request for solutions (rfs) naval sea systems command ......request for solutions (rfs) navsea 06l...

Request for Solutions (RFS)

Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA) Readiness and Logistics Navy Model-Based Product Support (MBPS)

20 March 2019

1.0 Purpose 1

2

This Request for Solutions (RFS) is issued to identify an integrated solution for the 3

Navy’s Model-Based Product Support (MBPS) environment. The Government will 4

evaluate the solutions with the intent to competitively award one or multiple Other 5

Transaction (OT) Agreements for prototype projects through the Training and 6

Readiness Accelerator (TReX) Consortium. 7

8

2.0 Summary and Background 9 10

2.1 The United States Navy requires a prototype Model-Based Product Support 11

(MBPS) system(s) with enterprise and field level capability to effectively and efficiently 12

acquire, field and sustain weapon systems’ digital twin and enable appropriate 13

predictive analysis and modeling tools that can improve material availability and 14

reliability, increase operational availability, and reduce Operation and Sustainment 15

(O&S) cost. 16

17

2.2 The delivered prototype solution(s) will be part of the MBPS family of integrated 18

systems and must support both ashore and afloat that are Cyber Secure and auditable. 19

The MBPS services portfolio is composed of Navy Product Data Management (NPDM), 20

Navy Common Readiness Model (NCRM), and Navy Data Acquisition Requirement 21

Tool (NDART). 22

23

2.3 NPDM. NPDM is a single, authoritative system baseline, technical data 24

management, logistics product data, change and configuration management service 25

environment to acquire, manage, and sustain technical data packages to include (but 26

not limited to): 27

28

Configuration Management 29

3D Models 30

2D Drawings 31

Requirements 32

Test and Evaluation 33

Technical Publications, Training, Navy Engineering and Combat Operational 34

Sequencing Systems 35

Bill of Material Management (Engineering/Manufacturing/Service Support) 36

Document Management, Workflows, Collaboration 37 38

2.4 NCRM. NCRM is an integrated modeling and simulation-based approach to 39

supportability analysis within the systems engineering process, which enables 40

acquisition programs to design and sustain equipment and logistics service solutions to 41

Request for Solutions (RFS) NAVSEA 06L MBPS, 20 March 2019

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT A. This is approved for public release; distribution unlimited

2

meet fleet readiness and cost objectives. NCRM also enables programs to embed 42

readiness at cost models as critical components of the system’s digital twin, which 43

provides the foundation for continuous performance monitoring and enhances decision 44

support services when integrated with enterprise data analytics capabilities. NCRM 45

integrates the following traditional supportability analysis processes / capabilities to 46

develop affordable readiness models: 47

48

Failure Analysis (Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) and 49

Fault Tree Analysis (FTA)) 50

Reliability Block Diagram (RBD) 51

Multi-echelon Readiness Based Sparing (RBS) 52

Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) 53

Readiness at Cost Modeling and Simulation 54

Reliability and Maintainability (R&M) Engineering Management 55

Maintenance Task Analysis 56

Failure Reporting and Corrective Action Systems (FRACAS) 57 58 2.5 NDART. The NDART will enable Navy program offices to enforce common data 59

standards, requirements and acquisition approaches across all Navy weapon systems 60

acquisition contracts. The high level NDART capabilities will enable the Navy program 61

offices to develop web-based Statement of Work (SOWs), Contract Data Requirements 62

Lists (CDRLs), and Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) for the procurement of technical and 63

product data for a system/platform which will support product support strategies and 64

sustainment of systems throughout the lifecycle. 65

66

3.0 General Information 67

68

3.1 Attachment 1, MBPS Technical Supplement dated 17 January 2019 and 69

appendices outline the technical program description and requirements of the 70

prototype(s) based on assumptions of the current state of technology. Vendors are 71

encouraged to challenge these assumptions in their individual solutions and should 72

articulate any major discrepancies between the attached technical documentation and 73

the vendor’s technical solution. 74

75

3.2 Vendors interested in responding to this Request for Solutions must be members 76

of the TReX. 77

78

3.3 The cost of preparing and submitting a response is not considered an allowable 79

direct charge to any Government contract or agreement. 80

81

3.4 This is to advise you that non-Government advisors will assist in the evaluation. 82

The use of non-Government advisors will be strictly controlled. Non-Government 83

advisors will be required to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement for the MBPS Request for 84

