Draft_Solicitation_Q&A_Release_1_(Public).xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 16 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- N0002419R2300
About this file
Government responses to industry feedback concerning the draft solicitation.
View the file
Other files
Show all 46
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&A #1-12 (21 Mar 2019)
| # | Date | Source Document | Reference | Excerpt of Content | Question | Government Response |
| 1 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Section L, 2.3.2 Page Count Exclusions, Page #230 | In addition, the following proposal pages are exempt from the page count limitations: |
| • Résumés | Instructions for Résumés do not appear in the Section L Requirements. Will the Government confirm that this listing in Section L is in error and that no Résumés are required to be submitted? | Section L does not require the submission of résumés. The reference to résumés will be removed from the final RFP. | |||||
| 2 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Section L, 2.7 Page Size and Format, Page #232 | Text within tables, diagrams, pictorial charts, or graphic material may use no smaller than 8-point font in Times New Roman or Arial typeface. | Can the Government please confirm that the term Arial typeface, as used here, comprises many styles: Regular, Italic, Medium, Medium Italic, Bold, Bold Italic, Black, Black Italic, Extra Bold, Extra Bold Italic, Light, Light Italic, Narrow, Narrow Italic, Narrow Bold, Narrow Bold Italic, Condensed, Light Condensed, Bold Condensed, and Extra Bold Condensed. | As used in the draft RFP, Arial typeface may include the examples cited. However, the referenced section of the final RFP will use the term "font" in place of "typeface." | |
| 3 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Section L, 2.7.3 Fold-Out Sheets, Page #232-233 | Foldouts for the entire proposal are limited to a total of 25 foldout sheets. Foldout sheets contained in the Price Proposal do not count towards the 25-sheet foldout limit. | Can the Government modify this Paragraph so that the Executive Summary and the IMS submissions (which are unlimited pages) are also not counted in the 25-sheet foldout limit? | Yes, the final RFP will exclude the Executive Summary and the IMS from the foldout page limit. | |
| 4 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Section L, 2.5.1 Binders, 2.7.2 Double-Sided Printing, and 2.7.3 Fold-Out Sheets Page #231, 232-233 | 2.5.1 - Each proposal section shall start on a new page; 2.7.2 - proposal material shall be presented on double-sided pages only; 2.7.3 Each non-blank side of a foldout page will count as two (2) pages for page count purposes. | Can the Government reword the RFP instructions to contain the following guidance: Pages excluded from the page count must contain only material pertinent to the page heading or be blank and marked “Intentionally Left Blank.” | The Government does not intend to count blank pages (whether marked as "intentionally left blank" or otherwise) towards the proposal page limits. | |
| 5 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Section L, 4.1.1.1 Design, 4.1.1.1.7 Intact and Damaged Stability, Page #235, 238 | 4.1.1.1 The Offeror shall provide the associated products in the specified areas to allow the Navy to evaluate how the proposed ship design meets or exceeds the requirements of this solicitation. Narrative discussion for each design area shall be included in the body of the Technical Volume. |
The Offeror shall provide the following associated products in the Design Appendix:
a) Intact and Damaged Static Stability Report with supporting analysis and native files provided in Ship Hull Characteristics Program (SHCP) format sufficient to validate the analysis in accordance with T9070-AF-DPC-010-079-1.
