Nulka MK 53 Decoy Lauch System (DLS) Production

SECTION 1: SYNOPSIS This is a Request for Information (RFI) issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), on behalf of the Program Executive Office Integrated Warfare Systems Above Water Sensors and Lasers directorate (PEO IWS 2.0). The Government is conducting market research seeking industry inputs and interest for hardware production of the Nulka MK 53 DLS. This includes all configurations. The Government's planned procurement strategy is to award one production contract. Notional award date for the FY23-27 production contract is Q2FY23. The anticipated contract type will be firm fixed-price for production, with no incentives. The basis for production of MK 53 DLS hardware is contained in the Technical Data Package(s) (TDP), portions of which will be provided as Government Furnished Information (GFI) under this RFI. It is NAVSEA's intent to procure Build-to-Print (BTP) hardware under a new competitively awarded contract in FY23. The term BTP in this context means producing to the exact specifications, drawings, and design contained within the TDP(s). The information obtained in response to this RFI is intended to increase the Government's understanding of industry interest and capability for MK 53 DLS production and to aid in making informed acquisition decisions related to the MK 53 DLS Program. SECTION 2: GENERAL INFORMATION Pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 52.215-3 this RFI is for planning purposes only and is issued solely for conducting market research in accordance with FAR Part 10. The Government will not reimburse respondents for any questions submitted or information provided as a result of this notice. This does NOT constitute a Request for Proposal. The Government is NOT seeking or accepting unsolicited proposals. This notice shall not be construed as a contract, a promise to contract, or a commitment of any kind by the Government. Specific responses will not disqualify or have an impact on participation and evaluation on future solicitations. Not responding to this RFI does not preclude participation in any future solicitation. If a solicitation is issued in the future, it will be announced via Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) and interested parties must comply with that announcement. It is the responsibility of interested parties to monitor FBO for additional information pertaining to this requirement. Any small businesses that believe they can accomplish this requirement should indicate their small business status (see FAR Part 19) in their response. Questions regarding this announcement shall be submitted in writing via e-mail to the Contract Specialist and Contracting Officer's email addresses. Verbal questions will not be accepted. Questions shall not contain classified information. SECTION 3: REQUIREMENTS OVERVIEW A brief overview of the MK 53 DLS mission requirements and configurations is provided as follows: 1. MK 53 DLS is a fast response decoy dispensing system utilized to counter Anti-Ship Missile (ASM) threats and is intended to counter a wide spectrum of present and future radar-guided ASM. 2. The MK 53 DLS is a mature program with an existing validated Level III TDP. Current configurations of the MK 53 DLS include the Decoy Launch Processor (DLP), Processor Power Supply, and Active Decoy Launcher. The TDP is available by request. 3. In addition to the continued production of the current configuration of the MK 53 DLS, new configuration(s) are being designed to replace the DLP with a Decoy Launch Message Convertor (DLMC). 4. A mature TDP for the new MK 53 DLS configuration, which includes the DLMC, is slated for 4Q2021. A draft TDP for the DLMC is available by request. 5. All production efforts will be BTP. 6. This contract limits and restricts foreign participation. For context, the notional procurement and delivery schedules for all FY23-27 MK 53 DLS configurations and anticipated delivery dates will be provided by request. The Government is interested in procuring the MK 53 DLS from companies that have the following attributes: Have experience manufacturing electronic attack systems, complex electronic warfare systems, Radio Frequency electronics, digital communications networks, x86 processing nodes, high-voltage power distribution and conditioning systems, high capacity cooling units, and array structures. Have demonstrated the ability to produce hardware units according to detailed TDP materials provided to them. Experience cooperating with industry partners for subsystem development. Experience cooperating with other prime industry partners integrating complex systems. Experience maintaining fielded Department of Defense or Military hardware systems. SECTION 4: SUBMISSION OF RESPONSES Responses to this RFI should be submitted by 15 February 2021 17:00 EST via e-mail to the Contract Specialist, Ms. Christiana Sapp, christiana.sapp@navy.mil, and the Project Manager, Ms. Deborah Leighty, Deborah.leighty@navy.mil, with a copy to the Contracting Officer, Ms. Holly Danner, holly.danner@navy.mil. SECTION 4.1: CONTENT Companies responding to this RFI should provide a response not to exceed thirty (30) pages. Cover Sheet, Company Profile, Table of Contents, and List of Abbreviations and Acronyms are exempt from the page limit. A detailed proposal is not requested. Responses should indicate sufficient detail for assessment of potential contracting strategies and company interest; submissions should be organized as follows: - Cover Sheet: RFI number and name, address, company, cage code, DUNS number, technical point of contact, with printed name, title, email address, telephone number, and date - Table of Contents: Include a list of figures and tables with page numbers - General response information - List of abbreviations and acronyms Product line brochures, catalog excerpts, etc. may be submitted and referenced within the general capability statement and are exempt from the page limit. Responses should attempt to address as many of the following questions as possible: Does your organization have any feedback on the feasibility of the Government's plan to procure BTP MK 53 DLS hardware? Are there any areas of ambiguity that need to be clarified for the definition of BTP? Are there other specific concerns related to procuring BTP that should be taken into consideration? Do you have past experience procuring/producing BTP hardware? If so, are there any lessons learned that the Government should incorporate into the contracting strategy? What additional data beyond the GFI provided as part of this RFI, if any, is necessary to successfully procure, produce, integrate and test MK 53 DLS hardware? What manufacturing and acceptance testing facilities does your organization have and what product lines have been developed in these facilities in the past? What experience does your organization have in producing and testing similar quantities of hardware listed in this RFI? Does your organization currently utilize any manufacturing automation or robotics? What capital investments/improvements does your organization already have planned for manufacturing and/or testing facilities? How would preparing for this competition change those plans? How would being awarded a contract change those plans? What flexibility does your organization have in production processes to adjust/adapt to increasing/decreasing number of production units? Are you considering establishing service/teaming agreements with additional contractors? If you are teaming, how would your organization manage subcontractors/teammates to ensure that the performance requirements are flowed correctly and met? How would your organization optimize hardware production, emergent hardware production, acceptance testing, and repair/replacement of failed hardware? What would your organization recommend for production lead times for delivery of a system for each of the MK 53 DLS configurations, and why? Would the delivery date - Months after Option Exercise (MAOE) decrease, based on a learning curve over time? Would MAOE adjust based on the number of units, potentially similar and different variants, being exercised at the same time? What would your organization recommend as necessary First Article Test (FAT) and Environmental Qualification Testing for each of the production MK 53 DLS configurations and why? What support equipment and/or test assets would your organization utilize to support hardware production, quality assessments, maintenance, and repair? If support equipment and/or test assets are required, would existing Contractor assets be available? If not, what would be your approach be to obtain the equipment? Are there any cost/pricing considerations you would like to bring to the Government's attention? Do you have any recommendations on the structure of the requirements or the overall contracting strategy that would reduce the total price? Does your organization have capabilities for Model Based Product Support, Digital Engineering and/or Product Lifecycle Management? If so, how would you develop - Best in Class future state processes for production and manufacturing support? Describe your Manufacturing and Production Capabilities and Partner relationships. How will this be handled when expectations are not met? Describe your in-house skill sets, their level/degrees of experience, and your single point of failures when no skilled backup is available. Describe your ability/ease of using/applying Production Level 3D models and 2D drawings, to include Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing. Provide examples of similar work and successes. Describe how your organization ensures TDP information is being interpreted correctly for increased one-pass yield. Describe your multi-processes understanding of casting, fabrication, machining, electrical, electronic (Circuit Card Assembly) work and the application of 3D models within these processes. Describe the continuity of internal communications throughout the product team to address issues in a timely manner. Does your organization have access to reputable supporting vendors, suppliers and contractors? How do you ensure schedules are met during normal circumstances? Under adverse circumstances? In relation to your facilities, describe equipment and their capabilities, environmentally controlled work, storage spaces for electronics, and management for multiple product assets/inventory. Describe your capability to provide security for products, including secure networks. Describe your Inspection and Quality Assurance (QA) capabilities and practices. Describe your processes when quality is not being provided by your support vendor/supplier, contractor. Do you have flexibility to switch to a different support vendor, etc.? Will a Qualified Provider List be used, or is freedom to ad hoc to other entities a possibility? How will you handle a support entities inability to provide good justifications for late deliveries? Describe your organizations capability to identify