Inactive

Only one response is necessary for this announcement. This notice is for market research purposes only and does NOT constitute a request for proposal. This notice shall not be construed as a contract,... Only one response is necessary for this announcement. This notice is for market research purposes only and does NOT constitute a request for proposal. This notice shall not be construed as a contract, a promise to contract, or as a commitment of any kind by the Government. The Government is NOT seeking or accepting unsolicited proposals. Failure to respond to this Request for Information (RFI) does not preclude participation in any future Request for Proposal (RFP), if any is issued. This Sources Sought/Request for Information (RFI) notice is issued by the Department of the Navy, Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), Program Executive Office (PEO) Unmanned and Small Combatants (USC), Unmanned Maritime Systems Program Office (PMS 406). The Navy is conducting market research in accordance with FAR Part 10 to determine if sources exist that are capable of satisfying the Navy’s anticipated program requirements in support of future Large Unmanned Surface Vessel (LUSV) program by identifying engines which will contribute toward a ship design that will reliably operate autonomously for at least 720 hours of continuous operations. The engines that the Navy is seeking to evaluate for autonomous operations would potentially be used for propulsion and/or electrical generation, and may be of diesel or gas turbine configuration, given that the LUSV propulsion system may be a mechanically geared or integrated electric system. The type, number, and power ratings for the LUSV engines have not yet been established. The objective of this RFI is to assess the interest and capabilities of companies (i.e., engine manufacturers) to accomplish engine testing at their own locations to the satisfaction of the Navy, with the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) as potential onsite witnesses. The vendor would utilize their own equipment (e.g., the engine itself) and facilities, and delivery of hardware would not be anticipated as a contractual deliverable. Rather, the focus would be on submission of technical reports and qualification from ABS that the tested engine has been demonstrated to be suitable in providing continuous operation in an autonomous, unmanned (a.k.a., uncrewed) shipboard environment for at least 720 hours. Engines of initial interest include those with brake power ratings between 2 – 5 megawatts (MW). If the above power range encompasses an engine family, the Government is interested in understanding the differences between variants. Activities anticipated under this concept include developing and executing government approved endurance tests, accomplishing failure and reliability analyses, design work to the engine and ancillary support equipment to address identified issues and risks, and performing data acquisition and system monitoring at their own site. The ultimate objective is testing and qualifying engines to satisfy at least 720 hours of operations without any form of repair or maintenance (i.e., without direct operator intervention while experiencing zero mission failures and requiring no corrective maintenance). The RFI responses will inform the Navy of industry’s interest and capability to test and qualify propulsion prime mover and/or electrical generation engines for the LUSV program. Testing and qualification data will be provided for capability and reliability validation purposes. In particular, the Navy is seeking responses to the following questions: What experience do you have conducting developmental, factory acceptance and qualification testing? Do you design and build engines yourself, or do you integrate engines into larger integrated systems? Do you have your own test facilities to run engines under varying loading and operating conditions, or do you use other company or entity facilities? Where are those test facilities located? Do you own your own engine test equipment (e.g., load banks)? What experience do you have conducting engine testing on behalf of or in support of Navy or other military or governmental customers or users? What experience do you have submitting technical contractual deliverables to the Navy or other military or government customers for review and/or approval? What experience do you have coordinating and hosting Navy or other military or government customers to witness testing or other activities in your facility? What experience do you have working with ABS, either as a contracted certification agent, or as an agent of the Navy or other customer? What experience do you have submitting technical documentation or other objective quality evidence to ABS in support of engine qualifications, acceptance testing requirements, or type approvals? What experience do you have coordinating and hosting ABS at your manufacturing and/or testing facilities? Are there other classification societies or non-governmental certification authorities you work with for engine testing/qualification activities? What experience do you have providing equipment (e.g., engines and associated support equipment, control systems, etc.) in support of vessels designed for autonomous operation? Fully autonomous operation is defined as equipment operating without operator interaction for a defined period of time free from mission ending failure or corrective maintenance actions. Automation of certain preventative maintenance actions is permitted. Describe your experience related to the development of autonomous solutions for equipment monitoring and preventative maintenance. Describe the level of autonomous equipment monitoring you have developed. Which domestic or international standards have you worked with? What experience do you have with equipment or systems intended for autonomous vessels or other similar applications? Qualification and/or certification testing of engine configurations may be a single engine or multiple engines of differing types. The testing of these engine configurations will fall into one of two categories: Accelerated Life Testing Mission Profile Operational Based Testing What experience do you have in performing these types of tests on engines between 2 – 5 MW of power? What test standards do you have experience with for these types of tests? What testing approaches or strategies would you recommend for evaluating engine configurations to reliably achieve 720 hours of fully autonomous operation? What experience do you have developing and executing reliability testing in accordance with Military standards such as MIL-STD-781D (Reliability Testing for Engineering Development, Qualification and Production, 21 March 1977) or Mil-Hdbk-781A (Military Handbook: Reliability Test Methods, Plans, and Environments for Engineering, Development Qualification, and Production, 1 April 1996) or similar standards? Have you had experience providing test plans and results that demonstrate the ability of engines to meet an 80% Lower Confidence Bound (LCB) mean time between critical failure (MTBCF) of 720 hours? What is the test length required to meet the MTBCF for the stated confidence level? Are there other recommended standards you would recommend referencing? What experience do you have in developing and executing data acquisition processing to include but not limited to pressure, temperature, vibration, flow, and other equipment operational characteristics? What is your