N00024-16-R-2449_Amendment_0003.docx

N00024-16-R-2449

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following items are applicable to this modification:

REVISED SUMMARY OF CHANGES

The purpose of this amendment to solicitation N00024-16-R-2449 is to respond to questions submitted by potential Offerors.

1. The following questions were submitted by potential Offerors. The Government’s response follows the question. Questions and Answers 001 through 002 were provided in previous amendments. Questions and Answers 003 to 007 are provided in this Amendment 0003.

Question 003: Does the Government intend to provide any further Government Furnished Information (GFI) to assist the Contractor in deriving baseline reliability, maintainability, and supportability issues? For example, legacy LCU 1610 class reliability and/or sustainment data.

Answer 003: No, the Government does not intend to provide any further GFI for the purposes of proposal evaluation. Offerors should be able to respond to this solicitation without additional GFI.

Question 004: The Indicative Design Scantlings drawings do not appear to clearly specify the bottom and side shell plate thicknesses. Can the Government provide these missing scantling details to support the Design Studies and Analyses?

Answer 004: Updated drawings may be provided for contract performance. Offerors should be able to respond to the solicitation with the drawings provided.

Question 005: The Indicative Design does not appear to represent a complete Preliminary Design. The design package does not include all drawings and calculations typically associated with a Preliminary Design. Is it the Government’s intention for industry to independently develop these drawings and calculations? Can the Government indicate which drawings, calculations, and other design documents it plans to provide to industry with Detail Design and Construction RFP?

Answer 005: Developing drawings and calculations associated with a Preliminary Design is not within the scope of this solicitation. The Government will not address what may or may not be provided in potential future soliciations.

Question 006: Will the Navy consider an Offeror eligible for award if the prime contractor does not possess a shipbuilding facility, but is teamed with a shipbuilder that is capable of producing the LCU-1700?

Answer 006: The solicitation does not state that the prime contractor for this solicitation must be a shipbuilder. “Offeror” is defined to mean all entities (prime contractor, subcontractor, team, joint venture, consultant, etc.) who would be performing together under any resulting contract.

Question 007: Will the Government consider the construction of high-volume, military “steel-hulled” vehicles as relevant past performance?

Answer 007: As stated in M.5.2.1, “It is incumbent upon the Offeror to explain the relevance of the data provided.” In accordance with Table M-2, page 52 of the solicitation, Government evaluators have several choices in determining the relevance of an Offeror’s past performance.

2. No changes or revisions to solicitation N00024-16-R-2449 result from this amendment.

3. The receipt date for proposals is not extended.

image1.wmf