Responses to Synopsis Questions.pdf

PDF 53 KB Posted

Attached to
Propulsor Demonstration Hardware
Solicitation number
N0016720R0009
Issued by

About this file

This document contains questions and answers regarding a draft request for proposal for propulsor demonstration hardware. The solicitation seeks proposals for a cost plus fixed fee completion contract to provide propulsor demonstration hardware and conduct related engineering and manufacturing efforts. Offerors are advised that responses should only address the requirements specified in Section L and not assume the sample tasks represent new design work. While the successful offeror will not be prohibited from bidding on future production work, the contractor is responsible for delivery of all hardware. Inspection and acceptance may occur at origin for large manufactured components requiring special transportation if so identified in delivery order requests for proposals. Cost realism will be evaluated based on proposals rather than auditing estimates given the undefined statement of work, and offerors may apply indirect costs to all cost items and shift dollars between labor and other direct costs ceilings while keeping the total contract value the same.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
N0016720R0009 0004.pdf PDF
Attachment 7 - Past Performance Reference (Rev 1).docx DOCX document
S9245-A4-TSM-010_REV00 30_DEC_2018-Part(2).pdf PDF
N0016720R0009 Amendment 2 Final.pdf PDF
Attachment 13 - Questions and Answers 20R0009 Round 2.pdf PDF
Attachment 14 - Questions and Answers 20R0009 Round 3.pdf PDF
N0016720R0009 0001.pdf PDF
Attachment 4 - Sample 3_Rev A.pdf PDF
Attachment 12 - Questions and Answers 20R0009 Final.pdf PDF
CDRL A013_Meeting Minutes.pdf PDF
CDRL A001_TDP-Worksheet.pdf PDF
Attachment 2 -Sample 1_Requirement.pdf PDF
Attachment 10 - QASP.pdf PDF
CDRL A003_Test Plan_S.pdf PDF
Attachment 6 - Sub Plan Coversheet 19R0009.docx DOCX document
Attachment 9 - DD254.pdf PDF
Attachment 3 - Sample 2_Requirement.pdf PDF
CDRL A004_MSR_S.pdf PDF
N0016720R0009 Final.pdf PDF
CDRL A005_Engr Change Proposal_S.pdf PDF
CDRL A006_TestInspecton Report_S.pdf PDF
CDRL A002_Technical Report_S.pdf PDF
CDRL A011_Program Review Agenda Revised.pdf PDF
Attachment 1 DO1_Requirement.pdf PDF
CDRL A001_TDP_S.pdf PDF
Attachment 11 - GFP Template.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
CDRL A008_Quality Status Report_R.pdf PDF
CDRL A007_Material Certification_S.pdf PDF
Attachment 4 - Sample 3_Requirements.pdf PDF
CDRL A012_Program Review Docs.pdf PDF
Attachment 8 - Past Performance Questionnaire.docx DOCX document
CDRL A010_Project Planning Chart.pdf PDF
Attachment 5 - Key Personnel Qualifications.pdf PDF
CDRL A014_GFP Inventory Revised.pdf PDF
CDRL A009_MER_S.pdf PDF
Attachment 7 - Past Performance Reference.docx DOCX document
Show all 36

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

Number Question Government Response

After reviewing the sample task/delivery orders, they appear to be primarily build-to-print efforts. Yet the description of the work effort in the draft RFP SOW includes development and execution of conceptual designs, production feasibility studies, etc. Is it appropriate to respond by assuming these sample tasks represent a similar new design effort for Next Generation submarine, and respond by describing our planned engineering & manufacturing efforts to bring the design from concept through first article delivery?

The responses shall be provided as required by Section L 4.1 of the solicitation. It is not appropriate to respond for any items not requested in Section L 4.1.

In Section H of the draft RFP, clause H-209-H004 Organizational Conflict of Interest is invoked.

Paragraph (f) of this clause focuses on the ability of the performer to compete for future work related to the effort under this RFP. The sample tasks are primarily build-to-print, whereby the performer will manufacture or conduct studies under Navy supervision related to Government designed hardware. Please clarify whether or not the successful performer will be prohibited from bidding on future production work resulting from this contract?

The successful Offeror will not be prohibited from bidding on future production work resulting from this contract.

All line items in the draft RFP are listed as FOB Destination. In light of the fact that some of the manufactured components may be very large, requiring special transportation, significant risk exists for the performer during shipping. Request the Navy evaluate designating the tasks/delivery orders which contain manufacturing of large parts as FOB Origin.

Additionally, it may be more efficient to allow for local DCMA to inspect at Origin (place of manufacture).

The contractor shall be responsible for all delivery of hardware. Although unlikely, the Government may consider Inspection and Acceptance at Origin only under rare circumstances. If the Government allows for FOB Origin for inspection and acceptance, it will be identified on DO Request for Proposals.

The draft solicitation indicates the award will be negotiated (see Block 4 of SF33). Since the specific tasks/delivery orders are not known at this time, but rather several examples are included in the presolicitation notice, how will the basis of estimate (labor hours and material dollars) be audited or reviewed for cost realism by the Government without having a defined scope of work?

The reason that Block 4 is checked is to tell the Government’s internal system that the solicitation will require a proposal and is not a sealed bid. As this solicitation will result in a competitive action, please see Section M

5.0 for instructions on discussions of the initial award, to include the first order. After the contract has been awarded, the Government intends to provide Request for Proposals for each Delivery Order and negotiate those Orders as needed. Please see instructions for L.4.4 for submitting a cost volume for this solicitation.

Under Section B of the draft solicitation, the CLIN ceiling amounts are listed. Several of the sample tasks provided in the FedBizOps notice involve manufacturing large test parts which could involve significant materials/other direct costs (CLIN 0002) relative to the direct labor hours (CLIN 0001).

Additionally, some of the work may require subcontracted effort which would be funded under CLIN 0002 due to limited industrial base capabilities.

Can the ceiling amounts be shifted between CLINs such that the dollar value of the contract is the same?

For example, can bidders propose shifting dollars from one CLIN to another (e.g. reduce CLIN 0001 ceiling by X dollars, and raise CLIN 0002 by the same X dollars)?

The Solicitation has been revised to include labor, material, and ODCs (minus travel) in CLIN 0001 and travel in CLIN 0002. The fee is still applicable to labor only, but offerors may apply appropriate indirect costs (e.g., G&A and overhead) to all cost items.

Sheet1

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .