RFP-RFQ_Q_AND_A_-__46-90.pdf

NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND

N00024-15-R-4406

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

The following are answers to questions received from potential offerors. The answers provide clarification only and DO NOT constitute an amendment to the solicitation.

46. The contractor is concerned that the requirements for Factor 2 of the Non-Price Proposal unreasonably restrict competition.

It is noted that Factor 1 -- Dry-Dock & Pier Facilities provides that if a prime "offeror does not own the dry-dock and/or pier, the offeror shall provide an official teaming agreement identifying and confirming committed access to the dry-dock and/or pier during the timeframe necessary to support the completion of the FY 15 ESRA(d)." However, the requirements specified in Factor 2 -- Corporate Experience, totally negate the Factor 1 option for a contractor without ownership of the dry-dock. Specifically, the requirements of Factor 2 (a) and/or (b) can only be reasonably met by two contractors and their respective shipyard operations within the homeport. No other contractor within the homeport can be responsive and reasonably competitive as a prime proposer in regard to the detailed and restrictive requirements of Factor 2 (a) or (b). No contractor is known to have had both a formal teaming agreement for use of a dry-dock as specified in Factor 1 and the corporate experience required by Factor 2, both of which are required to be responsive to the RFP.

Accordingly, it is recommended that the wording of both Factors 1 and 2 of the Non- Price Proposal be modified to allow for the reasonable possibility of increased competition.

ANSWER:

The intention of Factor 1 is to confirm that the offeror owns or has access to a dry-dock to perform the requirements of the USS MITSCHER (DDG-57) FY15 ESRA(d).The opening paragraph of Factor 1 is revised as follows:

“Factor 1 – Dry-Dock & Pier Facilities: offerors shall fill out the Dry-Dock & Pier Facilities Data Sheet (Attachment S-2) and provide a letter signed by the Principal identifying and confirming that the offeror owns a Dry-Dock capable of docking the USS MITSCHER (DDG-57) and a pier capable of berthing the USS MITSCHER (DDG-57) during the timeframe necessary to support the completion of the FY15 ESRA(d). If the offeror does not own the dry-dock and/or pier, the offeror shall provide a letter signed by the subcontractor identifying and confirming committed access to the dry-dock and/or pier during the timeframe necessary to support the completion of the FY15 ESRA(d).

Factor 2, paragraph (a) is to be revised as follows:

“Performance as a prime contractor of availabilities similar in complexity and magnitude as the proposed USS MITSCHER availability on commissioned US Navy Combat Vessels similar in complexity and composition as a DDG-51 class ship. For this solicitation and evaluation purposes, the Government considers availabilities of approximately six (6) months in duration and 75,000 man-days in magnitude using the same or similar personnel, processes and equipment the offeror is proposing to use to meet the solicitation requirements to be relevant.”

47. Factor 2 – Corporate Experience specifies three (3) years as the number of years over which experience will be considered relevant. Factor 3 – Past Performance specifies four (4) years as the number of years within which awards, letters of recommendation, etc. will be considered.

Should both factors specify the same number of years?

The opening paragraph of Factor 3 is revised as follows:

Factor 3 – Past Performance: No additional submittals are required for Past Performance in the Proposal submission**. Offerors may submit awards, letters of recommendation or other documentation related to relevant work completed or substantially complete within the last three years (since February 2012). There is no page limit associated with this documentation. The Government may contact references provided on the Corporate Experience Data Sheets to validate information received from clients. Thus, offerors shall ensure contact information is complete and accurate.

48. POAMs are not accessible in the MSP Project File.

In the file containing the MS Project Schedule “DDG 57 USS MITSCHER Advance Plan 6_13_15reva (Prelim).mpp”, Unique ID #6969 (ID 5247) DDG57_POAMs is summarized, attempting to expand causes error “The file cannot be found”.

Please provide copy of MSP Project where POAMs are accessible.

ANSWER:

Government will provide updated/corrected MS Project file to all offerors via CD/DVD with the upcoming addendum.

Offerors may request a CD/DVD by contacting Brian Kimm and LT Danilo Meulener at brian.kimm@navy.mil and danilo.meulener@navy.mil. CD/DVD delivery will then be coordinated with the following regional POCs as initiated by Brian Kimm or LT Danilo Meulener.

a. Brian Campbell, brian.a.campbell1@navy.mil, (757) 822-4875, Mid-Atlantic Regional Maintenance Center, 9727 Avionics Loop, Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk VA 23511-

b. Kathy Dugan, kathy.dugan@navy.mil, (904) 270-5126 ext. 3145 Southeast Regional Maintenance Center (SERMC), PO Box 280057, Mayport Naval Station Jacksonville, Florida 32228-0057, Attention: Technical Library

c. Rebecca Lee, SUPSHIP Bath, 574 Washington St., Bath, Maine 04530, (207) 442-2553, rebecca.lee@supshipba.navy.mil

d. Stephen Lee, Stephen.Lee@supshipgc.navy.mil, (228) 769-4365, (Code 150) Supervisor of Shipbuilding, U.S. Navy P.O. Box 7003 Pascagoula, MS 39568-7003

