13-R-0055_RFP.pdf

CODE

(Hour)

PAGE(S)

until 11:59 AM local time 10 Nov 2014

X

A

X B

X C X D

EX

X

G

F 82 - 89

90 - 99

X H joel.ashworth@navy .mil

RATING PAGE OF PAGES

7. ISSUED BY

(Date)

IMPORTANT - Award will be made on this Form, or on Standard Form 26, or by other authorized official written notice.

Previous Edition is Unusable 33-134 STANDARD FORM 33 (REV. 9-97)

Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.214(c)

1 99

(If other than Item 7)

15A. NAME 16. NAME AND TITLE OF PERSON AUTHORIZED TO

AND

ADDRESS

SIGN OFFER (Type or print)

OF

OFFEROR

AMENDMENT NO. DATE

15B. TELEPHONE NO (Include area code) 17. SIGNATURE15C. CHECK IF REMITTANCE ADDRESS

IS DIFFERENT FROM ABOVE - ENTER

SUCH ADDRESS IN SCHEDULE.

18. OFFER DATE

1. THIS CONTRACT IS A RATED ORDER

UNDER DPAS (15 CFR 700)

2. CONTRACT NO.

N68936 8. ADDRESS OFFER TO

See Item 7

9. Sealed offers in original and 1 copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if handcarried, in the depository located in

CAUTION - LATE Submissions, Modifications, and Withdrawals: See Section L, Provision No. 52.214-7 or 52.215-1. All offers are subject to all terms and

Section 8 conditions contained in this solicitation.

10. FOR INFORMATION

CALL:

A. NAME (NO COLLECT CALLS)

JOEL BLAINE ASHWORTH (760) 939-2459

11. TABLE OF CONTENTS

SOLICITATION/ CONTRACT FORM

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES AND PRICES/ COSTS

1 - 2

3 - 5

X I CONTRACT CLAUSES

DESCRIPTION/ SPECS./ WORK STATEMENT X

PACKAGING AND MARKING

6 - 39

40 - 41

J LIST OF ATTACHMENTS

INSPECTION AND ACCEPTANCE

DELIVERIES OR PERFORMANCE

42 - 43

44 - 45 X K

REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS AND

OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFERORS

CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION DATA 46 - 50 X

SPECIAL CONTRACT REQUIREMENTS

OFFER (Must be fully completed by offeror) 51 - 59 M

L INSTRS., CONDS., AND NOTICES TO OFFERORS

EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

NOTE: Item 12 does not apply if the solicitation includes the provisions at 52.214-16, Minimum Bid Acceptance Period.

is inserted by the offeror) from the date for receipt of offers specified above, to furnish any or all items upon which prices are offered at the price set opposite each item, delivered at the designated point(s), within the time specified in the schedule.

13. DISCOUNT FOR PROMPT PAYMENT

(See Section I, Clause No. 52.232-8)

14. ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF AMENDMENTS

(The offeror acknowledges receipt of amendments

AMENDMENT NO. DATE

to the SOLICITATION for offerors and related documents numbered and dated):

FACILITY

12. In compliance with the above, the undersigned agrees, if this offer is accepted within calendar days (60 calendar days unless a different period

SOLICITATION, OFFER AND AWARD

X

(X) SEC. DESCRIPTION (X) SEC. DESCRIPTION PAGE(S)

PART I - THE SCHEDULE

26. NAME OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print) 27. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 28. AWARD DATE

EMAIL:TEL: (Signature of Contracting Officer)

CODE CODE

B. TELEPHONE (Include area code) C. E-MAIL ADDRESS

AWARD (To be completed by Government)

19. ACCEPTED AS TO ITEMS NUMBERED 20. AMOUNT 21. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION

22. AUTHORITY FOR USING OTHER THAN FULL AND OPEN COMPETITION:

10 U.S.C. 2304(c)( ) 41 U.S.C. 253(c)( ) (4 copies unless otherwise specified)

23. SUBMIT INVOICES TO ADDRESS SHOWN IN ITEM

24. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 7) CODE 25. PAYMENT WILL BE MADE BY CODE

PART IV - REPRESENTATIO NS AND INSTRUCTIO NS

PART III - LIST O F DO CUMENTS, EXHIBITS AND O THER ATTACHMENTS

60 - 80

PART II - CO NTRACT CLAUSES

CDR NAWCWD CODE 254100D

ATTN: J. ASHWORTH

(760) 939-2459

429 E BOWEN RD - STOP 4015

CHINA LAKE CA 93555

(760) 939-2459

(760) 939-0528FAX:

TEL:

FAX:

TEL:

NOTE: In sealed bid solicitations "offer" and "offeror" mean "bid" and "bidder".

SOLICITATION

6. REQUISITION/PURCHASE NO.5. DATE ISSUED

25 Sep 2014

4. TYPE OF SOLICITATION

SEALED BID (IFB)

NEGOTIATED (RFP)

[ X ]

3. SOLICITATION NO.

N68936-13-R-0055

Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

INFORMATION FOR OFFEROR

CLIN 0001 is for upgrades to the H-1 aircraft, including Foreign Military Sales (FMS) variants based on System

Configuration Set (SCS) life cycle phases. This includes designing, developing, studies, and implementing upgrades to existing software and ancillary hardware and/or improved functionality and obsolescence management of the aircraft.

CLIN 0002 is for updates to the H-1 Weapon Systems, support equipment and trainers. The non-developmental products shall consist of aircraft parts, validated aircraft kits, non-aircraft hardware, and software including tools and licenses.

CLIN 0003 is for other direct costs associated with travel in this contract.

CLIN 0004 is for data that shall be delivered in accordance with the Contract Data Requirements List (CDRL), DD

1423, Exhibit A.