Solution. Additionally, they shall also be required to submit documentation to the 85

Agreements Officer indicating its personal stock holdings for a conflict of interest review 86



3

in consultation with the legal advisor prior to being allowed access to source selection 87

information. 88

89

After the non-Government advisors have completed their particular area of evaluation, 90

they will be released from the evaluation process. All non-Government advisors will only 91

have access to the information corresponding to its area(s) of expertise. They will not 92

have access to the Price Volume of the response. The companies identified herein have 93

agreed not to engage in the manufacture or production of hardware/services/R&D that 94

is related to this effort, and to refrain from disclosing proprietary information to 95

unauthorized personnel. 96

97

The following companies will have personnel participating: 98

99

Booz Allen Hamilton 100

8283 Greensboro Drive 101

McLean, VA 22102 102

103

4.0 Solution Paper Responses: 104

105

4.1 Solution Paper responses shall contain separate general, technical and price 106

volumes. No pricing detail shall be provided in any volume other than the Price Volume. 107

Each volume shall include the following 108

109

4.1.1 General Volume 110

Cover Page 111

Nontraditional status 112

Foreign Owned status 113

Sub-vendor List 114

Organizational Conflicts of Interest and Mitigation Plans 115

116

4.1.2 Technical Volume 117

Cover Page 118

Solution Paper 119

Data Rights and Assertions 120

Anticipated Delivery Schedule 121

122

4.1.3 Price Volume 123

Cover Page 124

Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) and Pricing Breakdown 125

126

4.2 General Volume (unlimited page count) 127

128



4

4.2.1 The cover page shall include the vendor’s name, Commercial and Government 129

Entity (CAGE) Code (if available), address, primary point of contact, and status of U.S. 130

ownership. 131

132

4.2.2 Nontraditional Status. Within the cover page the vendor shall provide its 133

nontraditional (see paragraph 5.2.3 for definition) business status or your ability to meet 134

the eligibility requirements of 10 U.S.C. §2371b on the cover page of your response. 135

Within your response, please check the following applicable box – with appropriate 136

justification if needed. 137

138

There is at least one nontraditional defense contractor or nonprofit research 139

institution participating to a significant extent in the project. 140

141

All significant participants in the transaction other than the Federal Government 142

are small businesses or nontraditional defense contractors. 143

144

At least one third of the total cost of the project is to be provided by sources 145

other than the Federal Government. 146

147

4.2.3 Definition. Nontraditional – an entity that is not currently performing and has not 148

performed, for at least the one-year period preceding the solicitation of sources by the 149

Department of Defense (DoD) for the procurement or transaction, any contract or 150

subcontract for the DoD that is subject to full coverage under the cost accounting 151

standards prescribed pursuant to 41 U.S.C §1502 and the regulations implementing 152

such section. 153

154

4.2.4 Foreign Owned, Controlled or Influenced. In accordance with RFS Attachment 155

3, Security Process for Vetting Contractors, the cover page must include certification 156

that the vendor (and subcontractor(s)) are not Foreign Owned or under USA Foreign 157

Owned, Controlled or Influenced (FOCI) status (and are not in merger or purchasing 158

discussions for a Foreign company or USA FOCI Company). Should a prospective 159

vendor be unable to so certify, they will be ineligible for award unless the mitigating 160

circumstances in Attachment 3 are met. In such a case, these mitigating circumstances 161

shall be detailed in an appendix to the General Volume. 162

163

4.2.5 Sub-vendors. Provide a list of all sub-vendors involved and their role within the 164

performance of your submission as an appendix to your technical submission. The list 165

shall include the same information as requested for 5.2.4, excluding nontraditional 166

business status. 167

168

4.2.6 Organizational Conflicts of Interest and Mitigation Plans. Vendors will submit 169

an Organizational Conflict of Interest Mitigation Plan via an Appendix to its General 170

Volume. 171

172



5

4.2.6.1 If you performed work on any of the following contracts you should review the 173

Organizational Conflicts of Interest clauses of those contract(s) for compliancy. 174

