N00024-20-R-5602 Questions-Comments 7.16.2020.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 16 KB Posted Jul 16, 2020

Attached to: Ship Self Defense System (SSDS) Technical Insertion 2016 (TI-16) Hardware Production and Engineering Services
Solicitation number: N00024-20-R-5602
Issued by: Department of the Navy Naval Sea Systems Command

About this file

Written by GovTribe AI · Dec 28, 2023

This document is a template containing questions and comments received in response to a draft request for proposal for Ship Self Defense System Technical Insertion 2016 hardware production and engineering services. The Naval Sea Systems Command intends to issue a competitive solicitation by the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2020 for hardware production, assembly, integration, test, and shipment of SSDS system hardware, as well as engineering services such as problem resolution, diminishing manufacturing sources management, repairs, engineering changes, and production reporting from fiscal years 2021 through 2026. Comments received recommend clarifying requirements, evaluation factors, contract line items, and delivery schedules in areas such as engineering support, production capability demonstration, transition planning, and program management reviews. Questions also request clarification on technical data package availability and proposal submission methods.

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
Attachment 2 - NSERC Instructions.pdf	PDF	Sep 16, 2020
Attachment 1 - Unclassified Terms of Use Agreement.docx	DOCX document	Sep 16, 2020
Attachment 1 - N00024-20-R-5602 SSDS TI-16 HW Draft Sections B-C-F.docx	DOCX document	Jun 16, 2020
Attachment 4 - NSERC Instructions.pdf	PDF	Jun 16, 2020
Attachment 2 - DD 254 for N00024-20-R-5602.pdf	PDF	Jun 16, 2020
Attachment 3 - N00024-20-R-5602 Question-Comment Template.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jun 16, 2020

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Template

Item No.	Response Date	Source Document	Page Number	Section/Paragraph	Question/Comment	Proposed Action/Change	Government Response
1	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	Pg N/A	Section M	Recommendation to include bridging support evaluation factor	Although section M was not included, we recommend that a key evaluation factor of the following be included to ensure the risk to the government in the execution of the eventual contract be minimized:

Bridging Support - In order to be acceptable, the Offeror's proposal shall demonstrate ability to tightly coordinate with, and effectively bridge between, the production team and the government's combat system engineering hardware and software integration agents such that the risks to eventual system activation are minimized.

	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The final solicitation will reflect the Government’s minimum requirement.
	2	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	Pg N/A	Section M	Recommendation to include transition capability as evaluation factor	Although section M was not included, we recommend that a key evaluation factor of the following be included to ensure the risk to the government in the execution of the eventual contract be minimized:
Transition Capability - In order to be acceptable, the Offeror's proposal shall demonstrate its ability to subsume control of the TDP such that accurate redlines and analysis of changes can be fully assessed prior to delivery of the TDP to the government. In order to be acceptable, the Offeror's proposal shall demonstrate its ability to transition detailed assembly techniques, to include cable routing and dressing, into its production facility such that risk to production schedule and quality of the delivered product is minimal.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The final solicitation will reflect the Government’s minimum requirement.
	3	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	Pg N/A	Section M	Recommendation to include engineering support of design as evaluation factor	Although section M was not included, we recommend that a key evaluation factor of the following be included to ensure the risk to the government in the execution of the eventual contract be minimized:
Engineering Design Capability - It is anticipated that over the production lifecycle the hardware design may evolve due to end of life material or other factors. In order to be acceptable, the Offeror's proposal shall demonstrate its ability to support the government in detailed evaluation of hardware changes to include, at a minimum, the assessment of: structural and thermal analysis impacts, acceptance testing software impacts, tactical software impacts, CIDS compliance impacts, production flow changes, and impacts to previously delivered shipsets.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The final solicitation will reflect the Government’s minimum requirement.
	4	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	Pg N/A	Section M	Recommend to include provisioning of evidence to corroborate production capability as an evaluation factor	Although section M was not included, we recommend that a key evaluation factor of the following be included to ensure the risk to the government in the execution of the eventual contract be minimized:
Production Capability - In order to be acceptable, the Offeror's proposal shall include in its basis for its production labor pricing a description of how the indentured parts list was translated into the touch labor hours required to produce each assembly and a validation that those touch labor hours are accurate estimates.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The final solicitation will reflect the Government’s minimum requirement.
	5	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 2	B/CLIN 0001	Although sections L and M were not included in this draft, it appears the govt’s intent is to set the RFP as an LPTA.	It is our recommendation that the TEP algorithm be set such that it does not stipulate a “random” selection from the stepladder tables and instead states a specific sample point(s) or quantity bands. We believe citing a random draw for the TEP will result in contractors providing non-optimal pricing.	The Government intends to utilize a best value tradeoff evaluation approach.
	6	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 2	B/CLIN 0001	Is intent to only order 3 shipsets per year? This is inconsistent with stepladder pricing requested in NOTE A Section 2.	Remove the citation from the CLIN references as it only will confuse potential bidders	The Government does not anticipate removing this citation. Quantities will be dependent on available funding and CNO Availability schedule. Step ladder pricing is used to allow adaptability in production.
	7	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 17	B/Note A - Table 1	MAMs Cabinet and PMA laptop are only referenced here and not in any of the delivery/pricing tables.	If it is the govt's intent for these items to be priced then add stepladder pricing tables and TDP information. If not, remove them from this table as it only will confuse potential bidders	A shipset (CLIN 0001), regardless of ship class, includes MAMs Cabinet, PMA Laptop, NSGs and APCs.