FOR YOUR INFORMATION:

The following addresses and points of contact are provided:

Name: J. Blaine Ashworth, Contract Specialist Name: Christopher Burchett, Contracting Officer

Phone: (760) 939-2459 Phone: (760) 939-1832

FAX: (760) 939-3095 FAX: (760) 939-3095

Email address: joel.ashworth@navy.mil Email address: christopher.burchett@navy.mil

U.S. Postal Service Mailing Address: U.S. Postal Service Mailing Address:

COMMANDER COMMANDER

CODE 254100D (J. Ashworth – 760-939-2459) CODE 254100D (C. Burchett – 760-939-1832)

NAVAIRWARCENWPNDIV NAVAIRWARCENWPNDIV

429 E. BOWEN RD. MAIL STOP 4015 429 E. BOWEN RD. MAIL STOP 4015

CHINA LAKE, CA 93555-6108 CHINA LAKE, CA 93555-6108

Direct Delivery Address (UPS, FedEx, etc): Direct Delivery Address (UPS, FedEx, etc):

COMMANDER COMMANDER

CODE 254100D (J. Ashworth – 760-939-2459) CODE 254100D (C. Burchett – 760-939-1832)

NAVAIRWARCENWPNDIV NAVAIRWARCENWPNDIV

BLDG 982, MAIL STOP 4015 BLDG 982, MAIL STOP 4015

CHINA LAKE, CA 93555-6108 CHINA LAKE, CA 93555-6108

As noted in synopsis N68936-13-R-0055, posted 18 MAR 2014, the Naval Air Warfare Center Weapons Division

(NAWCWD), China Lake, CA intends to enter in negotiations in accordance with FAR 6.302. Negotiations will be conducted on an other than full and open competition basis with Northrop Grumman Corporation. The anticipated award date is December 2014.

mailto:joel.ashworth@navy.mil mailto:christopher.burchett@navy.mil

Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT

0001 259,186 Hours System Configuration Sets

CPFF

Contractor shall provide activities in accordance with the SOW in Section C of the Request For Proposal (RFP).

FOB: Destination

ESTIMATED COST

FIXED FEE

TOTAL EST COST + FEE

0002 15 Lot Non-Developmental Products/Hardware

FFP

Firm Fixed Price CLIN for the purchase of products and hardware relating to the development of System Configuration Sets for the H-1 Upgrade Program.

NET AMT

0003 Each

TRAVEL

COST

Cost CLIN capturing travel costs associated with the development of System

Configuration Sets for the H-1 Upgrades Program.

ESTIMATED COST

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES AMOUNT

0004 Data

NSP

The contractor shall provide Data in accordance with the Contract Data

Requirements List (CDRL), Exhibit A.

CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY FULL TEXT

5252.211-9503 LEVEL OF EFFORT (COST REIMBURSEMENT) (NAVAIR)(DEC 2012)

(a) The level of effort estimated to be ordered during the term of this contract is 259,186 man-hours of direct labor including authorized subcontract labor, if any. The contractor shall not, under any circumstances, exceed one hundred (100%) percent of the total level of effort specified in this basic contract. The estimated composition of the total man-hours of direct labor by classification is as follows:

CY15 Hrs CY16 Hrs CY17 Hrs CY18 Hrs CY19 Hrs Total

Hrs

Woodland Hills Bus/Prog

Mgmt

L_WP3 865 895 860 919 762 4,301

Woodland Hills Bus/Prog

Mgmt

L_WP5 174 174 174 174 145 841

Woodland Hills Bus/Prog

Mgmt

L_WP8 1,115 1,112 1,112 1,112 927 5,378

Woodland Hills Engineering L_WE1 45 40 45 35 45 210

Woodland Hills Engineering L_WE3 4,815 6,142 4,378 7,775 6,268 29,378

Woodland Hills Engineering L_WE4 19,706 18,855 16,889 23,540 22,964 101,954

Woodland Hills Engineering L_WE5 12,509 12,670 10,890 12,450 12,670 61,189

Woodland Hills Engineering L_WE8 10,944 9,937 10,080 12,906 12,068 55,935

Bus/MGMT/Eng Total 50,173 49,825 44,428 58,911 55,849 259,186

Totals

* denotes Key Personnel labor categories

(b) FAR Clause 52.232-20, "Limitation of Cost" applies to fully funded orders and FAR Clause 52.232-22, "Limitation of Funds" applies to incrementally funded orders. Nothing in this clause amends the rights or responsibilities of the parties hereto under either of those two clauses. In addition, the notifications required by this clause are separate and distinct from any specified in either FAR Clause 52.232-20 or FAR Clause 52.232-22.

(c) In the event that less than one hundred (100%) percent of the established level of effort of the contract/order is actually expended by the end of the performance period, the Government shall have the option of:

(1) Requiring the Contractor to continue performance, subject to the provisions of the FAR Clause 52.232-20 or

52.232-22, as applicable, until the effort expended equals 100% of the established Level of Effort; or

(2) Effecting a reduction in the fixed fee by the percentage by which the total expended man-hours is less than one hundred (100%) percent of the established Level of Effort.

(d) The contractor agrees that effort performed in fulfillment of level of effort obligations under this contract shall include only verifiable effort in direct support of the work specified. It shall not include efforts such as work performed in transit to or from an employee's usual workplace, work during lunchtime activities, or effort performed at other non-work locations.

(e) In performing the contract/order, the contractor may use any reasonable combination of hours for the labor categories in support of section C of this contract/order.