175

N65726-18-F-3000 (Engineering, Scientific and Technical Services) 176

N00178-04-D-4024-EH04 (Program Support Services) 177

N00178-04-D-4090-L60533 (Technical Manual Management Program (TMMP) 178

Information Technology Systems) 179

180

4.2.6.2 The Mitigation Plan should reference the regulations implemented in the 181

Federal Acquisition Regulation Subpart 9.5, which implements section 8141 of the 1989 182

Department of Defense Appropriation Act, Pub. L. 100-463, 102 Stat. 2270-47 (1988). 183

184

4.3 Technical Volume 185

186



ownership. The cover page does not count towards page count. 189

190

4.3.2 Solution Paper. Vendors shall provide a Solution Paper for each solution it 191

chooses to propose. Solution Papers shall not exceed the page count in accordance 192

with Table 1 below, utilizing standard Times New Roman 12-point font. Charts or figures 193

directly relevant to the solution may be referenced and submitted as appendices and 194

are not bound by the Times New Roman 12-point font requirement. Any pages 195

submitted outside of this page length requirement, outside of standard charts and 196

figures, will not be reviewed. 197

198

Table 1: Solution Paper Page Count Requirements 199

200 Number of Solutions Total Number of Pages One Solution 20 pages Two Solutions 30 pages Three Solutions 40 pages

201

202

4.3.3 Vendors may submit a Solution Paper for one or more solutions. NPDM, NCRM, 203

and NDART are each considered a solution. Vendor responses must include systems 204

integration plans that demonstrate how multiple solutions can be integrated into the 205

enterprise MBPS system(s). 206

207

4.3.4 MBPS system(s) must consider afloat and ashore Navy users. Naval operational 208

forces consist of surface ships, submarines, carriers, air wings and detached 209

squadrons, expeditionary forces, and cyber forces operating afloat and ashore. They 210

require the ability to generate and sustain material readiness in all environments, to 211

include while in limited or no communications with the Navy enterprise, where material 212



6

readiness is defined as enough equipment operating with enough capability to meet 213

standards across various pre-defined warfare mission areas. 214

215

4.3.5 The MBPS system(s) will be the principal provider of authoritative product data 216

and highly scalable data analytics platform that will be integrated with the Navy 217

Operational Business Logistics Enterprise (NOBLE) family of systems and Navy 218

Maritime Maintenance Enterprise Solution (NMMES) system. 219

220

4.3.6 All prototypes will be developed around Human Centered design (HCD) 221

approaches, which shall be integrated with system requirements. 222

223

4.3.7 The Navy seeks to focus on mission outcomes and the enabling services and 224

data, while allowing technology to be continuously inserted and modernized without 225

disruption to the user community. Figure 1 represents Navy logistics mission outcomes 226

for material and shore readiness and service experience. 227

228

229 Figure 1: Mission Outcomes 230

231

4.3.8 The MBPS system(s) shall be cloud-based and leverage Navy cloud 232

brokers/SecDevOps instances and provide data integration of multiple legacy platforms 233

into a holistic level data environment, accessible via Application Program Interfaces 234

(API) and hosted in a government certified cloud at Impact Level (IL) 4/6. 235



7

236

4.3.9 The cloud environment combined with a common MBPS enterprise system(s) 237

shall provide a highly available and reliable solution. The environment shall be capable 238

of hosting and integrating applications, data, systems and services planned to be 239

transitioned to modern commercial technologies and accomplish this migration of 240

government-owned applications with no degradation of services. Figure 2 represents 241

Navy logistics Enterprise Technical Reference Framework (ETRF). 242

243

244 Figure 2: Navy Logistics ETRF 245

246

4.3.10 The vendor’s proposed solution(s) should clearly describe its approach to 247

delivering enduring capabilities as described within this RFS and the corresponding 248

Technical Supplement. 249

4.3.11 Created software documentation will be marked with Distribution Statement D 250

(Distribution authorized to the Department of Defense and U.S. DoD contractors only 251

due to Critical Technology effective 4 January 2018). Commercial software native to any 252

COTS items used require no distribution statement or export controls. 253

254

4.3.12 Vendor solution papers should clearly describe the offered rights in technical 255

data and computer software that will be delivered with your solutions. 256

257

4.3.12(a) The offered rights should be displayed in a manner that allows for ease 258

of discussion in determining trade-offs and potential options for long-term 259

sustainability of the deliverables of this effort. 260

261



8

4.3.12(b) If limited or restricted rights are being asserted within your response, 262

detail the specific rationale for this assertion. 263

264

4.3.12(c) Any items previously developed with federal funding should clearly 265

identify all components and the Government entity the items were delivered to. 266