49. Solicitation for USS MITSCHER ESRA(d) was received on Friday January 16th.

Immediately upon receipt, specifications and drawings were requested, and the CD containing this information was received on Tuesday January 20th. Considering the time it will take to download and distribute this significant information to all parties, including potential competitive subcontractors and material vendors, we respectfully request an extension to the bid date. In order to prepare our best proposal for the Government we need to solicit these subcontractors and material vendors in an orderly manner. They in turn need adequate time to prepare their responses for submittal, evaluation and inclusion into the prime bid.

Please consider an extension to the bid date of at least three (3) weeks, to 3/16/15, to provide the Contractor with ample time to submit a proposal that is most advantageous to the Government.

ANSWER:

The proposal due date is extended to 1000 EST, 6 March 2015.

50. Regarding ITEM NO: 468-90-001, ShipAlt DDG51-78391K

Para 3.1 tells contractor to accomplish requirements of selected reference drawings that include electrical modifications, however the notes in para 4 inform the contractor that the AIT is to accomplish all rip out, installation, termination and test of electrical cable (signal, data, and fiber) and is excluded from the requirements of this work item. The notes go on to say that the AIT contractor will be accomplishing the electrical modifications.

Please confirm that the AIT contractor will accomplish all electrical modifications required by this item, and that offerors are not required to price any electrical requirements in this work item including but not limited to those electrical requirements found in the referenced drawings.

KTR will be responsible for pricing electrical work as per references stipulated in Work Item to include interferences in accordance with NAVSEA STD Items. KTR to utilize Ref. 2.9 to 2.11 for clarification.

51. Block 9 of the SF-33 specifies that offeror should submit an original and four copies. Since Section L calls for an electronic submission only, should Block 9 be changed and left blank?

Proposal delivery instructions have been updated per Amendment 0002 as:

Proposal Due Date: Proposals* must be received no later than 06 March 2015 at 1000, local time

(EST).

NOTE: BLOCK 9 of Section A (Standard Form 33) provides the required number of copies for submission to NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND. Offerors shall utilize the following to comply with all submission requirements under this solicitation.

Offerors shall submit:

Volume Title Number of Paper Originals

Number of Paper Copies

Number of CDs

I Price Proposal

1 3 3

II Technical Proposal

1 4 4

Note 1: The CDs must be scanned to ensure that the files contained on them do not contain any computer viruses

Note 2: The files on the CD shall be in a format that is compatible with and capable of being opened in Microsoft Office Suite 2007 or Adobe Acrobat. The material presented in electronic format shall be identical to the paper copy of the proposal, notwithstanding any other format requirements stated elsewhere in the solicitation.

Note 3: Originals may be shipped in the same boxes as the copies to eliminate excess shipping costs. However, originals should be separately wrapped inside the container, and clearly labeled “ORIGINAL TECHNICAL PROPOSAL” or “ORIGINAL COST PROPOSAL.” The exterior of each box MUST clearly indicate its contents.

Submission shall be made to:

COMMANDER

NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND

ATTN: LT DANILO MEULENER, SEA 02443M, CONTRACT SPECIALIST

1333 ISAAC HULL AVE

WASHINGTON NAVY YARD, DC 20376-2030

Note 4: offerors shall mark all submittals “DO NOT OPEN PACKAGE IN MAIL ROOM— FORWARD UNOPENED DIRECTLY TO SEA 0244”. The outside of the package shall clearly indicate the offeror’s name, the solicitation number, and the contents of the package.

Note 5: LATE PROPOSALS WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED. PARTIAL PROPOSALS OR

ATTACHMENTS SUBMITTED LATE WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED.

52. The USS MITSCHER is not available for a ship check. Please confirm that configuration differences between MITSCHER and GONZALEZ will be addressed as negotiated changes via the CFR/RCC process.

ANSWER:

The USS GONZALEZ is a Flight I DDG therefore configuration differences should be minimal and will not be the subject of negotiated request for contract changes.

The specifications/work statements as defined in Section C of the solicitation may be addressed via the CFR/RCC process in accordance with 5252.217-9107 GROWTH AND NEW WORK (SEP 1990) and applicable NAVSEA Standard items.