Section C - Descriptions and Specifications

STATEMENT OF WORK

USMC Light/Attack Helicopter Programs

STATEMENT OF WORK

FOR

SYSTEM CONFIGURATION SET

UPDATES

BY

NORTHROP GRUMMAN

CORPORATION

FOR

H-1 HELICOPTERS

CONTRACT NO. N68936-13-R-0055

Prepared by:

DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY

H-1 Weapons Systems Support Activity IPT

Code 41240HD

NAVAIR, China Lake, California

Contents

1 SCOPE

2 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

2.1 Standards - Guidance Only

2.2 Instructions/Directives/Regulations/Specifications

2.2.1 Technical Manuals

2.2.2 Industry Standards

2.3 Information Technology ................................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.

2.3.1 Information Technology Information

2.3.2 Clinger-Cohen Act

2.3.3 Cybersecurity

3 REQUIREMENTS

3.1 Program Management

3.1.1 Overview

3.1.2 Cost

3.1.3 Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

3.1.4 Performance

3.1.5 Risk and Opportunity Management

3.1.6 Program Management Reviews (PMR)

3.1.7 Preliminary System Change Review Board (SCRB) technical support

3.1.8 Program Initiation Review (PIR)/ System Concept Review (SCR) technical support

3.1.9 Quality Assurance

3.1.10 Configuration Management

3.1.11 On-Line Data Support

3.1.12 Independent Expert Program Review (IEPR)

3.2 Systems Engineering

3.2.1 Systems Engineering Approach

3.2.2 Sub-System Definition

3.2.3 Technical Performance Measures (TPMs)

3.2.4 Formal Qualification Testing

3.2.5 Interface Control Document

3.2.6 Interface Design Document

3.2.7 Software Development and Integration

3.2.8 Airworthiness

3.2.9 Reliability Allocations

3.2.10 Reliability and Maintainability

3.2.11 Reliability, Maintainability and Built-In-Test (BIT)

3.2.12 Highly Accelerated Life Test (HALT)

3.2.13 Environmental Stress Screening (ESS) / Highly Accelerated Stress Screen (HASS)

3.2.14 TEMPEST

3.2.15 System Safety

3.2.16 Human Factors Engineering

3.2.17 Non Developmental Products (CLIN 0002)

3.3 Logistics

3.3.1 Technical Support

3.3.2 Support Equipment (SE)

3.3.3 Training

3.3.4 Obsolescence Management / Diminishing Manufacturing Sources & Material Shortages

(DMSMS) 33

3.4 Security

3.4.1 System Security

3.4.2 Critical Program Information (CPI)

3.4.3 Program Protection Implementation Plan (PPIP)

3.4.4 Security and Public Release

3.4.5 Program Protection

3.4.6 Program Protection Validation & Verification

3.4.7 Information Assurance

4 ACRONYMS and ABBREVIATIONS

1 SCOPE

BACKGROUND: The H-1 Weapons System Support Activity (WSSA) is the primary Research and Development (R&D) team supporting the H-1 Light/Attack Helicopter Program Office, PMA-276. The H-1 Weapons Systems are updated with new capabilities via a series of System Configuration Sets ( SCSs) throughout the platform lifecycle. An SCS is a combination of software and/or hardware configuration item (CI) changes integrated into a previously deployed baseline configuration. When a change in the SCS is required, either new CIs are added or existing CIs are modified or deleted as required to accomplish the change. The modification to the SCS is documented by multiple statements of requirements (SORs). The Functional Requirements Document (FRD) describes the changes for the SCS and is the combination of numerous SORs. The SCS is delivered to the Fleet as a highly integrated hardware and software package.

As the complexity of the H-1 Weapons System has increased, there is now a necessity for the Government to become the Lead Systems Integrator for the platform and sub-systems. The WSSA must contract directly with the major suppliers in order to maximize efficiencies and increase buying power.

1.1 This Statement of Work (SOW) defines the work efforts required of Northrop Grumman Corporation (NGC) to perform research for, and develop updates to, the H-1 Weapons Systems as part of an SCS. NGC is the Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) responsible for the Mission Computers (MCs), the Station Control Units (SCUs) and the Stores Station Electronics (SSE). The scope of this contract is for SCS work related to these areas, including creating prototypes of system capability improvements to the Fleet in support of emerging needs. The contract is organized around the United States Marine Corps (USMC) and Foreign Military Sales (FMS) SCS products and their life cycle.

1.2 The requirements of this SOW include researching alternatives, investigating and documenting new capabilities and anomalies related to avionics and weapons; and the development, i ntegration, verification, validation, and testing of these systems. The SOW also includes the maintenance capabilities required to support the systems. Research, investigation, development, integration, verification, validation, and testing may include upgrades and/or updates related to, test equipment, and other Support Equipment

(SE).

1.2.1 This SOW also includes the identification of changes to the support structure to include changes in requirements for SE (Consolidated Automatic System Support (CASS) or Test Program Set (TPS)), changes to Warning, Caution, and Advisories (WCAs), which will result in changes to documentation of Operator and Maintainer publications to include Maintenance Instruction Manuals (MIMs), Fault Locate/Troubleshooting Trees, Naval Aviation Technical Information Product (NATIP), Navy Tactics, Techniques and Procedures (NTTP) and Naval Air Training and Operating Procedures and Standards (NATOPS), and changes to Interface Control Documents (ICDs) and System Specifications.

1.2.2 Acquisition Product research, development and support will include engineering and logistics efforts which may or may not ultimately be incorporated into an SCS. Specific SCS tasking will be included within Task Orders (TOs). The Government will provide a schedule for each SCS that will be used by the Contractor for the work described within this SOW. Details of tasking will be described and defined in the following paragraphs and within TOs.

1.2.3 This contract covers studies and analyses related to avionics integration, acquisition product activities, and includes all efforts required to accomplish analysis of alternatives, system design, integration, testing, rapid response efforts, FMS and Fleet support. New subsystems and/or CIs under consideration for integration onto the H-1 will require a series of studies and analyses to determine the system engineering issues associated with the efforts. These investigations will yield the optimization tradeoffs that are possible and their effect on performance characteristics. Additionally, the costs and schedule recommendations associated with integration will be provided.

1.3 The scope of this SOW will be divided into four primary sections: Program Management, Systems Engineering, Logistics and Security.

2 APPLICABLE DOCUMENTS

The following documents form a part of this document to the extent specified herein. In the event of conflict between the documents referenced herein and the contents of this document, the contents of this document shall control the governing requirement.