267

4.3.12(d) If commercial software is proposed to be used within the prototype 268

solution, all applicable software licenses must be included with the response. 269

Note that any software license term or condition inconsistent with federal law will 270

be negotiated out of the license. 271

272

4.3.12(e) If the vendor proposes to deliver commercial technical data, computer 273

software, or computer software documentation with licenses providing rights 274

more restrictive than government purpose rights as described in 4.3.13 below, 275

the solution must describe how the design of the proposed MBPS solution 276

provides for modularity sufficient to enable substitution of components of the 277

system at a module or component level. This approach will allow for substitution 278

of such modules or components, and will allow the Government to consider 279

proposals with technical merit, but also include “black box” modules or 280

components with less than government purpose rights. 281

282

4.3.12(f) The United States Navy has release authority on any publications 283

related to this prototype project. 284

285

4.3.13 Government Desired Rights in Technical Data and Computer Software 286

287

4.3.13.1 The following definitions apply to this section. 288

289

4.3.13.1(a) Government purpose rights means the right to use, modify, reproduce, 290

release, perform, display, or disclose technical data within the Government without 291

restriction; and release or disclose technical data outside the Government and 292

authorize persons to whom release or disclosure has been made to use, modify, 293

reproduce, release, perform, display, or disclose technical data for United States 294

government purposes. The five-year period, or such other period as may be 295

negotiated, would commence upon execution of the Other Transaction Agreement 296

that required development of the items, components, or processes or creation of the 297

data. The Vendor will have the exclusive right, including the right to license others, to 298

use technical data in which the Government has obtained government purpose 299

rights under this agreement for any commercial purpose during this five-year period. 300

Upon expiration of the five-year or other negotiated period, the Government would 301

receive unlimited rights in the technical data and computer software. 302

303

4.3.13.1(b). Unlimited rights means rights to use, modify, reproduce, perform, 304

display, release, or disclose technical data in whole or in part, in any manner, and for 305

any purpose whatsoever, and to have or authorize others to do so. 306



9

307

4.3.13.1(c). Limited rights means the rights to use, modify, reproduce, release, 308

perform, display, or disclose technical data, in whole or in part, within the 309

Government. The Government may not, without the written permission of the party 310

asserting limited rights, release or disclose the technical data outside the 311

Government, use the technical data for manufacture, or authorize the technical data 312

to be used by another party, except that the Government may reproduce, release, or 313

disclose such data or authorize the use or reproduction of the data by persons 314

outside the Government if— 315

(i) The reproduction, release, disclosure, or use is— 316

(A) Necessary for emergency repair and overhaul; or 317

(B) A release or disclosure to— 318

(1) A covered Government support contractor in performance of its 319

covered Government support contract for use, modification, reproduction, 320

performance, display, or release or disclosure to a person authorized to 321

receive limited rights technical data; or 322

(2) A foreign government, of technical data other than detailed 323

manufacturing or process data, when use of such data by the foreign 324

government is in the interest of the Government and is required for 325

evaluation or informational purposes; 326

(ii) The recipient of the technical data is subject to a prohibition on the further 327

reproduction, release, disclosure, or use of the technical data; and 328

(iii) The contractor or subcontractor asserting the restriction is notified of such 329

reproduction, release, disclosure, or use. 330

331

4.3.13.1(d). Restricted rights applies only to noncommercial computer software and 332

has the meaning included in Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement 333

252.227-7014(a)(15). 334

335

4.3.13.2 All rights in Technical Data and Computer Software are negotiable based on 336

the vendor’s proposed solution. The Government seeks government purpose rights to all 337

development and deliverables of technical data and computer software funded under the 338

