Enclosure 1 Market Research Questionnaire - December 2025.docx

Enclosure 1: Market Research Questionnaire Please submit responses to the following Questions. The Government does not anticipate providing any formal responses to this market research or the comments/questions provided but will utilize this information to improve planning and acquisition efforts.

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 Department of State 22CFR Parts 120-130 and Department of Commerce Export Administration Regulations and submit a request for an export license.

1. Provide the following Company Information Name of Company:

Address:

City, State, Zip:

Point of Contact:

Title:

Email Address:

Phone:

CAGE Code:

2. Small Business Identification 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, please refer to the following link: https://www.sba.gov/document/support--table-size-standards __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. Provide feedback on the Government Acquisition Approach

a. Indicate support for or disinterest in the above approach and identify any recommended contracting adjustments or alternatives that would better enable delivery of these ships while meeting the objective of greater fidelity in cost estimates supporting DD&C proposals from industry.

b. The Government is contemplating a cost-reimbursement type contract for one or more of the Phases. Incentives are also contemplated to the extent they will generate improved programmatic results. Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Board (CASB) rules and regulations (48 CFR Chapter 99) would apply to the resulting contract(s).

i. Are particular contract types preferred at different stages?

ii. Is there interest for specific incentives to be included in the contract? If so, please describe.

iii. Does your company have a CAS Disclosure Statement (DS) that has been determined adequate by the cognizant Federal agency?

c. Identify risk areas and recommended mitigation activities NAVSEA should consider in its acquisition planning. From the shipyard perspective, does this change in approach, to mature designs to improve fidelity of cost estimates, materially reduce cost, schedule, and/or performance, risk?

d. What are the benefits or drawbacks to providing funding for two vessels at award versus a single ship with a follow-on option for a second vessel?

e. What would the anticipated cost (ROM) be of the initial phase(s) maturing the design to the definition of “basic and functional” design in Section 8669c of title 10, United States Code (to be updated in FY25 NDAA, see final signed law for final text)?

i. Basic and functional design - The term "basic and functional design", when used with respect to a vessel, means design through computer aided models, and when used with respect to manned surface and undersea combatants, means design through the completion of three-dimensional computer aided modeling, that-

a. Supports the major hull structure of the vessel

b. Sets the hydrodynamics of the vessel; and

c. Positions and routes all major distributive systems of the ship, including electricity, water, and other utilities

ii. Enclosure 2: T-ARC(X) Functional Design DI Matrix is a proposed Data Items (DI) matrix for the deliverables of Phase I.

1. Does the technical content represented by the DI matrix align with your company’s understanding of basic and functional design, and if so, to what extent?

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

3. 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.

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

iii. Are the respondents able to assign a confidence rating (e.g. a percentage relative to alternate level(s) of design maturity) for developing cost estimates that leverage the design maturity at completion of the technical content required by the DI matrix? If so, what is that rating?

f. What, if any, difficulties would there be in securing VFI to support the levels of design identified in Phase I?

i. Are there any recommendations on how to structure the contract to mitigate challenges in obtaining VFI in Phase I?

ii. What would the estimated costs be of securing the volume/detail of VFI required for Phase I efforts prior to award of a construction contract?

iii. What is the feasibility of contingent purchasing agreements? Would this type of arrangement facilitate VFI acquisition?

g. What would be the benefits and drawbacks for your company if the Government developed and provided a Technical Data Package (TDP) to the DD&C shipyard instead of conducting an initial design phase(s)? Please indicate if there is a preference to a TDP or not,

5. What is your company’s status of achieving Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) and to what level is that certification?

6. Are respondents interested in supporting acquisition strategy engagements with the Government? The Government is interested in virtual and/or in-person engagements with capable shipyards and their design agents and would support engagements prior to RFI submission deadline.