2.1 Standards - Guidance Only

MIL-HDBK-61A Configuration Management Guidance, February 7, 2001 MIL-HDBK-338B Electronic Reliability Design Handbook, October 1, 1998 MIL-STD-334B Displayed Message for Automatic Test Equipment, April 20, 1998 MIL-STD-882D Standard Practice for System Safety, February 10, 2000 DMSMS Guidebook, SD-22 A Guidebook of Best Practices and Tools for Implementing a

DMSMS Management Program, 01 AUG 2012

2.2 Instructions/Directives/Regulations/Specifications

02-271.01 H-1 Helicopter Series (All Variants) Security Classification Guide, PMA-276, August 27, 2013

AS-6146 Avionics System Performance Specification for the H-1 Cockpit Upgrades, October 27, 2006

DoD 5000.04-M-1 Cost and Software Data Reporting (CSDR) Manual, November 4, DoDM 5200.01 DoD Information Security Program (Volumes 1 – 4), Department of Defense, February 24, 2012

DoD 5220.22-M National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual February 2006 (Incorporating Change 1, March 28, 2013)

DoDI 5200.39 Critical Program Information (CPI) Protection Within the Department of Defense, July 16, 2008 (Incorporating Change 1, December 28, 2010)

DoDI 5230.24 Distribution Statements on Technical Documents, August 23, 2012 DoDI S-5230.28 Low Observable (LO) and Counter Low Observable (CLO)

Programs (U)", May 26, 2005 DODI 8500.2 Information Assurance Implementation, February 6, 2003 DODI 8510.01 Risk Management Framework (RMF) for DoD Information

Technology (IT), March 12, 2014 H-1 CMP H-1 Light Attack Helicopter Program, Configuration Management

Plan, PMA-276, Revision C, May 2014 H-1 PPP H-1 Light Attack Helicopter Program, Program Protection Plan

(PPP), Annex (U), PMA-276, September 27, 2010 HELOS #8122 AIR-4.2 Program Schedule Assessment and SRA Instructions, HELOS Ref. No. 8122, 14 July 2014 MIL-STD-461B Electromagnetic Emission and Susceptibility Requirements for the

Control of Electro-Magnetic Interference, April 1, 1980 MIL-STD-461D Requirements for the Control Electromagnetic Interference

Emissions and Susceptibility, January 11, 1993 MIL-STD-461F Requirements for the Control of Electromagnetic Interference

Characteristics of Subsystems and Equipment, December 10, 2007 MIL-STD-464 Electromagnetic Environmental Effects Requirements for Systems, March 18, 1997

MIL-STD-464A Electromagnetic Environmental Effects Requirements for Systems, December 19, 2002

MIL-STD-704D Aircraft Electrical Power Characteristics, September 30, 1980 MIL-STD-810G Department of Defense Test Method Standard: Environmental

Engineering Considerations and Laboratory Tests, October 31, 2008.

MIL-STD-1472 Department of Defense Design Criteria standard: Human Engineering, August 23, 1999

MIL-STD-1787 Aircraft Display Symbology, January 05, 2001 NAVAIR 00-25-300 Naval Air Systems Command Technical Directives System, March

1, 2002 NAVAIRINST 4130.1D Naval Air Systems Command Configuration Management Policy, December 19, 2006 NAVAIRINST 4355.19D Systems Engineering Technical Review Process, July 26, 2012 NAVAIRINST 5000.21B Program/Project Risk Management, January 24, 2008 NAVAIRINST 5234.4 Naval Air Systems Command Independent Expert Program

Reviews (IEPR) for Software Intensive Programs. June 21, 2002 NAVAIRINST 5234.5A Naval Air Systems Command Metrics for Software Intensive

Systems, July 20, 2005 TEMPEST NSTISSAM TEMPEST/2-95 Red/Black Installation Guidance OPNAVINST 4790.2J Naval Aviation Maintenance Instruction (series), February 8, 2005 SD 212-947-115 Detailed Specification for Model UH-1N Marine Tactical Helicopter, Revision R-2 SD 549-16R2 Detailed Specification for Model AH-1W Marine Tactical Helicopter SD 549-23R1C Detailed Specification for the AH-1Z Aircraft SD 549-24R1C Detailed Specification for the UH-1Y Aircraft

2.2.1 Technical Manuals

AT Desk Reference Department of the Navy Anti-Tamper Desk Reference, July 1, 2013 NAWCWD H1-001 Rev A System Life Cycle Plan for the H-1 Helicopter, June 30, 2011

2.2.2 Industry Standards

ANSI/EIA-748-B Earned Value Management Systems, September 10, 2007 ISO/IEC 12207 Industry Standard: Information Technology - Software Life Cycle

Process, 2008 (E)

RTCA/DO-178B Software Considerations In Airborne Systems and Equipment

Certification, December 1, 1992

2.3 Information Technology

2.3.1 Information Technology Information

The Government will provide all necessary reference documents not generally available to the Contractor, as required. Throughout the life of the contract, if any instruction or document is replaced or superseded, the replacement or superseding instruction or document shall be applicable to the requirements defined in this SOW.

The Contractor shall not purchase any Information Technology (IT) equipment on behalf of the Naval Air Systems Command (NAVAIR) in support of this Contract without a NAVAIR Command Information Officer (CIO) signed IT approval.

2.3.2 Clinger-Cohen Act

In 1996, Congress enacted the Clinger-Cohen Act (CCA) requiring agencies to use a disciplined capital planning and investment control process to acquire, use, maintain and dispose of information technology.

In accordance with the following Department of Defense Directive (DoDD), Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI), Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) memo, and Secretary of the Navy Instruction (SECNAVINST), CCA compliance is required for all programs that contain IT, including National Security Systems (NSS). NSS are defined in National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Special Publication (SSP) 800-59. Six factors are used to identify NSS, one of which is IT in weapons and weapons system programs. The law provides authority to the agency’s Chief Information Officer (CIO) to manage IT resources effectively. The authority to grant compliance with CCA and approve the Information Assurance (IA) strategy depends on the Acquisition Category (ACAT).

a. DoDI 5000.02 Interim, Operation of the Defense Acquisition System, 25 November 2013

b. OSD Memo, Clinger-Cohen Act Compliance Policy, Mar 8 2002

c. SECNAVINST 5000.2E, Implementation and Operation of the Defense Acquisition System and the

Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System, 01 Sept 2011

2.3.3 Cybersecurity

NAVAIR’s Cybersecurity Program is a unified approach to protect unclassified, sensitive or classified information, and is established to consolidate and focus efforts in securing that information, including its associated systems and resources. Cybersecurity is required operationally throughout the DON. The DON CIO is responsible for IT within the Navy, as mandated by the Clinger-Cohen Act, and is the lead for departmental compliance with the Federal Information Security Management Act of 2002.