53. Releasing the solicitation after local government working hours on 16 January, and before a (government-only) Monday holiday, made the work item specification package unavailable until Tuesday 20 January; thereby taking three full days’ review and estimating time away from the offeror workforce. The ship check target ship is not available until 2-6 February. Considering the size of the work package, the number of ShipAlts, and these other timing issues, there is insufficient time for this contractor to submit an accurate and credible bid by the current proposal due date of 23 February. It is therefore requested that the Government extend the proposal due date from 23 February 2015 to 20 March. It is hoped that the Government will also take into consideration that this solicitation is the transition procurement in the Government’s plan to evolve its contracting strategy away from cost-type MSMO contracts to Firm Fixed Price. There is only east coast company that has prime contractor experience on and daily access to the DDG- 51 platform. As the incumbent prime contractor, that company has the advantage of ship checking any and all DDG-51 class ships in its shipyard. That is a competitive advantage that can only be overcome with the additional estimating and proposal time that this extension request affords.

ANSWER:

See answer to question 49.

54. The following drawings/references are not included in the package received on 1/20/15.

Please provide the following:

123-11-001 Ref. 2.25 136-11-001 Ref. 2.3 522-90-001 Ref. 2.7 980-90-003 Ref. 2.5, 2.6 and 2.8

ANSWER:

123-11-001 Ref. 2.25 (Please utilize “DDG57_Interactive Index on provided CD/DVD)

136-11-001 Ref. 2.3 (Please utilize “DDG57_Interactive Index on provided CD/DVD)

522-90-001 Ref. 2.7 - The government will provide that reference as GFI via CD/DVD to all offerors upon request. The preliminary DDG MOD Critical Path Equipment for AIT turnover is contained on the CD/DVD provided in the "Schedule" folder.

980-90-003 - is “CANCELED” and is replaced with 980-90-018 in Addendum Two.

55. Regarding 009-60, Schedules & Reports:

Standard Item 009-60 requires the Contractor to prepare, provide and submit an integrated Production Schedule that includes key events, milestones, tests and all Alteration Installation

Team (AIT), Ship’s Force, Commercial Industrial Services (CIS), and Fleet Maintenance Activity (FMA) work.

As the Lead Maintenance Activity (LMA) the successful offeror will be responsible for all work being accomplished and will be tasked to organize, structure, and coordinate all availability execution matters. In order to ensure success, ALL other participants must support the LMA regarding the integrated planning process, work control process, and ship certification process.

As stated on page 79 Factor 4 : “The offeror shall provide both electronic and paper format (report does not require incorporation of production (I-level) or Organizational (Ships Force) Schedules)” Page 79 Factor 4 a. i. further states : “Integrate known Alteration Installation Team (AIT) Ship’s Force, Commercial Industrial Services (CIS) and Fleet maintenance Activity (FMA) work.

1) Are the I-Level or Ships Force work anticipated to be supplied to the LMA at any time during the performance period in order to Integrate into the Master production Schedule ?

2) The AIT POA&M’s are not included in the MSP Project supplied to the offeror. If/When the

AIT POAM’s are received please confirm that each AIT will comply with TS9090.

(Reviewing the PDF supplied to the offeror there appears to be some non-compliance issues.)

3) Is there any other work being performed by other activities unknown to the LMA that may impact the Project Team’s ability to meet Key Events or Milestones ?

1) MARMC I-Level/Ship’s Force Work schedules to be provided at time of contract award.

2) AIT Schedules (POA&M) will be supplied as Microsoft Project (.mpp) files to assist offerors with schedule integration. The AITs will comply with TS9090.

3) The government cannot answer this question as it is the KTR responsibility to meet Key Events and milestones in accordance with the solicitation.

56. Regarding 123-11-005, Machinery Room Structural Repairs:

Paragraphs 3.3.6, 3.3.7, 3.6.5 & 3.6.6 refer to 009-32 line and column only. There is no table listed.

Please advise offerors on the 009-32 table to utilize.

The government is in agreement. Work Item was corrected in Errata One.

57. Solicitation for USS MITSCHER ESRA(d) lists inter-port Differentials that shall be applied to all offers proposing performance away from MITSCHER’s home port of Norfolk, Virginia.

These differentials are said to be calculated using foreseeable costs for fuel, towing and pilot charges, and travel to the contractor’s facility by applicable Government personnel. There is no mention of foreseeable cost calculations for the vessel’s crew, such as travel allowances, dedicated transportation to and from home port, or permanent change of station allowances.

There is no mention of additional costs for Norfolk based Alteration Installation Teams (AITs) to ship their material/equipment and to perform their work outside their normal accomplishment of this work in the port of Norfolk.

1) Does the calculation for Government personnel include travel AND associated per diem costs?

2) Has any consideration been given to, and all foreseeable cost calculations included for the vessel’s crew?

3) Has any consideration been given to, and all foreseeable cost calculations included for the multitude of AITs?

Please clarify the methodology of the foreseeable cost calculations and include all real costs that will be incurred by performing the USS MITSCHER ESRA(d) away from the home port, as the current application appears to be a fraction of the actual additional costs that will be incurred by the Government.