OT agreement. 339

340

4.3.14 Anticipated Delivery Schedule: Vendors shall include its anticipated 341

delivery milestone schedule to reflect its individual solution. The Government’s desire is 342

to complete all prototypes for the governments full set of requirements, to include legacy 343

system rationalization, within 24 months after prototype award. The government will 344

consider incentivizing Vendor solutions that deliver ahead of the government proposed 345

timeline. 346

347

348



10

4.4 Price Volume 349

350



ownership. 353

354

4.4.2 Vendors shall submit a fixed amount price for its solution, further divided into 355

severable milestones. Pricing submission shall be submitted in a separate document 356

with no pricing detail provided in the solution papers. The price volume has no page 357

number limitation. Attachment 2, SOW, is provided to aid vendors in developing price 358

responses and as a starting point for agreement negotiations with Vendors that are 359

selected to prototype. 360

361

4.4.3 Vendors shall clearly identify the anticipated sustainment costs and risks for its 362

solution. In the Technical Volume, Vendors should identify technical approaches and 363

rationale within its proposed solution that will result in sustainment cost savings for the 364

government. Sustainment cost savings from the technical approaches shall be 365

quantified and provided. 366

367

4.4.4 Vendors shall provide Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) pricing for potential 368

follow-on production activities. 369

370

5.0 RFS Response Instructions: 371 372

5.1 The Government intends to award one Other Transaction Agreement as a result 373

of this Request for Solution; however, more than one award may be made if determined 374

to be in the Government’s best interest. 375

376

5.2 All questions related to this RFS should be submitted in writing to 377

[email protected], with “NAVSEA MBPS” used in the subject line. Submitted 378

questions should also clearly identify if they are related to NPDM, NCRM, and NDART 379

or the overarching MBPS requirement. 380

381

5.3 Questions must be submitted no later than 12:00 PM EDT 29 March 2019. 382

Questions received after the deadline may not be answered. Questions shall not include 383

proprietary data. 384

385

5.4 The Government reserves the right to post submitted questions and answers, as 386

necessary (and appropriate) to facilitate vendor Solution Paper responses. Submitted 387

questions will be posted without identifying company names. 388

389

5.5 Responses shall be submitted no later than 12:00 PM EDT on 19 April 2019. 390

Your response shall be submitted electronically to [email protected], with “NAVSEA 391

MBPS” used in the subject line. Any submissions received after the deadline may be 392

rejected as late and not considered. 393



11

394

6.0 Selection Process 395

396

6.1 Solution Papers will be evaluated with consideration given to the vendor’s ability 397

to provide a clear description of the proposed solution, technical merit of the response 398

and total project risk. The proposed project price, and sustainment costs, schedule, and 399

intellectual property rights assertions will be considered as aspects of the entire 400

response when weighing risk and reward. The approach should also clearly identify the 401

sustainment strategy and address software updates. Attachment 2, SOW, is provided 402

to guide vendors in developing its Solution Paper responses. The SOW will be used as 403

a starting point for negotiating agreements with vendors that are selected to prototype. 404

405

6.2 The Government will evaluate the degree to which the submission provides a 406

thorough, flexible, and sound approach in response to the ability to fulfill the 407

requirements in Attachment 1, MBPS Technical Supplement, 17 January 2019. 408

409

6.2.1 Phase I – The Government will evaluate the vendors’ Solution Papers outlining 410

its unique solution(s) and approach(es) to meeting the appropriate requirement set. 411

Estimated length of Phase I is 7-10 days. The pool of vendors will be down-selected to 412

a smaller group that will participate in Phase II of the evaluation. 413

414

6.2.2 Phase II – Remaining vendors will conduct in-person Solution Demonstrations. 415

Prior to the solution demonstration, the government intends to provide vendors a list of 416

questions generated from the evaluation of the Phase I solution papers. The questions 417

will assist vendors in demonstrating its solutions. 418

419

6.2.3 If the Vendor does not have a solution to demonstrate, the vendor shall brief its 420

strategy for executing the prototype(s). 421

422

6.2.4 Estimated dates to conduct Solution Demonstrations are 6-17 May 2019. These 423

dates are subject to change based on the number of vendors selected to provide 424

Solution Demonstrations. Location of the vendor in-person solution demonstrations will 425

be provided with an Amendment following the Q&A period. 426

427

6.2.5 The Solution Paper and the Solution Demonstration will be evaluated based 428

upon the following criteria. Criteria 2-4 will be evaluated based on the vendors’ solution 429