All Cybersecurity shall be in compliance with the following listed instructions:

a. ASD (NII) Directive-Type Memorandum (DTM) 08-027 – Security of Unclassified DoD Information on Non-DoD Information Systems, 31 July 2009

b. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Instruction CJCSI 3170.01H (series), Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System, 10 Jan 2012

c. CJCSI 6211.02D– Defense Information System Network (DISN): Policy and Responsibilities, 24 Jan 2012

d. CJCSI 6212.01F Net Ready Performance Parameters (NR KPP) 21 March 2012

e. CJCSI 6251.01D Narrowband Satellite Communications Requirements, 30 Nov 2012

f. CJCSI 6510.01F, Information Assurance (IA) and Computer Network Defense (CND), 09 Feb 2011, certified current 10 Oct 2013

g. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Manual CJCSM 6510.01B – Incident Handling Program 10 July

h. Chief of Naval Operations/Headquarters, United States Marine Corps CNO N614/HQMC C4 –

Navy-Marine Corps Unclassified Trusted Network Protection (UTN-Protect) Policy, Version 1.0, 31 October

i. Defense Acquisition Guidebook – Chapter 7 Acquiring Information Technology, Including

National Security Systems, Section 7.5 Information Assurance (IA)

j. DoD 5220.22-M, National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual, 28 February 2006 (NISPOM)

k. DoD 8570.01-M, Information Assurance Workforce Improvement Program, 19 Dec 2005 (Incorporating

Change 3, 24 Jan 2012)

l. DoDD 8000.01 Management of the Department of Defense Information Enterprise, 10 February

m. DoDD 8100.02, Use of Commercial Wireless Devices, Services, and Technologies in the Department of

Defense (DoD) Global Information Grid (GIG), 14 April 2004, Certified Current as of 23 April 2007

n. DoDD 8570.01 Information Assurance Training, Certification, and Workforce Management, 15 August

2004, Certified Current as of 23 April 2007

o. DoDI 4630.8, Procedures for Interoperability and Supportability of Information Technology (IT) and

National Security Systems (NSS), 30 June 2004

p. DoDI 8500.01, Cybersecurity, 14 March 2014

q. DoDI 8510.01, Risk Management Framework (RMF) for DoD Information Technology (IT), 12 March

r. DoDI 8520.2, Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) and Public Key (PK) Enabling, 01 April 2004

s. DoDI 8551.01, Ports, Protocols, and Services Management (PPSM), 13 August 2004

t. DoDI 8580.1, Information Assurance in the Defense Acquisition System, 9 July 2004

u. DoDI 8581.01, Information Assurance (IA) Policy for Space Systems Used by the Department of Defense, 8 June 2010

v. DON CIO Memo 02-10, Department of the Navy Chief Information Officer Memorandum 02-10

Information Assurance Policy Update for Platform Information Technology, 26 April 2010

w. DON ltr 5239 NAVAIR 726/2322 of 18 Feb 09, NAVAIR Data at Rest Policy

x. Federal Information Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUB) http://www.nist.gov/itl/fips.cfm

y. Committee on National Security Systems (CNSS) Policy No. 11, National Policy Governing the Acquisition of Information Assurance (IA) and IA-Enabled Information Technology Products, 10 June 2013

z. Office of the Chief of Naval Operations OPNAV INST 5239.1C, Navy Information Assurance (IA) Program, 20 Aug 08

aa. SECNAV M-5239.1, Department of the Navy Information Assurance Program; Information

Assurance Manual, November 2005

bb. SECNAVINST 5230.15, Information Management/Information Technology Policy for Fielding of

Commercial Off the Shelf Software, 10 April 2009

cc. SECNAVINST 5239.3B, Department of the Navy Information Assurance Policy, 17 June 2009

dd. SECNAVINST 5239.19, Department of the Navy Computer Network Incident Response and Reporting http://www.itl.nist.gov/fipspubs/by-num.htm

Requirements, 18 March 2008

ee. The National Security Act of 1947

ff. Title 40/Clinger-Cohen Act

gg. Title 44/Federal Information Security Management Act

All IT procured in support of this contract shall meet all DoD/DON and NAVAIR IA polices. Failure to follow these policies will result in denied access to NMCI, One Net, Integrated Shipboard Network System (ISNS) and other DON, DoD and Joint Networks. These IA policies are standard across the Department and ensure IA compatibility and interoperability.

IT systems and/or networks operated by contractors pursuant to a NAVAIR contract, regardless of the level of data processed, shall be operated in accordance with the instructions listed above in this section.

Contractor-owned equipment shall be permitted connections to NAVAIR/DoD networks in order to carry out the performance of this contract. All Contractor-owned hardware and/or software shall meet DoDI 8500.2 Cybersecurity Controls, is subject to validation scanning, and is approved by the Operational Designated Accrediting Authority (ODAA) via AIR-7.2.6 prior to connection.

