems identified including those associated with payload shipping, handling, stowage, deployment and recovery.

4.1.4.2 Document results of analysis, draft computer aided design models and engineering drawings including conceptual designs and system layouts and other findings in a technical data package. (CDRL A003 –

4.1.4.3 Document results of analyses, including rationale for all findings and recommendations in a technical

4.1.5 Concept Specification Development and Review

4.1.5.1 Document prototype solution set specifications taking into account operational, performance, interface, space, weight, cost, and schedule criteria in a technical report. (CDRL A004 – Technical Report - DI-

MISC-80508B)

4.1.5.2 Conduct design reviews to present conceptual prototype solutions, review performance against requirements, identify risks and concerns and validate design methods and approaches.

4.1.5.3 Make recommendations concerning proposed feasibility of specifications and their potential for successfully meeting design requirements.

4.1.5.4 Prepare a design review package that presents the results of analysis, simulation, exploratory testing and other engineering activities. (CDRL A005 – Design Review Package - DI-SESS-80776A)

4.1.5.5 Document results of analyses, including rationale for all findings and recommendations in a technical

4.2 Prototype Design, Fabrication, Integration & Test

4.2.1 Prototype Design & Development

4.2.1.1 General

4.2.1.1.1 Design a prototype set or sets using information provided by the Government or derived from Section

4.1 of this SOW. The contractor shall generate and document the functional and detailed design of all electrical, mechanical, software, and human interface components.

4.2.1.1.2 Develop a tailored System Engineering Plan (SEP) to document the prototype set development process which includes requirements allocation, risk management, configuration management, software integration, hardware integration and test and evaluation. (CDRL A006 – Systems Engineering Plan -

DI-SESS-81785A)

4.2.1.1.3 Conduct trade-off studies of various design options, recommend an approach that best satisfies the

Government requirements, and document results in a technical report. (CDRL A004 – Technical

Report - DI-MISC-80508B)

4.2.1.1.4 Provide detailed technical assessments, conduct compatibility studies and impact studies of the proposed solution set(s), and document the attributes of the prototype design in a design review package. (CDRL A005 – Design Review Package - DI-SESS-80776A)

4.2.1.1.5 Participate in technical reviews to assess requirements at key milestones and to assess the readiness to enter the next technical…