obsolescence items ahead of production meet time. Describe your organizations practices for trying to resolve issues in-house prior to contacting the customer. What will be the processes if the issue includes major reallocation of assets? Of work locations? Describe your organizations ability to develop self-supporting, initiated, or improved testing and QA over the customer's requirement and/or Government Furnished Equipment. Provide examples. Describe any prior experience with performing FATs. Were they successfully accomplished? What was the degree of difficulty in accomplishing them? Were there any issues? If so, how were they resolved? Describe your organizations processes used to accomplish successful results for customers, to include planning, management (program, configuration, data), and software used. Describe your organizations facility measure of confidence review processes to help the Government ensure capabilities exist or can be acquired for successful quality production. Will the processes be the same for subcontractor facilities? Why/why not? Has your organization used a Defense Contract Management Agency representative? Describe the processes you went through. Has your organization been audited by Defense Contract Audit Agency? If so, were there any findings? Please explain. Has your organization provided innovation to bring customer cost down and/or improve production processes? Describe your organizations in-house training programs used to increase skill sets and quality output. Were these programs successful? Why/why not? Is there any additional information or input you would like to provide as it relates to MK 53 DLS hardware production and the Government's associated acquisition strategy, as outlined under this RFI? Respondents are solely responsible for properly marking and clearly identifying any proprietary information or trade secrets contained within their responses. The Government will not be liable, or suffer any consequential damages, for any proprietary information not properly marked and clearly identified. Proprietary information received in response to this RFI will be safeguarded and handled in accordance with applicable Government regulations. SECTION 4.2: CLASSIFICATION All materials submitted in response to this RFI should be UNCLASSIFIED. If a potential respondent believes submission of classified material is necessary or will provide a higher quality response, please contact the Project manager, Ms. Deborah Leighty at deborah.leighty@navy.mil, with a copy to the Contract Specialist, Ms. Christiana Sapp, christiana.sapp@navy.mil, and Contracting Officer, Ms. Holly Danner, holly.danner@navy.mil. SECTION 4.3: FORMATTING NAVSEA will accept ONLY electronic unclassified submission of responses. Respondents to this RFI must adhere to the following details: - Submissions shall be single spaced, typed or printed in Times New Roman font with type no smaller than 12-point font. - Paper should be 8 1/2 x 11 inches with a minimum of 1 inch margins around the page. Any text contained within tables, graphs, etc. should be 8-point Times New Roman font or larger. - Included files should be created/prepared using Microsoft Office 2010 compatible applications. Graphics, photographs, and other data that may not be compatible with Microsoft Office 2010 should be submitted in Adobe Acrobat format. - Submitted electronic files should be limited to the following extensions: .docx Microsoft Word .xlsx Microsoft Excel .pptx Microsoft PowerPoint .pdf Adobe Acrobat .mmpx Microsoft Project Submitted electronic files should not be compressed. SECTION 5: REQUESTING GFI To obtain the TDP documentation, interested companies shall provide a current copy of their approved DD Form 2345, Military Critical Technical Data Agreement, verifying eligibility and authority to receive export-controlled information. In addition, interested companies must complete the Terms of Use Agreement (Attachment J-S1 of this RFI). Companies should assert in their requests that they have a Defense Security Service issued SECRET facility clearance, providing for SECRET personnel clearances and SECRET safeguarding capability. The DD Form 2345 and completed Terms of Use Agreement form shall be submitted via email to the Contract Specialist, Christiana Sapp, christiana.sapp@navy.mil, and the Project manager, Ms. Deborah Leighty at deborah.leighty@navy.mil, with a copy to the Contracting Officer, Ms. Holly Danner, holly.danner@navy.mil. Upon receipt, verification of facility clearance, and approval of the GFI request, the GFI will be provided. IMPORTANT: For purposes of this RFI, each company must be able to receive classified documents up to the SECRET level. There will be classified attachments at the SECRET level included as part of any future solicitation. Prime contractors interested in bidding under any subsequent solicitation must be able to receive classified documents up to the SECRET level and must be a United States (U.S.) company or an independent U.S. subsidiary. The Navy will not consider foreign contractors acting as subcontractors to U.S. prime contractors. The export of defense articles, defense services, and related technical data is subject to the Arms Export Control Act and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations and requires the issuance of an export license by the U.S. Department of State. Please make the request as soon as practicable as it may take several days for the Government to review and approve access to the documents.