The Government intends to provide more detailed information via Section J attachment(s).

	8	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 17	B/Note A	It is very difficult for a contractor to price production with an unknown demand per year. Is the govt able to narrow down the range to say either 3 OR 4 shipsets per year based on anticipated fielding plan vs. a range of 1 to 5? Whatever the decision, please ensure the RFP clearly defines the evaluation algorithm to be utilized to determine the total evaluated price.	Reduce the shipset quantity band range from 1 to 5 to from 3 to 4.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The final solicitation will reflect the Government’s minimum requirement.
	9	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 18	B/Note D - Table 1	It is difficult to price this table without some knowledge of the intended scope and/or skillsets required to be performed.	Recommend the government either stipulate a skill mix or stipulate the intended scope such that contractors can price appropriately.	The Government intends to address this in Sections L and M.
	10	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 18	B/Note F	NOTE F PIO CLIN 0006 – This note references CLINS 0005 thru 4005 but also CLIN 0006. The tables in Note F would price the MK2 equipment costs for only CLINs x0005.	Define how CLIN 0006 is to be priced.	Note F references CLIN 0006 in case there is a need to order PIO/Spares associated with CLINS 0005/1005/2005/3005/4005. The formal solicitation will contain instructions regarding how CLIN 0006 is to be priced.
	11	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 19	B/Note F - Table 2	Recommend that since these quantities are tightly correlated to the shipsets ordered that the number of stepladder bands be aligned with the shipset stepladders. That is, if shipsets are to be priced in 5 bands, ASTABS should be priced in 5 bands.	Make the Note F table stepladders consistent with the shipset stepladders.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The table represents the max quantity the Government will buy in a year.
	12	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 24	B/Note J - CLINs/SLINs	Confusing as worded.	Recommend the Pricing Availability be changed from “No earlier than date of Contract Award +12 months” to “No earlier than date of Contract Award +24 months”, etc.	The Government expects pricing availability no earlier than date of contract award plus 12 months.
	13	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 31	C-2/1.1	The Engineering Services as defined here is inconsistent with the definition of CLIN 0003 on page 30. As stated some of this is mandatory scope which must be priced (i.e. DMSMS reporting and production reporting) and some of it is more appropriately services scope (i.e. engineering changes)	Recommend two paragraphs be provided. One that cites the scope to be priced within CLINs x001 and one that cites scope to be priced within services CLINs x002.	The engineering services for CLIN 0003 are separate from the engineering required to complete the production. The pricing for CLIN 0001 and CLIN 0002 should incorporate the engineering services associated with the production of this hardware.
	14	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 31	C-2/1.1	The citation of Key Personnel is presumably intended to require those personnel to hold a secret clearance however the text of this paragraph is not exactly clear	Clarify intent of KP scope.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	15	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 39	C-2/3.2.7	Program Management Metrics - Recommend that the metrics be described and proposed in the A001 and not a separate CDRL. The actual reporting of metrics can be in the A002.	See comment	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government does not anticipate incorporating this recommendation.
	16	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 39	C-2/3.2.8	For scope as defined in this DRFP, it is recommended that the requirement to comply with the TRM be removed.	See comment	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government does not anticipate incorporating this recommendation.
	17	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 40	C-2/3.2.8.2	3.2.8.2 Program Management Reviews. Make this paragraph consistent with the wording of 3.2.8 which describes “monthly interchange meetings” Presumably the content defined here is intended for the “semi-annual program reviews” and not for a monthly meeting.	See comment	Meetings shall occur semi-annually and monthly. When the Semi-Annual Program Review and Monthly Interchange Meetings are coincident, the Monthly Interchange Meeting shall be replaced by the Semi-Annual Program Review.
	18	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 40	C-2/3.2.8.2	3.2.8.2 Program Management Reviews - CDRL A006 is specifically cited here. Recommend the delivery of the actual CDRL be removed and only be cited in 3.2.12.	See comment	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The final solicitation will reflect the Government’s minimum requirement.
	19	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 41	C-2/3.2.8.3	3.2.8.3 PRR – This paragraph cites a PRR “within 60 days of each award”. A PRR with every CLIN award is unnecessary.	Recommendation is to change this to a single PRR “within 90 days of prime contract award”.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The final solicitation will reflect the Government’s minimum requirement.