The following specific criteria must be met before any contractor owned equipment may be connected to any DoD or NAVAIR network in support of this contract. Requirements include:

a. Network Vulnerability Scanning. NAVAIR Deputy CIO for Information Assurance maintains authorized auditing tools and shall provide for firewall/port scans, device discovery scan, vulnerability assessment, and other requirements as required to ensure secure interoperability with DoD networks The contractor shall be responsible for the remediation of any equipment that fails these audits prior to the connection of the system to the networks; results of approvals shall be documented via Memorandum of Agreement with the Facility Security Officer and the Defense Security Service Representative for that contractor and Operational Designated Accrediting Authority (ODAA) via AIR-7.2.6;

b. Extent of Validation Scanning. To prevent scanning of corporate assets, all such networks, equipment and connections shall be physically segregated from any government/contractor corporate networks that are not in direct support of DoD contracts;

c. Circuit Provisioning. Any circuit or connection between NAVAIR and/or DoD site and the contractor site shall be provisioned via the Defense Information Security Agency and comply with CJCSI 6211.02C (series), Defense Information System Network (DISN): Policy and Responsibilities, 9 July 2008;

d. Servicing Systems from a Remote Contractor Site. Remote Access Service connections that allow off-station operation and/or administration of contractor-owned systems, located at any NAVAIR facility or site, shall not be permitted, with the exception of those systems connecting to the Command via the Outreach Services identified in Section 7, Enterprise Architecture;

e. Memorandum of Agreement and Inter-connection Agreements. An Information Assurance Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the contractor owning the equipment and Operational Designated Accrediting Authority (ODAA) via AIR-7.2.6 shall be developed and signed before the equipment can be connected to NAVAIR networks. Failure to comply with the signed MOA shall be grounds for disconnection from the network.

3 REQUIREMENTS

When ordered by the Task Orders (TOs) the following subparagraphs and CDRLs shall apply. No work shall be performed unless ordered by an individual TO.

3.1 Program Management

3.1.1 Overview.

The Contractor shall develop and utilize a Program Management Organization (PMO) to execute the requirements of this SOW. The Contractor shall document the PMO through organization charts that define the hierarchical relationships, the roles and responsibilities, and the person filling the positions in the organization. Key personnel changes within the PMO must be approved by the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) prior to implementation.

3.1.2 Cost

The Contractor shall provide cost analyses, detailed technical studies, and evaluation on the H-1 weapons systems [CDRL A001]. Areas under consideration shall be existing hardware and software configuration items, as well as new weapons and avionics systems being considered for integration into the H-1 aircraft.

These studies shall include supportability impacts in addition to technical issues. Specific information and schedules required to perform studies and analyses will be provided by TO. The information shall include the technical issues, supportability, or the area to be addressed, objectives, and desired outcomes.

3.1.2.1 Cost Analysis

Cost analyses data typically includes the following types of information:

a. Lines of code per software configuration item or alternative software size measures used by the developer. Size will be broken down by the amount of new, reused, and modified software in the effort along with any COTS products

b. Schedule

c. Number of components or board changes for hardware configuration items

d. Estimated costs for lab modifications or build-up

e. Estimated costs for aircraft prototyping

f. Estimated labor hours and costs, including non-labor costs

g. Estimated changes to SE (changes to include updates to TPS or CASS requirements)

h. Estimate for documentation, Technical Publications, and Technical Directives

i. Estimated cost for changes to training courses, courseware, lesson plans, and devices

j. Assumptions used for the cost analyses with the highest cost drivers, including supportability costs, identified

k. Empirical measures from previous efforts serving as the basis for performance predicted in the current analyses

l. Total cost of effort

3.1.2.2 Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM)

The Contractor shall provide ROM data [CDRL A00T] to assist the Government in the programmatic planning for the H-1 weapon system. ROMs shall be tailored for the effort to be estimated and shall provide cost, schedule, and technical information pertinent to the effort based upon written requirements provided by the Government in the form of a draft task statement, SOR, or draft FRD. Because ROM’s are based upon draft documentation, in particular draft ICDs, the Government recognizes that the estimate will have an inherent uncertainty. If the uncertainty exceeds the typical ROM uncertainty of + 40%, the Contractor shall notify the Government.

3.1.2.3 Budgetary Data

The Contractor shall provide budgetary data [CDRL A00T] to assist the Government in the programmatic planning for the H-1 weapon system. Budgetary data shall be tailored for the effort to be estimated and shall provide cost, schedule, and technical information pertinent to the effort based upon written requirements provided by the Government in the form of a draft task statement, SOR, or draft FRD. Because budgetary data is based upon draft documentation, the Government recognizes that the estimate will have an inherent uncertainty. If the uncertainty exceeds the typical budgetary uncertainty of + 25%, the Contractor shall notify the Government.

3.1.2.4 Impact Statements

The Contractor shall provide impact statements [CDRL A00T] that define the cause and effect of proposed new or changed requirements, including both technical and supportability impacts, on the planned SCS efforts.

Impact statements shall be based upon written requirements provided by the Government in the form of a draft task statement, draft SOR or FRD change, or System Anomaly Report (SAR) or System Trouble Report (STR). Because impact statements are based upon draft documentation, the Government recognizes that the estimate will have an inherent uncertainty. If the uncertainty exceeds the typical impact statement uncertainty of + 10%, the Contractor shall notify the Government.

3.1.2.5 Financial, Schedule, and Earned Value Reporting Performance Requirements

3.1.2.5.1 Financial Data Requirements - Contract Funds Status Report

The contractor shall prepare and deliver Contract Funds Status Reports by TO (CDRL A00M).

3.1.2.5.2 Contractor Integrated Cost, Schedule, Technical Performance Management

3.1.2.5.2.1 Contractor Integrated Performance Management:

DFARS 252.234-7001 and 252.234-7002 apply. The Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR) shall be developed, maintained, updated/statused and reported on a monthly basis (CDRL A012). The contractor shall establish, maintain, and use in the performance of this contract, an integrated management system that is in compliance with the Industry Guidelines for Earned Value Management Systems (EVMS) ANSI/EIA-748-B as determined by the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA). The application of these concepts shall provide for early indications of contract cost and schedule problems. Earned value assessments shall correlate with technical achievement.

