N00024-17-R-4312_LCS_Execution_Planning_Industry_Day_Q_and_A.pdf

LCS Execution Planning (N00024-17-R-4312) Industry Day Bidders’ Questions

Q1 What is the relationship among the existing family of planning and sustainment/execution contracts – i.e. this execution planning contract, the current SEC West, SEC East, LCS Planning Yard

Services contract, SUBMEPP, and the RMC Maintenance Third Party Planner contracts/organizations?

a. To what extent do the scopes overlap?

b. With any overlap in scope, is there any intended phasing between the contracts?

A1 The LCS Fleet Introduction and Sustainment Program Office (PMS 505) has a family of support contracts. The Planning Yard contract provides class configuration management support, while planning for modernization efforts for program alterations. The Execution Planning (EP) contract will utilize drawings and records maintained by the Planning Yard to develop specific planning packages to support future availabilities. The future Sustainment Execution Contract on the West Coast will execute repairs including but not limited to CNO Availabilities, Emergent Availabilities, Continuous Maintenance

Availabilities, and Windows of Opportunity.

The existing Third Party Planner contract for surface class ships does not include LCS Class Ships.

SEC East supports specific hulls homeported in Mayport, FL, CONUS and OCONUS. Southeast

Regional Maintenance Center (SERMC) will perform the functions for those hulls utilizing indigenous planning, only utilizing this contract for surge capabilities if necessary.

SUBMEPP does support PMS 505 as it pertains to Force Revisions (FR), but is not involved in EP.

The Government does not intend to execute duplicative scope, as all contracts will be phased accordingly, eliminating the possibility for executing tasks on multiple contracts simultaneously.

Q2 To what extent do the Government entities (LCSRON, SURFMEP, RMCs, etc.) function as independent planners?

A2 SERMC is the only Government entity that currently possesses organic planning capabilities.

Those efforts are independent from this contemplated contract and future sustainment efforts on the West

Coast.

Q3 How do various Government entities (ordering activities) interact with one another on the same contracts?

A3 Although Ordering Activities may be listed on multiple sustainment contracts, executed delivery orders will be limited to the scope of work within each designated contract (i.e. planning vs. sustainment execution).

Q4 Will the DOs be of relative consistent size (i.e. potential impact to staffing)? What will be the relative variability and timing of the workload?

A4 The size of executed DOs will be based on the ships’ availability schedules and the phase in its lifecycle. Planning to support CNO Availabilities begin at A-540, while CMAVs begin at A-120. The periodicity of those availabilities is 17 weeks every 32 months for CNO Availabilities and 2 weeks every

4 months for CMAVs. The Government intends to issue DOs of a relatively constant workload, although

DOs with CNO availabilities may increase the size when required.

Q5 Will subcontractor labor be included in material or labor (as executable hours)?

A5 Subcontractor hours will be included in the total Level-of-Effort (LOE), but costs can be incurred and invoiced in accordance with Offerors’ Cost Accounting Disclosure Statements.

Q6 Will the EP contract provide any Mission Package planning?

A6 No.

Q7 Will the SEC EP contractor deliver PMAV planning packages?

A7 No.

Q8 What is the anticipated fee structure?

A8 The Government intends to solicit a Cost-Plus-Fixed- Fee and Incentive Fee arrangement for

LOE line items, and Cost Only CLINs for Material, Travel, and ODC elements. The solicitation will govern the terms of the final structure.

Q9 Will a draft RFP be released prior to final? If so, will it include Sections L&M?

A9 If time permits within the procurement schedule, the Government will post a comprehensive draft solicitation prior to release.

Q10 Will this be a small business opportunity or any other small business opportunities for LCS planning? All currently third party planning opportunities are unrestricted.

A10 The Government has not made that determination at this time.

Q11 Will the technical requirements/plans be made available to all offerors so that it may be adequately addressed in the RFP?

A11 Yes, all necessary references and attachments required to adequately address solicitation requirements will be provided to all Offerors.

Q12 Is the intent of the SAIDIQ structure to assign detailed sub/prime guidance or assume risk (in a specific percent of work share)?

A12 No, the intent is to allow individual Ordering Activities the ability to execute DOs for specific planning packages to support future availabilities.

Q13 As mission package upgrades and modernization are released after award, what is the PMS 505 strategy to ensure the awardee has the details, data, etc. to ensure the systems are properly secured into the lifecycle sustainment of all LCS platforms?

A13 This contemplated contract will only provide for the LCS Seaframe only.

Q14 How will both the contract (structure) and the program office adjust for growth over the life of the contract? Further, as the platforms are being released, there will also be introductions of new modules;

does the contract allow growth in scope after the standards have already been received?

A14 This effort will only support the LCS Seaframe. Therefore, the LOE will reflect the total projected effort to be executed over the five-year period of performance and allow the potential for growth. The use of a SAIDIQ contract allows individual Ordering Activities the independence to determine requirements based on the ships’ schedules and the phase in its lifecycle.

Q15 How will the contract address the risk of design flaws/issues and the fluid nature of growth in

LCS?

A15 The contract will provide a total level-of-effort to support planning efforts; however, issued DO will have the flexibility to address the fluid nature of growth.

Q16 Will the RFP provide clear points of risk related to fixed cost (with flexibility for growth) and past performance?

A16 The Government intends to issue a Cost-Plus Fixed-Fee and Incentive Fee arrangement. The use of delivery orders will allow the flexibility to conform to growth and fluid requirements.

Q17 Does LCSRON have a vision of how they would like to have awareness of the overall program, meaning do they have a program management tool or oversight over LCS as a whole?

A17 LCSRON and SWRMC have an established relationship with LCS. They have the necessary tools to provide oversight for the LCS Class Ships homeported in San Diego while CONUS and

OCONUS.