ANSWER:

The foreseeable costs were created in accordance with policy for the determination of justifiable inter-port differentials. The schedule of costs considered when creating the inter-port differentials include:

• Fuel Costs for vessel transit from the homeport to the place of availability execution and return.

• Towing and Pilot charges

• Escort Ship Charges (if applicable)

• Type Commander or Squadron Commander Travel for the oversight of the

Availability

• Ship’s Force Travel, for one person, to monitor work performed at the homeport intermediate maintenance activity (IMA)

• Ship’s Force Travel, for 15% of the crew, to attend schooling

58. Regarding 411-90-001 and Various Other Items, ShipAlt DDG51-78511K:

USS MITSCHER ESRA(d) contains several items that will require AITs to accomplish electrical and other modifications. The specifications for these items, at paragraph 4.5 states: The AIT contractor accomplishing electrical modifications shall accomplish all hot work operations (to include but not be limited to welding, burning, grinding, drilling, and fire-watch operations) required to install new/modify existing cableways to accommodate new and rerouted cable installations. This will include all required cable support brackets, collars, MCTs and stuffing tubes.

Paragraph 4.6 goes on to state: The AIT contractor shall accomplish the installation of all foundations for electrical equipment/components under 75 pounds (method mount).

The Contractor has concerns with this direction as it applies to areas of Safety, Health, and Environmental - The obvious safety risks are to our people, our facility and your vessel and crew.

The less obvious but major environmental risks associated with hot work, and specifically welding are twofold; worker exposure and environmental exposure. The worker exposure is significant and highly regulated under OSHA requiring in depth process knowledge and understanding, guided by industrial hygienists, to ensure workers are protected from exposure to hex chrome, cadmium, and lead in accordance with OSHA defined limits. We have procedures governing the materials that can be used, the processes that use them, and lastly the PPE that is mandated for all employees engaged in the welding process. For the environmental exposure, detailed record keeping and analysis is conducted to quantify the exposure beyond the fence line to the public at large. For all of these reasons, it is essential that we maintain control of the exposure aspects of welding.

1) Please clarify and confirm that Government AITs involved with hot work will be schooled in these dangers and will exhibit strict compliance with the rules of our facility concerning Safety, Health and Environmental.

2) For items 411-90-001, 456-90-001, 456-90-002, 456-90-003, 468-90-001, 512-90-001 and 721-90-001, where the specifications have directed that AITs shall accomplish their own hot work operations :

a) Where will these AITs obtain their power, ventilation, and other shipyard services that may be required?

b) Will they require crane service?

c) How will these AITs handle gas free engineering and hot work chits?

d) NAVSEA STD Item 009-07, paragraph 3.3 says “Provide trained fire watches, at all affected areas where hot work is being accomplished.” Because the Employer (each AIT) is responsible to ensure that the fire watches are trained under an approved program, please confirm this will be the case.

e) Please confirm that this training program will be submitted, approved, and followed in accordance with the requirements of 3.3

f) Please confirm that AIT furnished fire extinguishing equipment will be as described in

2.2 (OSHA 29 CFR 1915), 2.4 (NFPA 51B), and 2.5 (NFPA 312).

g) Please confirm that these AITs will utilize dedicated fire watches.

h) Will AITs bring their own welding and burning equipment?

i) Are you aware that the employer of the AIT welders will need to provide documentation that they are trained IAW OSHA and Standard Items to conduct drop tests?

j) Are you aware that their electrical equipment must meet NFPA and UL requirements?

k) Are you aware that their portable power tools must meet OSHA and UL standards?

Please confirm that AITs will perform their own housekeeping duties and all other applicable requirements of 009-07.

1. ALL Government Work shall be accomplished under the applicable NAVSEA technical standard and regulatory Safety and Environmental standards.

2. For - 2a, 2b Government Work Support Services are stipulated in Work Items 980-90-001 to

908-90-017.

3. For - 2c - All Government Work shall utilize the same Gas Free and Hot Work approval processes.

For – 2d, 2e, 2f, 2g, 2j and 2k: ALL Government Work shall be accomplished under the applicable NAVSEA technical standard and regulatory Safety and Environmental standards.

59. Regarding 992-11-002, Temporary Air Conditioning; provide:

Paragraph 3.1.1 calls for the installation, maintenance and relocation of temporary air conditioning when directed by the SUPERVISOR. Notwithstanding paragraph 4.1, for bidding purposes, should the contractor assume that temporary air conditioning is to be installed and maintained in all spaces listed in paragraph 1.2? Moreover, will the Government specify the number of “moves” to be priced, or will requested moves be covered by CFR/RCC/equitable adjustment?

ANSWER:

The contractor shall assume that temporary air conditioning is to be installed and maintained in all spaces listed in paragraph 1.2.