3.1.2.5.2.2 Schedule Risk Assessments with Government:

The Government will participate in the Probabilistic Schedule Risk Assessments (SRA) as per the frequency delineated in the IPMR (CDRL A012). One of the SRAs shall be scheduled to support the Government Estimate-at-Complete (EAC) process. In addition to the paths identified in IPMR, the contractor shall also report optimistic, pessimistic, and most likely remaining durations and rationale for the values for each task/activity on any of the following paths: driving path to the next Major Milestone, the next three near-driving paths to the next Major Milestone.

The AIR-4.2 Program Schedule Assessment and SRA Instructions, HELOS #8122, shall be used when conducting the SRA. At the request of the Government and included in the Task Order, a complete SRA shall be performed outside of routine scheduled occurrences.

3.1.2.5.2.3 Integrated Baseline Review (IBR):

The purpose of the IBR is to achieve an understanding of the Performance Management Baseline (PMB) and its relationship to the underlying EVM systems and processes that will operate during the contract execution.

The objectives are to gain insight into cost, schedule, technical, management processes and resource risk areas associated with the remaining effort, and to develop confidence in the program’s operating plans. This will be accomplished by evaluating the PMB to ensure it captures the entire remaining technical scope of work, is consistent with contract schedule requirements, and has adequate resources assigned. The IBR Process will consist of these five events: 1) Joint Government/Prime Management Systems Training, 2) Prime Management Systems Assessment, 3) Subcontractor IBRs, 4) Schedule Risk Assessment (SRA), and 5) Total Contract IBR.

These events are described below.

a. Joint Management Systems Training. Prior to the end of the first full accounting period, the contractor shall host and facilitate a joint Government/Prime training session on the contractor's system description and procedures governing the implementation and operation of its management control systems. This shall include an overview of: EVMS; Baseline Establishment; Planning, Scheduling and Budgeting; Earned Value Methods; Performance Measurement Analysis; Baseline Maintenance;

Estimate At Completion (EAC) Process; and Material and Supplier Management/Subcontract Processes, including Inter-Divisional Processes.

b. Prime Management Systems Assessment. Prior to the end of the third full accounting period, the contractor shall demonstrate the development of its PMB in accordance with the contractor's approved management systems processes. The contractor shall ensure that the baseline includes the entire contract technical scope of work at the prime level and is consistent with contract schedule requirements; adequate management processes are being employed, and has adequate resources assigned. The contractor shall demonstrate to the Government that effective earned value methods are used to accurately state contract cost, schedule, and technical performance. The contractor shall make Management System Assessment (MSA) documentation available for Government review at least two weeks prior in electronic, searchable format. The documentation shall include, but is not limited to, Organizational Charts, Responsibility Assignment Matrix, Control Account Plans (including Work Packages and Planning Packages), Work Authorization Documents, Baseline Control Logs, Baseline Change Requests, Program unique directives/procedures, CLIN to WBS cross-reference matrix, proposed subcontractors and definitization schedule, and Data (WBS/IMS) dictionary.

c. Subcontractor IBRs. IBRs shall be conducted on subcontractors that report EVM data. The subcontractor IBR shall be led by the Prime contractor with Government participation. All subcontractor IBRs shall be within 90 days of Subcontract Authority to Proceed.

d. Total Contract IBR. No later than 180 calendar days after contract award, the contractor shall host and facilitate a Total Contract IBR. The Government will assess the contractor’s baseline, including all awarded subcontracted effort, to be used for performance measurement to ensure complete coverage of the statement of work, logical scheduling of work activities, adequate resourcing, and identification of inherent risks. Detailed planning, to the greater of, “six months beyond the IBR date” or “the next major milestone following the IBR” is required. IBR documentation/updated documentation shall be made available to the Government at least four weeks prior to the review. The documentation includes but is not limited to that listed in paragraph (b) above. The Government will verify during the IBR, and follow-on IBRs when warranted, that the contractor has established and maintains a reliable performance measurement baseline. The contractor will ensure that the baseline includes the entire contract technical scope of work consistent with contract schedule requirements, adequate management processes are being employed, and has adequate resources assigned. The contractor will assure the Government that effective earned value methods are used to accurately status contract cost, schedule, and technical performance.

Subsequent baseline reviews shall be required:

a. At incorporation of major modifications,

b. At incorporation of an Over Target Budget/Over Target Schedule,

c. To review subsequent detail planning windows (often referred to as Rolling Wave or Block Planning)

d. In support of EAC site visits, or

e. At the government program manager discretion.

3.1.2.5.2.4 Subcontract Cost/Schedule Management and Reporting:

The contractor shall manage all subcontracts, including those that are Firm Fixed Price (FFP), to include the timely award of the subcontract, integration of the subcontractor’s plans into appropriate schedules with sufficient detail, and monitoring the subcontractor’s staffing plans, to include the execution of those staffing plans to the required levels with the required skills.

Non-FFP subcontracts at or exceeding $20M or as directed by the Government in the TO will have applied to them the requirements of DFARs clauses 252.234.7001, DFARS 252.234-7002, Integrated Program Management Report (IPMR) (CDRL A012).

3.1.2.5.2.5 Over Target Baseline (OTB)/Over Target Schedule (OTS)/Restructure:

The contractor may conclude the baseline no longer represents a realistic plan in terms of budget/schedule execution. In the event the contractor determines an OTB/OTS/Restructuring action is necessary, the contractor shall obtain Government approval prior to implementing an OTB/OTS/Restructuring action. The request shall also include detailed implementation procedures as well as an implementation timeframe. The contractor will not implement the OTB/OTS/Restructuring prior to receiving written approval from the Contracting Officer.

3.1.2.5.3 Cost and Software Data Reporting (CSDR)

3.1.2.5.3.1 Contractor Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS)

The Contractor shall provide the final Contract Work Breakdown Structure (CWBS) and dictionary (CDRL A01M) within 60 days after contract award. The Contractor shall maintain and update the CWBS and dictionary during contract execution. Submittals shall be in accordance with the Contractor Cost Data Report (CCDR) (CDRL A017) requirements.

3.1.2.5.3.2 Contractor Cost Data Reporting (CCDR)

The contractor shall systematically collect and report actual contract costs in accordance with the Cost Data Summary Report (DD Form 1921) (CDRL A017) and the Functional Cost-Hour Report (DD Form 1921-1)

(CDRL A018).

