LAW Industry_Day 2 Q and A.pdf

Industry Day 2‐ Questions and Answers in General Session. 09 APRIL.

Q: What drove the increase in manning/change in manning?

A: Input from the USMC and resource sponsor

Q: Does the Government have an objective number of total platforms?

A: Yes, an objective would be approximately 28‐30

Q: Is there funding is in place for the studies?

A: Yes, we do have the funding for studies

Q: Will the Government be relying on GFE for combat systems?

A: Yes our plan is to GFE the C5I suite with a programs of record.

Q: Taking into consideration the ruggedness and shock requirements, does the Navy still see LAW as a built to commercial standards, or do they see a 901 equipment being invoked?

A: We haven’t finalized the shock requirement for LAW. It’s vital to get marines and the equipment on/off, so the ramp could have a 901 requirement. We’re reviewing propulsion drive train associated with beaching aspect of the warship. We are open to concepts, which may/may not be subject to a 901.

Q: Does Navy have targeted quantity and budget for prototype designs?

A: Not going to discuss budget target, but we envision a quantity of approximately 7‐15 in the prototype phase.

Q: Is there an existing or foreign platform that’s on your radar as comparable?

A: No, everything is on the table. We are looking at both foreign and domestic designs, however, to date, nothing has met all attributes in RFI.

Q: Have there been any Army discussions, looking at their requirements for MSV NextGen ?

A: Yes, we are aware of it and the capabilities. They may look similar, but the requirements are fundamentally different. Navy needs more habitability, seakeeping and intra‐theater focus for LAW.

Q: Will the vessel need to stay on station to provide C5I support for USMC after unloading/operations?

A: There may be some C5I capabilities, but that is not the main objective of platform.

Q: Is Navy seeking exemption from EPA exhaust regulations for engines?

A: DoD will seek waiver from Tier 3 requirements for exhaust. If there are military requirements or regulations that drive away from a commercial design, please let the Navy know so they can be evaluated. We encourage industry to share these things with us and we want to understand. We ask that you’d highlight it to us, you can send us white paper, or email, etc… to the two points of contact listed in the RFI.

Q: With the government anticipating the RFP to come out next fiscal year, has this been approved in Presidents budget, where is the funding coming from?

A: Yes, LAW is in our budget for FY21 for preliminary design efforts. We have funding in FY21 to support what we’re looking to do to accelerate and we’re seeking funding in this FY to assist with theses efforts.

Q: Has the Government done a review of requirements to look at limitation surf zone wave action?

A: The Navy hasn’t fully analyzed it yet, but it’s in our plan and will need to ensure we’re safe and stable while in beaching mode. Some of the analysis is done, however, we’re still in RET and our SEA05 team that are supporting LAW are also working with our team at NSWC Carderock.

Q: Regarding the typical cost drivers that relate to logistics, are you thinking going to commercial style of logistics support?

A: We are not envisioning going away from Navy tradition logistics. No, we don’t see this program going away from the traditional logistics packages.

Q: Is the Government looking at a commercial contracting style that would be more commercial – less navy design reviews, CDRLS, etc… or standard process.

A: The Navy is definitely challenging all assumptions, looking to take a light hand by the Navy. Navy has a large appetite for deliverables, but Navy has to live in this uncomfortable situation. Navy needs to curb its appetite for information to do this as quickly and affordably as it wants.

Q: Will the Government require RTA? Or conventional contracts?

A: We’re currently looking at conventional, but we know there’s a lot of ways to do contracts. We aren’t shying away from ideas. No specific method is off the table from what’s in DFAR. We need to pick the things that move the fastest but also balance technical and risks. We want to deliver the right product.

We will challenge technical & contracts to move fast.

Q: Is the Government prepared to provide an affordability cap?

A: We have talked internally, cost KPP or cost CAP, we don’t like them, but it’s the right thing to do to meet the deadline.

Q: Once studies are done, what is the likelihood of multiple awards?

A: When the studies are done, there will be multiple awards for preliminary design. Then down select for a prototype. No plan for multiple yards and designs like LCS. It’s too hard of a logistics tail. But options are open if it is cheaper/faster.

Q: Do you envision something similar to LCS variance? Multiple yards and designs?

A: No, it involves too much logistics and O&S. This drives overall costs initially and we’re not trying to go down that path. As we’ve said before, if studies tell us we are wrong, if its’ affordable and fields faster, then we won’t ignore it. The data and cost drivers will help us decide. The Government wants to field as rapidly as possible, and we believe that using multiple yards is not the best and most affordable path.

Q: Are you considering threshold objective with best value?

A: Yes.

GE: acq costs, are important – how will lifecycle costs be evaluated?

A: We are still developing Source selection criteria, we welcome input on what we SHOULD be measuring it by. We realize it’s tough and broad. So many assumptions and variable, if industry has a way that we should measure it, we encourage feedback. For forecasting, etc.

Q: How do we/ who do we send information to?

A: Dan Maher and Katie Sanders, the points of contact on the RFI. We’d like to encourage you, that if you’re not a Shipyard and you want to be part of it, get together with the builders and have the discussions necessary to potentially team up.

Turnkey prime to deliver a vessel. We don’t want to be the integrator. We are looking for total solution, design production and complete vessel.

Q: Just so we’re all on all on the same page on affordable, what does it mean?

A: It means several digit millions not triple digit millions.

Again, if industry thinks we’re completely off base and are we shopping in the wrong area, please tell us.