| Can the Government confirm that the supporting analysis requested in the Design Appendix with the Intact and Damaged Static Stability Report can contain "narrative" information to explain the analysis? This also applies in other requests for Design Appendix informaiton, e.g., 4.1.1.8 Auxiliary Systems and Equipment | The Intact and Damaged Stability Report required by Section L 4.1.1.1.7 and the products associated with Section L 4.1.1.1.8 may include supporting analysis in a narrative format to the extent that such embedded narrative is necessary to understand the content of the product. However, narrative descriptions of how the intact and damaged stability and auxiliary systems and equipment of the Offeror's design meet the requirements of the FFG(X) System Specification must still be provided in the body of the Technical Volume. | ||||
| 6 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Draft Attachment J-1 Contract Security Classification Specification DD254 Block 13, Item 11(j), Page #4 | Item 11(j) Continued: CUI Correspondence transmitted internally on the contractor's unclassified networks or information systems, and externally, shall be protected per NIST SP-800-171, Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Non-federal Systems and Organizations | The Terms of Use Agreement for FFG(X) Material states that firms' shall ensure that any information system that processes, stores, or transmits FFG(X) bidder's library set materials complies with the requirements of FAR 52.204-21, Basic Safeguarding of Covered Contractor Information Systems, and DFARS 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting. |
To better align the Draft Attachment J-1 and the Terms of Use Agreement for FFG(X) Material, would the USN update the Draft Attachment J-1 DD254 form to replace the reference to NIST SP-800-171, Protecting Controlled Unclassified Information in Non-federal Systems and Organizations with FAR 52.204-21, Basic Safeguarding of Covered Contractor Information Systems, and DFARS 252.204-7012, Safeguarding Covered Defense Information and Cyber Incident Reporting.
| The Contractor believes that FAR 52.204-21 and DFARS 252.204-7012 are more current requirements than NIST SP-800-171. | DFARS 252.204-7012 already requires implementation of NIST SP-800-171. The DD Form 254 will remain unchanged. | |||||
| 7 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Section C, 2.17.2 Government Furnished Services (GFS), Page #97 | The Contractor shall be responsible for the proper installation, checkout and testing of all equipment and systems and making necessary adjustments or alignments in the performance or any other operation involving such equipment and systems as required by the FFG(X) System Specification. Substitution, elimination, or addition of services in Schedule B may be made in accordance with FAR 52.243-1 Changes – Fixed Price.” | The statement "The Contractor shall be responsible for the proper installation, checkout and testing of all equipment and systems" is in conflict with the previous statement in the test section which says the testing of GFE aligns with J-17. Would the USN please clarify? |
| The intent is for the Contractor to be responsible for installation, checkout, and testing of all equipment and systems, except for the stage tests identified in Attachment J-17. The language in the final RFP will be updated to clarify this requirement. | ||||||
| 8 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Section C, 2.7 Earned Value Management and Cost and Software Data Reporting, Page #60 | Per DFARS 252.234-7004, “Cost and Software Data Reporting System” (CSDRS), the Contractor shall establish, deliver, implement and maintain a CSDRS. Per Cost and Software Data Reporting (CSDR) Plan, Attachment J-16, the Contractor shall prepare and submit Contractor Cost Data Reports (CCDRs) (CDRL C002), the Functional Cost-Hour Report (CDRL C003), Contractor Business Data Report (CDRL C004) and Software Resources Data Reporting (SRDR): Initial Developer Report (CDRL C005) for all contracts and subcontracts over $50 million. SRDRs are only required for software development efforts totaling over $20 million…. The Contractor is responsible for flowing down CSDR requirements contained in the prime contract to all subcontractors who meet the reporting thresholds specified in the DoDI 5000.02, or as required by the Cost Working Integrated Project Team (CWIPT). This includes requiring subcontractors to submit reports electronically directly to the DCARC using the CSDR Submit-Review System. | Will the Government clarify if the $50 million threshold applies to the full contract award expected to the supplier (locking in a value for a 10 ship buy) or will it only apply to US Government contractual awards with options (QTY 1-2 shipset via fiscal year)? | The $50 million threshold applies to the total contract value including all options. |