The Contractor shall:

a. Use the most current approved DoD 5000.04-M-1 Production Contract CSDR Plan, DD Form 2794 Cost of Software Data Reporting, as the baseline for reporting.

b. Provide relevant DD Form (1921, 1921-1) data for every indicated element identified within the Production Contract CSDR Plan.

c. Provide relevant DD Form (1921-3) (CDRL A01Z) data in accordance with the CSDR Plan.

d. Provide updates to the Contract CSDR Plan for Government approval. Updates include, but are not limited to aligning reporting Subcontractor effort to a single WBS element and updating as new Subcontracts are awarded.

e. Flow-down Contractor Cost Data Reporting requirements to any Subcontracts valued at over $50 million or any Subcontracts valued between $20 million and $50 million that are designated by the program as high risk, high value, or high technical interest. Reporting thresholds are inclusive of all anticipated contract options and modifications and are given in Then Year dollars.

3.1.2.5.4 Software Resources Data Report (SRDR)

3.1.2.5.4.1 The DD Form 2630 series SRDR is needed to supply the Government with basic information about the size, effort, schedule, and quality of a developed software product. The Contractor shall submit a DD Form 2630-2 and DD Form 2630-3 (CDRLs A019 and A01A), and the Cost and Software Data Reporting Plan (CSDR) DD Form 2794 (CDRL A01Z).

3.1.2.5.4.2 The DD Form 2630-2 shall be submitted to provide estimates at completion for each SCS delivery and a DD Form 2630-3 shall be submitted after each SCS is delivered. DD Form 2630-2 and DD Form 2630-3 shall be submitted for contracts containing over $20 million of software development effort.

The contractor shall flow down SRDR requirements to any lower tier contractor that will have a subcontract containing over $20 million of software development effort. Subcontracted software development for less than $20 million may be reflected (rolled-up) in the data provided on the primary DD Form 2630 or may be reported separately, as appropriate or reasonable. A DD Form 2630-3 is required at contract completion that covers the entire software product. Reporting thresholds are inclusive of all anticipated contract options and modifications and are given in Then Year dollars.

3.1.3 Integrated Master Schedule (IMS)

3.1.3.1 The Contractor shall develop, maintain, and manage the H-1 Program under this contract with an IMS by logically networking all discrete Contractor, major Subcontractor, and Government activities in sufficient detail to enable effective insights into the management of the program. All schedule data shall be contained within one data file per TO with the capability to roll up from the lowest manageable level to the highest summary level.

3.1.3.2 The Project Master Schedule and/or all major program milestones shall be incorporated into the scheduling system at the appropriate level with predecessor(s) and successor(s) assigned as required.

3.1.3.3 The Contractor shall prepare and deliver detailed schedule data per TO requirements. The IMS shall be maintained, updated/statused, and reported on a monthly basis (CDRL A012). The IMS shall also include all required summary level tasks representing future planning. The Government will use this information to verify the attainability of program objectives, and evaluate progress toward meeting the program objectives.

The contractor shall submit a monthly narrative/analysis with electronic IMS submission. The IMS data shall be accessible to the Government on the Contractor’s digital information system. The IMS shall also be presented at milestone reviews and program meetings as required.

3.1.4 Performance

3.1.4.1 Performance Measurement/Metrics

The Contractor shall develop, collect, and utilize metrics in the management of the system development effort in accordance with NAVAIRINST 5234.5A and the System Life Cycle Plan (SLCP), NAWCWD H-1-001. The Contractor shall collect and report as specified during milestone reviews the following minimum metrics (planned and actual) for software: requirements, size of software effort, staffing, quality, software maturity, schedule, cost, capacity, and time. The Contractor shall collect and report as specified during milestone reviews the following minimum metrics (planned and actual) for hardware: requirements, number of drawings, engineering orders, schedule, and cost.

3.1.4.1.1 Performance Measurement/Metrics Analysis

The Contractor shall provide explanations of all anomalies or movement in the metrics data over time. The Contractor shall include as an addendum to the Software Development Plan (SDP) (CDRL A00P) and System

Engineering Management Plan (SEMP) (CDRL A00W):

a. A complete list of metrics, with definitions of each

b. Frequency of data collection

c. Frequency of data reporting

d. Methods of data collection and verification

The Contractor shall analyze the software and hardware metrics collected. These analyses shall identify risks to be addressed by the risk management program. The metrics shall be collected and submitted by the Contractor via a Technical Progress Report – Metrics (CDRL A015) and the SLCP. The metrics shall be presented at all major milestones.

3.1.4.2 Contractor Surveillance Plan (CSP)

The Government will utilize the CSP to provide evaluation of the performance based elements of this SOW. The CSP is provided as Attachment 3 to the contract for information purposes.

3.1.4.3 Technical Analyses

3.1.4.3.1 The Contractor shall perform technical analyses to refine and clarify requirements for existing H- 1 systems and for new weapon/avionics systems being considered for integration (CDRL A001).

3.1.4.3.2 The Contractor shall identify integration requirements and recommended subsystem tradeoffs.

These engineering efforts shall identify integration requirements in terms of performance impact and optimization, required software, required wiring changes, required structural modifications, required avionics hardware modifications, and development of installation drawing packages (to include production and retrofit) and supportability requirements as specified in the TO.

3.1.4.3.3 The Contractor shall provide impact statements that define the cause and effect of the new or changed requirements on the planned efforts. Impact statements shall be requested and prepared in accordance with this SOW.

3.1.4.3.4 The Contractor shall develop baseline buy-to packages for potential suppliers on efforts identified by the Government. These packages may include (but not be limited to):

a. Measurable parametric system performance requirements, i.e., system sensitivity, system power, system processor throughput, system memory reserve, etc.

b. Drawings that identify mechanical tolerances for installation, electrical connection, and cooling requirements

c. Data requirements

d. Reliability and…