(NPDM, NDART, NCRM). If Solution Paper only addresses one solution such as 430

NCRM, criteria 3 and 4 will not be applicable. 431

432

Evaluation Criteria Number Criteria Description 1 Cloud Technical and Computing Performance 2 Navy Common Readiness Model (NCRM) Technical 3 Navy Product Data Management (NPDM) Technical 4 Navy Data Acquisition Requirements Tools (NDART)

Technical



12

5 Integration of Technical Solution 6 Rationalization of Legacy IT Programs 7 Data Management 8 System Engineering Approach 9 Product Support Cost/Affordability

433

Criteria 1: Cloud Technical and Computing Performance will be assessed based upon the following:

1. Readily containerize and edge deploy application to seamlessly extend MBPS capabilities across shipyards, ships and submarines, including detached operations.

2. Leverages functional domain driven design and a micro services architecture approach to establish a shared services operating model and position the platform to create innovative cross-domain products and services.

3. Address enterprise edge-to-cloud information pipe constraints by prioritizing data interchange between Enterprise Cloud and Edge based on network bandwidth and critical nature of business capability serviced.

4. Ensure that cloud and edge solutions remain consistent and complement each other’s capabilities by communicating information and syncing data only via APIs and enabling consistent technology stacks.

5. Support serverless posture at the edge, minimizing memory and processing foot print for submarines, ships and expeditionary units

6. Support the application of Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms, optimized in the Cloud, on limited data sets available for deployed (edge) solutions.

7. Enable an integrated enterprise data platform that scales to accommodate thousands of data sources and millions of data point while enabling real time decision making in a highly immersive customer experience leveraging Mobility and AI.

8. Leverage native cloud capabilities to support automated distribution of product and technical data models based on triggers and meta data from MBPS capabilities, specifically configuration management

9. Support a scalable, enterprise CAD and modeling and simulation capability that minimizes latency from hours to seconds

434

Criteria 2: Navy Common Readiness Model (NCRM) Technical will be based upon the following:

1. Support seamless, end-to-end information flow and bi-directional connectivity across each analytical technique (Failure Analysis, Reliability and Maintainability Engineering, Reliability Centered Maintenance, Maintenance Task Analysis, Level of Repair Analysis, Readiness at Cost Modeling and Simulation, etc.) within Supportability Analysis



13

2. Enable the Navy to treat Readiness at Cost designs, models and simulations as configuration items that are configuration management across the weapon system lifecycle

3. Enable the Navy to rapidly conduct design tradeoffs/what ifs scenarios across the lifecycle for complex weapon and support system designs to meet the Navy’s materiel readiness and total ownership cost requirements

4. Support rapid aggregation and disaggregation of system optimization models to develop complex system, ship, strike / task group and fleet models that produce the design, resource, and cost requirements needed to support different readiness levels across various mission scenarios.

5. Integrate modeling and simulation and enterprise cloud / edge advanced data analytics capabilities to enhance the effectiveness of decision support across the Navy.

6. Enable an enterprise, edge deployable approach to designing, deploying and operating Predictive Maintenance and Prognostic and Health Management solutions to support mission readiness reporting and decision support across the Navy.

7. Include a closed-loop Data Reporting and Root Cause Analysis System (DRACAS) to continuously monitor performance against required/predicted mission and design outcomes, conduct root cause analysis, and improve performance, agility, responsiveness, and scale of supply chain, maintenance and support operations.

435

Criteria 3: Navy Product Data Model (NPDM) Technical will be based upon the following:

1. Enable the Navy to develop, receive, sustain, publish and distribute serialized product data models with full bi-directional traceability, associativity and effectivity

2. Anchor “all” product model data to NPDM’s change proposal/notification capability to enable the Navy to affordably manage product data model configuration across the lifecycle?

3. Provide collaborative model-based program and project management business capabilities to enhance a program's ability to meet its business, schedule, quality, risk and technical requirements; associate objects to the program’s product structure; and provide configuration management as part of the system’s baseline?

