1. Enclosure 1 - Market Research Questionnaire.docx

Enclosure 1: Market Research Questionnaire

Please submit the following:

1. Company Information Name of Company:

Address:

City, State, Zip:

Point of Contact:

Title:

Email Address:

Phone:

CAGE Code:

2. Identify your company’s socio-economic Small Business size status under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 541330. For more information about Small Business Size Standards for Seaport-e, please refer to your Seaport-e Contract.

__Small Business (with no socio-economic size status) __8(a)

__SDB

__WOSB

__VOSB

__SDVOSB

__HubZone __N/A - Large Business

3. Identify if your company is interested in pursuing this opportunity as a prime and/or subcontractor. If interested in pursuing this opportunity as a subcontractor identify the nature of work anticipated.

4. All parties interested in receiving the draft SOW, COR, DRL, and other contract attachments must submit a written request. Interested parties are required to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement prior to receiving the draft COR. All requests shall be submitted via email to Mr. Steven Noel NAVSEA 02, at steven.w.noel.civ@us.navy.mil and Ms. Olivia Wisont NAVSEA 02, olivia.s.wisont.civ@us.navy.mil.

5. Navy policy does not support the release of controlled files to non-U.S. contractors. Only U.S. companies may propose as prime contractors. If a non-U.S. company decides to team with a U.S. prime contractor then the U.S. prime contractor must comply with the applicable Department of State 22CFR Parts 120-130 and Department of Commerce Export Administration Regulations and submit a request for an export license.

6. Specific feedback requested for RFP scope

1) How does your identified solution align within the FAR Part 10 commerciality order of priority stated in the RFI posting?

2) For the events and timelines presented in SOW Section C.2.1.2 and Attachment J-2 DRL, what is your recommended duration for this effort?

a) Are there any specific recommendations that would improve schedule?

b) Are there any specific recommendations and supporting rationale for the durations of Blocks 5 & 6 of individual Data Items (DI) in Attachment J-2 DRL? (i.e. deliverables for design reviews should be 25 DPT instead of 30)

3) Does the Contractor understand the SOW tasking in Section C.2.2 CLIN 0002 – TASK 3 FUNCTIONAL DESIGN PLANNING?

a) The Contractor is requested to provide a written response detailing their understanding of the impact of H.R. 5009, specifically the changes to the definition of "Basic and Functional Design" in 10 USC 8669c, on the Detail Design & Construction process that could follow the NGLS Concept Refinement contract.

b) Please provide any recommendations to improve the Task 3 scope and any questions if clarification is needed.

c) How does the offeror interpret the related tasking under DI-B0024, DI-B0025, and DI-B0026?

d) NOTE: Completing “basic and functional design” is not in the scope of the Concept Refinement RFP.

4) Attachment J-XX is the NGLS Functional Design DI Matrix is the notional list of Data Items (DI) matrix for the completion of “basic and functional” design. The “level of completion” percentage is an estimate for the amount of detail needed to meet the definition of “basic and functional design” compared to a typical completed deliverable at ship delivery.

a) To what extent does the technical content represented by the DI matrix align with your company’s understanding of basic and functional design?

b) Does the technical content represented by the DI matrix improve the construction cost fidelity, and if so, to what extent?

c) Are there any recommended additions or deletions to achieve the requisite technical maturity supporting estimate cost fidelity? If so, please provide a brief description and rationale for those changes.

d) The provided file J-XX NGLS Functional Design DI Matrix may be used to provide feedback on specific Data Items.

e) What amount of time (in months) would offerors suggest for maturing the design to this level of detail?