The Government will not specify the number of “moves” to be priced. Moves will be the incorporated via the RCC process.

Please price the work item as written accordingly.

60. Regarding 993-31-003, Temporary Main Reduction Gear (MRG) Dehumidifier System;

provide:

Paragraph 3.5 states that “Each component shall operate as reported in 3.1.1.” Paragraph referenced should be 3.1.2 vice 3.1.1. Please confirm.

The Government is in agreement. Changes made to work item in Errata Two.

61. Regarding 630-80-001, ShipAlt DDG51-64155D, VLS Fairing Plate Corrosion Modification;

accomplish:

Drawing 7284240A, sheet 22 requires welding of CRES Fairing Plate Bracket to VLS Skirt Plate.

The material for the VLS Skirt Plate is not identified. Please provide material details for the VLS Skirt Plate to allow determination of welding requirements.

VLS Skirt Plate is Steel.

62. Regarding 264-90-001, ShipAlt DDG51-85973K, DDG Lube Oil Purifier Heat Exchanger Modifications; accomplish:

Paragraph 3.1 requires “remove and retain systems oil”. There is no direction on what to do with retained oil. Please clarify.

The Government is in agreement. Changes made to work item in Errata Two.

63. Based on e-mail communications with NAVSEA and MARMC this week, the procedure for obtaining references that were omitted from the CD/DVD package is unclear. Contractor personnel have submitted requests directly to MARMC (as instructed in the RFP and listed below) and been instructed that “bidder questions” should go only to Contracting Officer representatives in NAVSEA. After review, the NAVSEA Contracts Specialist indicated via e-mail that it was acceptable to send reference requests directly to MARMC, in accordance with the RFP. Later e-mail from the MARMC PM indicated, however, that requests for omitted references should be submitted as “bidder questions” (which by earlier direction flow only to NAVSEA). Is a request for a missing reference considered a “bidder question”? If it is, is this type of bidder question permitted to go directly to the MARMC PM on the S-1 Form, or must it flow only to NAVSEA Contracts? Please clarify so that we may expedite access to missing references while following proper protocol and maintaining procurement integrity.

From the RFP, page 75, “Should any required references, including NAVSEA Standard Drawings, Military Standards, Naval Ships Technical Manuals, and Tech Manuals, not be included in the CD/DVD, they will either be provided upon request to Brian Campbell at brian.a.campbell1@navy.mil (copy to Brian Kimm and LCDR Douglas Quinn) and/or made available for review (please copy Brian Campbell and the Contracting Officer and Contracts Specialist listed above) at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Maintenance Center Technical Library, located at the following address:"

Section L will be revised as follows:

Offerors may request a CD/DVD by contacting Brian Kimm and LT Danilo Meulener at brian.kimm@navy.mil and danilo.meulener@navy.mil. CD/DVD delivery will then be coordinated with the following regional POCs as initiated by Brian Kimm or LT Danilo Meulener.

a. Brian Campbell, brian.a.campbell1@navy.mil, (757) 822-4875, Mid-Atlantic Regional Maintenance Center, 9727 Avionics Loop, Naval Station Norfolk, Norfolk VA 23511-

b. Kathy Dugan, kathy.dugan@navy.mil, (904) 270-5126 ext. 3145 Southeast Regional Maintenance Center (SERMC), PO Box 280057, Mayport Naval Station Jacksonville, Florida 32228-0057, Attention: Technical Library

c. Rebecca Lee, SUPSHIP Bath, 574 Washington St., Bath, Maine 04530, (207) 442-2553, rebecca.lee@supshipba.navy.mil

d. Stephen Lee, Stephen.Lee@supshipgc.navy.mil, (228) 769-4365, (Code 150) Supervisor of Shipbuilding, U.S. Navy P.O. Box 7003 Pascagoula, MS 39568-7003

Should any required references, including NAVSEA Standard Drawings, Military Specifications, Naval Ships Technical Manuals, and Tech Manuals, not be included in the CD/DVD, the above data shall be requested in the same manner as outlined above for requesting a CD/DVD.

64. Work Specification Items 411-90-001, 456-90-001, 456-90-002, 456-90-003, 468-90-001, 512-90-001, and 721-90-001 contain statements in paragraph 3 and/or 4 that state, “The contractor shall allow unhindered AIT access to accomplish government work. . . “. Please clarify what is meant by “unhindered”. Will the Government provide schedules for all AIT work to enable the contractor to adequately assess the cost of providing “unhindered” access to the AIT in advance or providing a price for these work items?