	20	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 42	C-2/3.2.10.2	3.2.10.2 ECPs - Content of ECPs is not sufficient for the government to assess impacts.	Recommend this section be augmented to include: ECPs shall be delivered including drawing redlines, detailed analysis to include shock and thermal analysis of risk of impacts to previously performed qualification testing, analysis of impacts to the ability of the hardware to comply with CIDS requirements, and acceptance testing software modifications necessary to accommodate the design change.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	21	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 42	C-2/3.2.10.2	3.2.10.2 ECPs – Recommend to clarify in this section the govt’s intent on how ECPs are initiated and to be priced. That is, are they purely govt initiated and funded under the services CLINs or contractor initiated and covered under the scope of non-services CLINs.		The intent is for the Government to fund the ECPs via the Engineering Services CLINs.
	22	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 43	C-2/3.2.10.6	3.2.10.6 CSA – this paragraph cites FAUs which are not referenced elsewhere in this SOW.	Remove reference to FAUs	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	23	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 43	C-2/3.2.11	3.2.11 DMSMS – This paragraph contains redundant/repeated text	Remove redundant text	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback
	24	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 44	C-2/3.2.11	3.2.11 DMSMS – Cites that all DMSMS records shall be delivered in the A015 DMSMS plan. Recommend to delete this sentence. DMSMS records are delivered in the A016 as cited in the next paragraph.	Remove requirement to deliver all records	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	25	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 45	C-2/3.2.12	3.2.12 System Safety Program – As this SOW is intended to build to a govt design the need for a contractor led SSPP A018 and A019 SAR is unnecessary and adds cost. Reconsider if the scope as defined in this paragraph is truly needed.	Remove scope to deliver A018 and A019 or clarify in SOW the specific intended effort.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	26	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 46	C-2/3.2.15	3.2.15 Nomenclature, Serialization, IUID. This section cites the A022 and both a plan and report. Recommend the Plan citation be removed in its entirety and the contract be required to mark per the P(A)-1001 SSDS Mk2 IUID Implementation Plan as cited in the previous paragraph.	Consolidate to a single SSDS program marking plan.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	27	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 48	C-2/3.2.19	3.2.19 EOC Transition Plan – Recommend that this CDRL not be required until the second year of the contract.. i.e. “Within 365 days for contract award”	Update delivery date requirement.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	28	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 49	C-2/3.3.1	3.3.1 TDP – This paragraph cites a PCA which is not referenced elsewhere.	Remove PCA reference	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	29	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 49	C-2/3.3.2	3.3.2 Manufacturing Plan. Recommend this CDRL be due at the PRR not 14 days after award	Change CDRL A030 due date	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	30	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	pg. 49	C-2/3.3.3	3.3.3 FAT/PAT/SBT – Recommend the “FAT” references be removed. Test reports should be on conduct of the PAT and SBT events only. “FAT” is an internal contractor activity not described in govt delivered procedures.	Remove all references to "FAT"	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The Government intends to update the SOW prior to solicitation release.
	31	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	N/A	N/A	We have noticed that other government solicitations issued during this period with COVID-19 are permitting electronic submissions of a Offeror’s response through DoDSAFE.	Respectfully recommend that electronic submission through DoDSafe be listed in the final RFP as primary method of submission for Offeror's proposal response.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The final solicitation will reflect the Government’s minimum requirement.
	32	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	N/A	N/A	We have noticed the increased use of the
L-215-H007 Clause regarding questions by offerors.	Respectfully recommend that the L-215-H007 Submission of Questions by Offerors - Alternate I Clause be included in the final RFP.	The Government has received the comment and proposed change feedback. The final solicitation will reflect the Government’s minimum requirement.
	33	7/16/20	Draft Sections B, C, F	N/A	N/A	Is the TDP currently available? If yes, how can the Offeror obtain a copy?	Respectfully request a copy of the TDP if available.	The Government intends to provide a copy of the TDP with the formal solicitation.

_x000D__x000D_

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Jul 16, 2020.