| 9 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Draft Attachment J-23 Weighting Factors for Labor and Material, Page #1, Paragraph A.4 | The certification requirements in this Generic FFG(X) CID trace to Aviation Bulletin 1N | FFG(X) CD Phase used Bulletin 1M. Is Bulletin 1N available? | Bulletin 1N will be posted to FBO as a Distribution Statement D document. |
| 10 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Section C, 2.0 Item 0100 and Items 0200, 0300, 0400, 0500, 0600, 0700, 0800, 0900, and 1000 (Option): DD&C of FFG(X) Ship, Page #53 | The Contractor shall perform DD&C of each FFG(X) ship per the requirements outlined in the following subparagraphs. Performance under each line item shall not be dependent upon the Government exercising any other line item under this or any other contract. Unless explicitly stated otherwise, the requirements set forth herein must be completed for each line item. | Section C 2.0 states that "Performance under each line item shall not be dependent upon the Government exercising any other line item under this or any other contract". CLINs 200-1000 (ships 2-10) are individually exercisable options, therefore, the Government could potentially "skip" exercising one or more options. |
| Given that the acquisition plan allows for individually exercisable options, what is the Government intent with the potential ability to skip annual ship awards so that Industry can properly identify the risk associated with out year pricing. | The Government's ability to exercise the options for ships 2 through 10 is depedent upon annual authorization and appropriations from Congress. The CLIN structure in this draft RFP allows for maximum flexibility in order for the Government to execute the program in accordance with said Congressional authorization and appropriations. However, the intent of the referenced Section C.2.0 requirement is to make clear that any and all efforts required to build each ship (engineering labor, trade labor, etc.) must be priced in the applicable shipbuilding CLINs, and completion of the scope in the shipbuilding CLINS shall not be dependent upon any other CLINs. | |||
| 11 | 3/21/19 | Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 | Section F, Deliveries, Page #141 | |
| Section L, 4.1.1.2.3 Detail Design Approach, Page #241 | Section F |
CLIN 0100 SHIP #1 Estimated Delivery 72 months after contract award
Section L
4.1.1.2 Design Maturity and Detail Design Approach
The Offeror shall describe the maturity of the proposed design and the engineering approach used to develop the design to its current state. The Offeror shall describe the engineering approach it plans to employ to complete Detail Design in twenty-four (24) months or less. Section F states that the period of performance for the first in class ship is 72 months. Per the table of deliveries, the first in class POP is only 4 months longer than the second in class. In Section L, Section 4.1.1.2.3 "Detail Design Approach", it states that "The Offeror shall describe the engineering approach it plans to employ to complete Detail Design in twenty-four (24) months or less."
1.) Since there is not a separate CLIN for Detail Design and associated 24 month POP, can the Offeror assume that Detail Design is to be bid and executed as part of CLIN 0100 and executed during the 72 month POP?
2.) Can the Offeror assume that the Government intends for Detail Design to be conducted in parallel with Construction, rather than completed prior to the start of Construction? 1) Yes, Detail Design must be bid and executed as part of CLIN 0100. The delivery schedule for CLIN 0100 accounts for a Detail Design period, but the contract does not specify a discrete required delivery date for completion of Detail Design.
2) The Offeror may propose a a Detail Design period that does not reach final completion prior to the start of construction. However, per Section C.2.3.3.3, a Production Readiness Review (PRR) must be completed prior to the start of construction. The FFG(X) Design and Readiness Review Requirements and Criteria, Attachment J-13 establishes successful completion of CDR as an entrance criterion for PRR. Per Section C.2.3.2, a Critical Design Review (CDR) for CLIN 0100 may only be conducted once the Detail Design is sufficiently mature and the readiness of the design can be assessed per Attachment J-13.
12 3/21/19 Draft RFP N00024-19-R-2300 Section L, Paragraph 2.3 Offerors shall structure proposal submittals such that the required content is organized as follows: Will the Government allow a 200 page limit versus 100 pages for the Technical Volume? The Government anticipates that 100 pages will provide adequate space for Offerors to present a complete and sufficiently detailed proposal in response to the RFP requirements.
&12GOVERNMENT RESPONSES TO INDUSTRY FEEDBACK
DRAFT SOLICITATION N00024-19-R-2300
FFG(X) DETAIL DESIGN & CONSTRUCTION
&"Times New Roman,Regular"UNCLASSIFIED
PAGE &P OF &N
File details come from the government source that posted it.