“Unhindered” means that access shall be provided in accordance with HQ C-2-0004 ACCESS TO THE VESSEL(S) (AT) (NAVSEA) (JAN 1983), which states:

“Officers, employees and associates of other prime Contractors with the Government and their subcontractors, shall, as authorized by the Supervisor, have, at all reasonable times, admission to the plant, access to the vessel(s) where and as required, and be permitted, within the plant and on the vessel(s) required, to perform and fulfill their respective obligations to the Government. The Contractor shall make reasonable arrangements with the Government or Contractors of the Government, as shall have been identified and authorized by the Supervisor to be given admission to the plant and access to the vessel(s) for office space, work areas, storage or shop areas, or other facilities and services, necessary for the performance of the respective responsibilities involved, and reasonable to their performance.”

AIT Schedules (POA&M) will be supplied as Microsoft Project (.mpp) files to assist offerors with schedule integration included on the CD/DVD which is available upon request.

65. Work Specification Items 411-90-001, 456-90-001, 456-90-002, 456-90-003, 468-90-001, 512-90-001, and 721-90-001 contain statements in paragraph 4 which state that the AIT is to accomplish work associated with the work specification item but “is excluded from the requirements of this Work Spec.” Please clarify this statement.

The statements provided in Sections 4 are for informational purposes only and do not amend the scope of Sections 1-3 of the work items. Offerors are to price the requirements of Sections 1-3 in accordance with the applicable NAVSEA technical requirements contained therein.

66. Solicitation Section C, paragraph 3.2 state, “DELAYS / DISRUPTIONS: The contractor shall coordinate the work effort with the NSA Project Manager on a daily basis to prevent changing situations from causing delays and disruptions. Disruption due to minor delays in obtaining access to spaces and operation of equipment are to be expected. A minor delay is defined as eight hours or less. These disruptions are considered normal rather than unusual occurrences during the performance of tasks ordered under this contract. If, during contract performance, delays greater than those indicated above are encountered, the Contractor shall immediately verbally notify the Project Manager and Contracting Officer, followed by a written statement within 24 hours after occurrence of delay, stating time of impact, reason for delay, duration of impact, number of people affected, action taken to properly schedule the work, action taken to minimize impact, and the names of the Government person(s) contacted.”

It is assumed that the definition of a minor delay is eight man-hours in the course of execution of a work specification item. Nothing in the stated definition precludes the Government from imposing upon the contractor the requirement to absorb multiple individual eight hour delays in the course of execution of a work specification item. Please modify the definition to clearly indicate that the Government’s intent is for the contractor to absorb a single eight man-hour delay in the course of execution of a work specification item.

The government shall enforce minor delays as stipulated in Section 3.2 of the statement of work, in accordance with applicable NAVSEA standard items, as written.

67. The requirement to provide “unhindered access to the AIT” is in direct contradiction to the “ACCESS TO VESSEL” clause (DFARS 252.217-7011) which requires that the contractor provide admission to facilities and access to vessel on a “non-interference basis, as necessary to perform their respective responsibilities.” Please reconcile this discrepancy.

See answer to question 64.

68. Solicitation Section B, paragraph 1.5 “Labor and Material Rates” states, “The material mark-up rates applies to materials to be provided to the ship as part of the repair that will sail away with the ship”. This paragraph goes on to say that welding rod and common fasteners are part of the contractor’s overhead and not subject to the mark-up. Welding rod and common fasteners do sail away with the ship and are not presently included in the contractor’s list of consumables in the contractor’s DCAA audited Forward Pricing Rate. Please remove the inclusion of these materials as overhead consumables.

In part, the intent of paragraph 1.5 is to ensure that the Navy and all offerors for the USS MITSCHER Availability have an identical definition of “sail away” material and consumable materials for the purposes of this clause. The Navy also intends that offerors treat “Sail away” and consumable materials identically for the purposes of pricing the Ship Repair Labor Rate and the Material Mark Up Rate, regardless of individual contractor’s DCAA audited Forward Pricing Rates.

This identical treatment is intended to ensure that offerors are evaluated on a level basis and that the clause will be implemented with a common understanding between the Navy and the successful offeror during execution.

However, the Navy will revise the definitions of “Sail away” material and consumable materials as follows:

“Sail away” Material – Material, that is not specifically consumable material, that will sail away with the ship (e.g. equipment, replacement steel, pipes, fasteners, etc).

Consumable materials – material consumed or used in the process of repair (e.g. welding rods, paint buckets, paint brushes, and protective clothing, etc) .

The clause will be revised to reflect the clarified definitions.

69. Solicitation Section B, paragraph 1.3 states, “The fully burdened Ship Repair Labor Rate is a fixed rate that includes all wages, overhead, general and administrative expenses, Facilities Capital Cost of Money (FCOM) and profit. The fully burdened Ship Repair Labor Rate represents a blended rate to be performed by the offeror, including ………………., and all subcontractors. As the fully burdened Ship Repair Labor Rate is intended to be all inclusive, subcontractors proposed to complete efforts under the trade rate schedule may not be proposed as separate material or ODC charges”.

