Q&A01.pdf

Solicitation Number: N00173-18-R-DU01 Q&A 01

Dated 2/16/2018

Questions & Answers 01

The purpose of this Q&A 01 is to answer questions that were submitted by potential Offerors.

Q1: Are small businesses who can address only one or two of the categories of interest as contractors/performers? Or does section H-6 indicate that the entire 68,400 hours must be supplied by one entity/awardee?

A1: An Offeror’s proposal, to include any subcontractors, must address the entire requirement.

Q2: The RFP says that the activities/efforts on this contract are required to be performed 'principally' on site at NRL... what % do you think is required on site (outside of integration and testing activities)?

A2: Approximately 90% is onsite.

Q3. Is there a preliminary step like a whitepaper or quad to gauge interest before investing in a full proposal? Or should Offerors do that via calls, emails like this, etc.?

A3. No. This RFP requires proposals must be submitted according to the instructions in Section L.

Q4. Would someone who can address UUVs agnostically be preferred to someone with experience with only one UUV and who has a motivation to support only their own line of UUVs?

A4: A vendor’s technical proposal will be evaluated in accordance with Section L & M of the RFP. A best value determination will then be made to determine which Offeror provides the best value to the Government.

Q5. Do you expect confidentiality issues between the various UUV manufacturers and whomever does the UUV instrumentation work? Does this infer that the instrumentation contractor should not themselves be a UUV manufacturer?

A5: No. NRL does not see any confidentiality issues between the eventual contractor and equipment manufacturers.

Q6: Do you have a list of the specific UUVs that are of interest?

A6: Bluefin 21 class vehicles and Hydroid REMUS class vehicles.