J-S2_-_Offeror_Questions_BATCH_3_06JUN2019.pdf

N00024-19-R-5111 Offeror Questionnaire Template

BATCH 3

Attachment J-S2

Question

Number:

Date

Submitted:

Question

Source: (RFP, attachment #, GFI title, etc.)

Page number and paragraph header from source:

Question: Answer:

5/1/19 RFP

Pg 60;

Section

C.3.3.9

Please confirm that the First Article Units (CLIN 0001,0002) produced IAW with the TDP are excluded from Hardware Qualification Testing (HQT), since C.3.3.9 only requires HQT for units or configuration items not under a Government-established baseline.

HQT requirement removed from the RFP. Please see RFP Amendment 003.

5/1/19 RFP

Pg 65, Section

3.6.3

The Government is requesting the contractor generate and submit ECPs along with obtaining approvals from the Government and attend necessary meetings. Will the Government amend this solicitation that includes the ability for the contractor to bid a labor rate for Cost

Plus Fixed Fee that would cover this requirement.

No, the Government will not be including Cost Plus Fixed Fee. Historically there have been an average of 3-5 ECPs per year.

5/1/19 RFP

Pg 66-67;

Section 3.8

DMSMS requires an order for Engineering Services. Recommend that the Government amend the RFP to include the requirement to price Engineering Services.

Engineering Services will not be included in this solicitation. Please see RFP Amendment 003

Section C paragrap 3.8.

5/1/19 RFP

Pg 68; Section

3.9

Please provide instructions to the contractors on how to bid services for Reliability and

Maintainability Plan. R&M is typically a service type that is dependent upon the design and field use? Recommend that the Government amend this solicitation to specify the contractor to bid a labor rate for Cost Plus Fixed Fee that would cover this requirement.

Cost-plus-fixed fee is not contemplated under this effort. See RFP Amendment 003.

5/1/19 RFP Pg 91; Part I

Factory Acceptance Test Plan/Procedures is not listed as a subsection of Attachment 1.

Please provide FAT Procedure.

The Government does not provide a FAT test plan/procedure, it is incumbent upon the offeror to develop a FAT test plan/procedure.

5/1/19 RFP

Pg 95 & 98;

Table I

RFP provides MTB (EME) THRESHOLD FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY, MTB (EME) SUPPLIES, THRESHOLD / SHIPSET MK 82 MOD 0 Directors (2 ea) - 838 HRS; MK 200 MOD 0 Director

Control (2 ea) 802 HRS” Will the Government provide the reliability data that is associated with this requirement? A contractor is not able to properly price this requirement without the R&M data. In addition, is this considered a design requirement?

The MTB (EME) requirements will not change. The specific failure information is not shareable. This is not considered a design requirement.

5/1/19 Attachments

CDRL Data

Package, A031

DD 1423, CDRL A031, Block 5 is listed throughout the RFP. It references PARA 3.2.8.6, however PARA 3.2.8.6 is not listed in the RFP. Please confirm which PARA is associated with this CDRL.

Please see corrected CDRL Package posted with RFP Amendment 003.

5/1/19 RFP

Pg 60;

Section

C.3.3.7

Please confirm that the First Article Units (CLIN 0001,0002) produced IAW with the TDP are excluded from System Assessment Testing ( C.3.3.7 ) since the Government established baseline has been already verified to meet or exceed minimum system performance standards.

This testing requirement has been removed. Please see the RFP Amendment 003.

5/1/19 RFP

Pg. 92 AEGIS

PRODUCTION

PROGRAM

WARRANTY –

USN

The contractor recommends that a standard one (1) year warranty after unit acceptance be applied for production related failures rather than the specified Aegis program warranty associated with “design and manufacturing” (i.e. the 40 month period).

If the 40-month warranty is required, what reliability and field failure data for the

Government established baseline will be supplied to the contractor so a proposed cost for a

40-month warranty can be accurately priced? Also in support of proposing a 40-month warranty period, the contractor would like to know the average return rate/failure data of specific components and/or MAKE assemblies for both the MK82 Guided Missile Director and

MK200 Guided Missile Director Control

The requirement for a 40 month warranty will not change. Historically, there is an average of

7 failures per ship after CDD.

12 March 19 1 of 2

N00024-19-R-5111 Offeror Questionnaire Template

BATCH 3

Attachment J-S2

Question

Number:

Date

Submitted:

Question

Source: (RFP, attachment #, GFI title, etc.)

Page number and paragraph header from source:

Question: Answer:

5/1/19 RFP

Pg. 95 AEGIS

PRODUCTION

PROGRAM

WARRANTY –

FMS

The contractor recommends that a standard one (1) year warranty after unit acceptance be applied for production related failures rather than the specified Aegis program warranty associated with “design and manufacturing” (i.e. the 40 month period).

If the 40-month warranty is required, what reliability and field failure data for the

Government established baseline will be supplied to the contractor so a proposed cost for a

40-month warranty can be accurately priced? Also in support of proposing a 40-month warranty period, the contractor would like to know the average return rate/failure data of specific components and/or MAKE assemblies for both the MK82 Guided Missile Director and

MK200 Guided Missile Director Control

The requirement for a 40 month warranty will not change. Historically, there is an average of

7 failures per ship after CDD.

5/7/2019

RFP

N0002419R51

Section F, Deliveries or

Performance, (Amendment

1)

Section “F” Deliveries and Performance: States that MK82/MK200 System Units CLINS (1001-

5001 and 1002 – 5002) shall be delivered no later than (18) months from option, DO award or contract modification. "...If more than (3) Units are ordered using same option, DO or

Contact Mod the (4th) system unit shall be delivered no later than (2) weeks from deliver of the (3th) system, the (5th) system shall be delivered no later than (2) weeks from the (4th) system and such delivery schedule shall continue for every system unit order after the 5th unit until delivery of the last system unit ordered under the same option. The contractor shall establish a two-week completion rate for each MK82/MK200 system unit."

At max ordered quantities per the latest option exercise date, base year and year (1) option deliveries appear to overlap at the required (18) months delivery schedule. Is it the USG’s intent for industry to facilitate to meet a surge requirement of up to (5) MK82/MK200

System Units per month for 6 months, if awarded max overlapping system CLINS? Or is it the USG’s intent for industry to maintain a (2) week completion rate for each MK82/MK200 system unit regardless of subsequent option year CLINs?

The USG's intent is to have industry have the production capacity to complete a system unit every two weeks, but with a maximum 18 mos PLT per system unit. The delivery schedule

(CDDs) will be set by the associated Delivery Order(s). However, some Delivery Orders may have CDDs that overlap from undetermined requirements, and, thus, industry must be able to handle the surge during the production cycle.

5/10/2019 Proposal Due date Request for an extension

The proposal due date for RFP N00024-19-R-5111 has been extended from 11 June 2019 to

30 July 2019. In order to maintain ship schedule, this is the latest extension we can provide.

5/10/2019 TDP

The TDP is missing test requirements, please provide the test requirements and procedures for the TDP.

A revised TDP has been issued to all offerors who have submitted a signed TOU agreement.

12 March 19 2 of 2