Due to the vast range of labor rates proposed by the numerous local subcontractors with varying skill sets and in order to develop a reasonable composite rate that will prevent undue hardship to the contractor, please identify the exact nature and scope of growth work to be encountered.

The Government will not provide the exact nature and scope of growth and new work to be encountered. Offerors shall use their best judgment to propose a fully burdened Ship Repair Labor Rate that accounts for the variance of the potential growth and new work to be encountered during the execution of the USS MITSCHER Availability and the associated variance of subcontractor labor rates to develop a composite rate that covers the offeror’s risk.

70. The Clause entitled “NAVSEA 5252.217-9121 INDEMNIFICATION FOR ACCESS TO VESSEL (MAY 1989)” is incorporated by full text into this solicitation. The Clause states:

“Notwithstanding any provision in the “ACCESS TO VESSEL” clause (DFARS 252.217-7011), or any other clause of the Contract, Seller agrees to allow officers, employees, and associates of the Government, or other prime contractors with the Government and their subcontractors, and officers, employees, and associates of Seller or other offerors on other contemplated work, admission to Buyer’s Facilities and access to the Vessel without any further request for indemnification from any party, which has not been previously included in the Contract Price.”

Paragraph (b) of 252.217-7011 Access to vessel states that “(b) All personnel granted access shall comply with Contractor rules governing personnel at its shipyard.” It is the Contractor’s policy to require all entrants to its shipyard to indemnify Contractor against all claims, demands, or causes of action arising in whole or in part from the negligence or other wrongful act or omission of the entrant or its agents or employees, or any subcontractor, or its agents or employees. Contractor factors such indemnification into its risk analysis when determining its submitted pricing. Is it the Government’s intention to limit any and all indemnification by entrants proceeding under the “Access to Vessel” clause on behalf of the Contactor even if such indemnification is of no greater scope than would normally be applied to other personnel entering its facility?

No, it is not the Government’s intention to limit any and all indemnification by entrants if such indemnification is of no greater scope than would normally be applied to other personnel entering its facility. However, the Government intends to ensure pricing is fair and reasonable and reflects the Offeror’s allocation of risks among itself and third parties. The allocation of the risks should be reflected in the Offeror’s pricing.

71. Regarding 411-90-001, ShipAlt51-78511K, AWS: ACB12/TI12 CIC Display:

For item 411-90-001, para. 2.42, DDG MOD CRITICAL PATH EQUIPMENT Cable System to AIT and Test Requirement Turnover Schedule for DDG-57 is not on the CD/DVD package provided by MARMC. Please provide or advise.

See answer to question 63.

72. Regarding DDG 57 Adv Plan 6 13 15reva (Prelim).mpp file:

In the Master Integrated Schedule provided on the MARMC CD/DVD, contractor is unable to expand the “DDG57 POAMs” at activity number 5247 (see below). Clicking on the “+” key to expand results in Microsoft Project attempting to open a linked file from, apparently, a government or third party computer (see Windows dialog below). Please provide or advise.

73. Solicitation is somewhat ambiguous regarding the price to support 009-72. Our understanding is that you require each Contractor to provide a narrative along with a price estimate (including basis of estimate) to complete the requirements of 009-72 and submit this separately as instructed on page 77 – Price Proposal – g. 009-72 Supporting Price information. It is also our understanding that this should not be included in our total price or the J-4 spreadsheet.

Since there is no CLIN or Item included in J-4, please confirm that this pricing is not to be included anywhere in our price proposal (other than as g.).

NAVSEA Standard Item 009-72 is Category I and, in accordance with the solicitation, is included without further reference. Accordingly, the offerors price for the USS MITSCHER work package shall include the price to support 009-72. However, as the Navy has installed Port Security Barriers that protect some but not all potential offerors, the Navy intends to remove the cost of compliance with Standard Item 009-72 from its calculation of total evaluated price.

Therefore, in accordance with Section L “009-72 Supporting Price Information,” As part of the Price proposal package, the offeror shall submit other than cost and pricing information sufficient for the Contracting Office to validate the offeror’s price associated with completing the requirements of 009-72. This other than cost and pricing data shall include a both narrative description, including the basis of all labor and material estimates, and a quantitative and traceable price estimate by cost element to complete these requirements.

However, as described in Section M, “Factor 5: Price,” While the costs to support 009-72 will be evaluated for reasonableness, the price to support 009-72 will not be included in the Navy’s calculation of Total evaluated price.

74. USS MITSCHER ESRA(d) Solicitation directs contractors to provide a fully loaded man-hour rate for direct production man-hours that will be used for negotiating growth and new work to be performed under this contract. It is understood that the fully burdened Ship Repair Labor Rate is a fixed hourly rate that includes all wages, overhead, general and administrative expenses, Facilities Capital Cost of Money (FCCOM) and profit. It is also understood that the fully burdened Ship Repair Labor Rate represents a blended rate to be performed by the offeror, including labor transferred between divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates of the offeror under a common control.