4. Provide an enterprise collaborative knowledge management capability within NPDM to provide access and visibility to required program information and traceable environment digital communications across the Navy to support commonality and high velocity learning

5. Provide the capability to develop and manage enterprise level workflows and provide business intelligence reporting to track workflow and business process status

6. Support seamless, end-to-end information flow between all NPDM and NCRM capabilities



14

436

Criteria 4: Navy Data Acquisition Requirements Tool (NDART) Technical will be based upon the following:

1. Enforce common non-proprietary data standards, requirements, and acquisition approaches across all Navy weapon system acquisition contracts

2. Provide simplified, prompted solution that enables users to develop Statements of Work (SOWs), Contract Data Requirements Lists (CDRLs), Quality Assurance Plan (QAP) and Data Item Descriptions (DIDs) to acquire product data models

3. Correlate answers from the prompted questions into the end-products (e.g., SOW, CDRL, DIDs) for the acquisition contract based on non-proprietary data standards that meet requirements following acquisition approaches

4. Employ established business rules for decision points within standards (e.g., business rule decision points) and content requirements (e.g., information sets) into the acquisition contract

5. Provide a collaborative knowledge management environment with access and visibility to for a repository of the previously developed acquisition contracts

6. Generate usage reports (e.g., Access Logs, Functionality used, CDRLs generated, DIDs used, times a specification/standard was used for the Digital Data Delivery requirements, etc)

7. Cover the acquisition of COTS Product Data 8. Provide the capability to auto-generate an acquisition workflow to include a

data requirements list for tracking the anticipated data products to be received 9. Provide for the specification of the acquisition of data types needed for the

NCRM and NPDM components such as (not all inclusive): installation, operation, maintenance, overhaul, failure analysis, reliability, parts management, and other logistics data, etc.

10. Enable seamless integration of product data models from Original Equipment Manufacturers PLM systems into the Navy's MBPS system

437

Criteria 5: Integration of Technical Solution(s) will be based upon the following: 1. Define, execute, and test integration requirements internally across MBPS

capabilities (NCRM, NPDM, NDART) 2. Define, execute, and test integration requirements externally to the ETRF and

other LogIT applications such as NOBLE, NMMES-TR, etc. 3. Enable use of multi-computing platforms (e.g. laptops, Smart Phone, tablets,

additive manufacturing printers, mobile printers etc.) (interdependencies between NOSS, NAMS, NOME, and NOBLE at large).

4. Address Technical Integration Risks as it relates to technology maturity, implementation

438

Criteria 6: Rationalization of Legacy IT Programs will be based upon the following:



15

1. System Assessments and Technical Business Case Analysis (BCAs) to influence system rationalization strategy

2. Data Rationalization Strategies to quickly transition workforce to MBPS capabilities

3. System Rationalization and Implementation plan identifying high-level timeline and proposed shutdown of legacy applications

4. Reduction of sustainment costs through the use of Out of the Box (OOTB) COTS solutions versus customization

5. Minimize the use of proprietary solutions

439

Criteria 7: Data Management will be based upon the following: 1. Self Service Access: Greater use of search, natural language processing, and

self-service tools for data preparation, business intelligence and reporting, and analytics

2. Rapid Insights Discovery: Investments in data discovery capabilities to identify patterns, trends and opportunities previously unknown

3. Hybrid Framework: A strategic selection of hybrid fit-for-purpose technologies accelerating data movement at the speed of the mission

4. Governed Data Lake: Governed and trusted data lake evolves to become the authoritative source of data, including the evolution of data catalogs and metadata

5. Automation, Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning: Evolution of intelligent solutions to data management challenges for data integration, data quality, and master data management

6. Data Standards: Common language and syntax for data to provide a streamlined process from the start to finish of the data lifecycle

7. Data Characteristics: Enablement of Auditable, Visible, Trustworthy and Accessible data to support mission outcomes and enable informed decisions by Navy leadership, program offices and shipboard personnel

440

Criteria 8: System Engineering Approach will be based upon the following: 1. Use of an Agile Scrum Methodology to rapidly deploy capability and

requirements management 2. Implement HCD principles and incorporate user feedback throughout the

software development lifecycle process (SDLC). 3. Clearly define Software Baseline Management and Test and Evaluation

strategies 4. Address Legacy System shutdown through system rationalization strategies

and implementation of MBPS capability 5. Clearly communicate schedule to include risks and dependencies to achieve

an integrated MBPS minimum viable product (MVP) to support all Navy MBPS objectives.

6. Standardize and incorporate user experience findings as a pre-requisite for further prototype improvement and development.