experience developing or executing a Failure Reporting, Analysis, and Corrective Action System (FRACAS) to identify critical failures and determine potential corrective actions to mitigate future failures? The engine testing hypothesized in this RFI is anticipated to be conducted solely at the Contractor’s testing facility, using Contractor-owned engines, support equipment (including fuel and lube oil, cooling water, and exhaust), and testing equipment (including data collection and analysis). If the Contractor successfully completes reliability testing on engine, then the Contractor earn a certificate of qualification for the endurance requirement for the testing categories on these specific variants tested. Identify and discuss the engines and variants that you would provide to meet the reliability requirement. Discuss when would you anticipate being able to physically begin testing. Discuss any schedule constraint or scheduling considerations that you anticipate. A possible contracting approach for engine reliability testing is Prize Challenge (e.g. challenge.gov), which would reward successful reliability testing with a certificate of qualification of engines. Do you consider a government provided certificate of qualification (enabling potential future purchase of engines/marketing) for demonstrating a successful reliability test conducted at your own expense to be adequate consideration and enough motivation to participate? If not, please discuss. Given that unmanned and autonomous ship design and construction is a complex activity involving a high degree of integration and layering of capabilities and solutions, what other teaming or company relationship concerns or considerations would you like the Navy to be aware of? Are there any opportunities to leverage commercial, international or other non-traditional partners or sources that might otherwise be restricted, either by existing law or regulation? Can you envision challenges to translating successful engine testing into an overall ship design? ANSWERING THIS NOTICE: Interested vendors shall respond describing their capability for testing and qualifying engines for the LUSV program. Respondents should provide a company profile to include, at a minimum, the following: Business name DUNS number business address business website business size status (i.e., SB, VOSB, SDVOSB, HUBZone SB, SDB, WOSB, LB) number of employees employee classification level facility classification level point of contact name mailing address (if different from business address) phone number email address The desired format for submissions is white paper or similar narrative (contractor’s format). The response should be no more than twenty (20) single-sided pages (including cover and administrative pages) and no less than 1-inch margins and 12-point font. Submissions shall be in Microsoft Word 2010 or searchable Adobe Acrobat Portable Document Format (PDF). Respondents are instructed to submit their response electronically via the DoD Secure Access File Exchange (SAFE) application located at https://safe.apps.mil. Respondents wishing to submit a response to this notification shall notify the Contracting Officer, Cassandra Brese (cassandra.brese@navy.mil), and Contracts Specialist, Ramin Movahed (ramin.movahed@navy.mil), noted as points of contact on this solicitation no later than three business days prior to the response deadline of this request and no earlier than 14 calendar days prior to the response deadline. The Respondent shall provide their name and e-mail as contact information so the Government can generate a pick-up request from the DoD SAFE application to be sent to the Respondent, which is valid for 14 calendar days. Respondents shall address their package with the solicitation number and Respondent’s company name. Respondents shall click the “Confirm Delivery” button within the DoD SAFE app in order to receive a confirmation of pick up by the Government. The DoD SAFE system records the time that files are submitted for transmission. Respondents are responsible for ensuring that they drop-off their proposal and generate a drop-off time prior to the proposal submission date and time. Acknowledgment of responses received will not be made. NO CLASSIFIED MATERIAL SHALL BE SUBMITTED ELECTRONICALLY UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCE. If a classified supplement is included it shall be provided as a separate addendum to the electronic copy and on a separate CD-ROM with appropriate security classification markings. The classified supplement is not included in the 20-page limitation. Each electronic CD-ROM shall be labeled as follows: Company Name, City, State Point of Contact (POC) Name POC Phone # Security Classification of the Response All classified responses should be addressed as follows: Commanding Officer Naval Sea Systems Command Attn: Cassandra Brese, Code 02632 1333 Isaac Hull Ave SE Washington Navy Yard DC 20376-2060 Proprietary information, if any, must be clearly marked. To aid the Government in its review and evaluation, please segregate proprietary information. Please be advised that all submissions become Government property and will not be returned. Respondents shall mark any data included in its submissions that they do not want disclosed to the public for any purpose. QUESTIONS: The Government does not intend to release any supplemental information related to this RFI nor does the Government intend to address any technical questions related to this RFI. Responses to the RFI will not be returned. Questions regarding submission details for this announcement shall be submitted in writing, via e-mail, to Naval Sea Systems Command, Cassandra Brese (Cassandra.brese@navy.mil) Code 02632. Verbal questions will NOT be accepted. DISCLAIMER AND IMPORTANT NOTES: Respondents are advised that Booz Allen Hamilton may assist the Government in its review of responses received under this notice. Respondents shall provide notification on its cover page if the respondent does not consent to the use of the aforementioned contractors. Unless otherwise stated by the respondent, a submission received to this notice constitutes consent that the abovementioned contractors can have access to all information provided in the respondent's submission. This notice is not a request for proposals and is not to be construed as a commitment by the Government to issue a solicitation. This notice does not obligate the Government to award a contract or otherwise pay for the information provided in response. Sources choosing to respond to this notice are wholly responsible for any costs/expenses associated with submitting a response. Therefore, any cost associated with the market survey submission is solely at the interested vendor's expense. The Government reserves the right to use information provided by respondents for any purpose deemed necessary and legally appropriate. Any organization responding to this notice should ensure that its response is complete and sufficiently detailed to allow the Government to determine the organization's qualifications to perform the work. Respondents are advised that the Government is under no obligation to acknowledge receipt of the information received or provide feedback to respondents with respect to any information submitted. Respondents will not be notified of the results of this notice. The information obtained from submitted responses may be used in development of an acquisition strategy and a future solicitation. Submissions will not be returned.