16

7. Use of system model (SySML) throughout the SDLC 441

Criteria 9: Product Support Cost and Affordability will be based upon the following:

1. Provide a lifecycle cost estimate 2. Identifies critical risks to affordability and recommends readily implementable

mitigation strategies 3. Identify opportunities to minimize the manpower requirements to sustain MBPS

services by leveraging advanced Artificial Intelligence capabilities such as Robotic Process Automation (RPA) and Blockchain

4. Address affordable strategy to conduct initial and sustainment training requirements

5. Address system training and instruction (installation guide, system help, tier 1 documentation) developed in S1000D and associated with the product baseline

442

6.2.6 The Government will award this OT prototype project through TReX, to the 443

vendor whose solution is determined to be the most advantageous to the Government, 444

cost, schedule, technical risks and other factors considered. One or more OT 445

agreements are anticipated to be awarded to accomplish the necessary work and select 446

the best response(s) satisfying the criteria stated in Section 7.2.5. 447

448

6.2.7 The Government reserves the right to award to a vendor that does not meet all of 449

the requirements, but provides attributes or partial solutions of value. 450

451

7.0 Additional Information 452

453

7.1 Export controls: research findings and technology developments arising from the 454

resulting project may constitute a significant enhancement to the national defense and 455

to the economic vitality of the United States. As such, in the conduct of all work related 456

to this effort, the recipient will comply strictly with the International Traffic in Arms 457

Regulation (22 C.F.R. §§ 120-130), the National Industrial Security Program Operating 458

Manual (DoD 5220.22-M) and the Department of Commerce Export Regulation (15 459

C.F.R. §§ 730-774). 460

461

7.2 Interaction and/or Disclosure with Foreign Country/Foreign National Personnel. 462

The contractor should comply with foreign disclosure processes IAW Army Regulation 463

380‐10, Foreign Disclosure and Contacts with Foreign Representatives; the Department 464

of the Navy Foreign Disclosure Manual, SECNAV M-5510.34, as of June 2017; 465

Department of Defense Directive (DoDD) 5230.11, Disclosure of Classified Military 466

Information to Foreign Governments and International Organizations; and DoDD 467

5230.20, Visits and Assignments of Foreign Nationals. 468

469



17

7.3 All submissions shall be unclassified. Submissions containing data that is not to 470

be disclosed to the public for any purpose or used by the Government except for 471

evaluation purposes shall include the following sentences on the cover page: 472

473

“This submission includes data that shall not be disclosed outside the 474

Government, except to non-Government personnel for evaluation purposes, and 475

shall not be duplicated, used, or disclosed -- in whole or in part -- for any purpose 476

other than to evaluate this submission. If, however, an agreement is awarded to 477

this Company as a result of -- or in connection with – the submission of this data, 478

the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the 479

extent agreed upon by both parties in the resulting agreement. This restriction 480

does not limit the Government's right to use information contained in this data if it 481

is obtained from another source without restriction. The data subject to this 482

restriction are contained in sheets [insert numbers or other identification of 483

sheets]” 484

485

7.4 Each restricted data sheet should be marked as follows: 486

“Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restriction on 487

the title page of this submission.” 488

489

8.0 Follow-On Production 490

491

Upon a vendor’s successful completion of the prototype, the Government anticipates a 492

follow-on production contract or transaction may be awarded to the vendor without 493

additional competition. Successful completion will be defined in the negotiated 494

Statement of Work (SOW) for this prototype project. Specifically, the negotiated SOW 495

will specify the Minimum Viable Product (MVP) prototype requirements (i.e. minimal 496

core features). Successful completion will occur when the prototype has been validated 497

to meet the MVP requirements and is accepted by the Government. 498

499

Further, the government reserves the right to determine part or all of the prototype 500

project is successfully completed if the vendor shows a particularly favorable or 501

unexpected result justifying the transition to production. 502

503

9.0 Attachments 504

505

Attachment 1, MBPS Technical Supplement dated 17 January 2019 (Draft Appendices 506

are for Reference Only) 507

Attachment 2, SOW (Appendices are for Reference Only) 508

Attachment 3, Security Process for Vetting Contractors 509

request for solutions (rfs) naval sea systems command ......request for solutions (rfs) navsea 06l...

Documents