With respect to subcontractors, it is impossible to provide a rate that encompasses all potential subcontractors. Potential subcontractors proposed to complete efforts in the execution of USS MITSCHER contract will have gone through the competitive process, their inclusion in the successful offeror’s proposal is subject to change for many different reasons, and their rates are not under the control of the Prime Contractor. As long as a reasonable determination can be made as to their price reasonableness for growth and new work, they should be included in the same group as Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEMs) and Government directed subcontractors.

1) In order to avoid significant additional costs inherent in the pre-pricing of risks and unavoidable layering associated with the proposed requirement, please confirm that all subcontractors will be treated as material under this requirement with the appropriate markup applied in accordance with the solicitation.

Absent this confirmation, please confirm that the Government will be willing to accept this composite “bid rate”, regardless of growth/new work dollar values at the item level, for subcontractors with cost structures lower than the Prime contractor’s “bid rate”. This confirmation is required to ensure the offset necessary for those subcontractors with cost structures higher than the “bid rate”.

See answer to question 69.

75. USS MITSCHER ESRA(d) Solicitation directs contractors to provide a fully loaded man-hour rate for direct production man-hours that will be used for negotiating growth and new work to be performed under this contract. It is understood that the fully burdened Ship Repair Labor Rate is a fixed hourly rate that includes all wages, overhead, general and administrative expenses, Facilities Capital Cost of Money (FCCOM) and profit. It is also understood that the fully burdened Ship Repair Labor Rate represents a blended rate to be performed by the offeror, including labor transferred between divisions, subsidiaries, or affiliates of the offeror under a common control.

The Contractor is directed to provide these rates for Straight Time, Overtime, and Double Time per the following guidance:

1.6 Definitions:

1) Straight Time Hours – Work performed during an employee’s scheduled 8 hour day.

2) Overtime Hours - Hours worked in excess of eight hours up to and including 12 hours in any work day, and for the first eight hours worked on the seventh consecutive day of work in a work week.

3) Double Time - Hours worked in excess of 12 hours in any workday and for all hours worked in excess of eight on the seventh consecutive day of work in a workweek.

Because each Contractor has different disclosure statements and charging practices, your definition of Overtime does not fit every contractor. Every contractor has to be able to price Overtime in accordance with their charging practice and/or Collective Bargaining Agreement to remain consistent with the way they PAY overtime to their employees.

1) Please confirm that Contractors should price Overtime consistent with their own practices including narrative that explains any differences to the definitions listed above.

In part, the intent of paragraph 1.6 is to ensure that the Navy and all offerors for the USS MITSCHER Availability have an identical definition of Straight Time, Overtime, and Double Time for the purposes of this clause. The Navy also intends that offerors treat Straight Time, Overtime, and Double Time identically for the purposes of pricing the Ship Repair Labor Rates, regardless of individual contractor’s disclosure statements and normal charging practices.

This identical treatment is intended to ensure that offerors are evaluated on a level basis and that the clause will be implemented with a common understanding between the Navy and the successful offeror during execution.

Therefore, offerors shall provide pricing for straight time, overtime and double time in accordance with the definitions provided.

76. Regarding 324-11-001, Automatic Bus Transfer Switch:

Paragraph 3.1.1 directs contractors to accomplish 009-16 to the equipment listed. Routinely following a 009-16, there is a parts clause included in the specification listing a dollar amount for the parts replaced.

Please confirm the parts replaced will be the subject of a change order.

ANSWER:

Please refer to the Work Item specification and the applicable NAVSEA CATII standard items contained therein. Offerors shall price the requirements of 324-11-001 as provided in the work item.

77. Regarding SI 009-07, 009-28, 009-74, FY15 CHG-1 Standard Items:

USS MITSCHER ESRA(d) Solicitation invokes NAVSEA FY15 CHG 1 Standard Items. Some of the requirements for communication, fire prevention, warning systems, and trained safety observers contained in these items are unclear and potentially costly beyond what is necessary.

The Ship’s 1MC is used as an example of the preferred operational general announcing, casualty and warning system.

1) Is it reasonable to expect that the Supervisor, the Contractor, and the Ship’s Force will work together to minimize the time that the preferred, permanent system might need to be secured?

2) If the system needs to be secured for a short period of time, could the Ship’s Force man the sound powered phone system as a substitute?

3) If a temporary system is required due to a long outage will the contractor be entitled to compensation?

4) For areas/spaces that are not normally manned and a general announcing system cannot be heard, the installation of a temporary general announcing system that can be heard (3.22) is an ambiguous requirement that could be open to interpretation. Can more detailed requirements be provided so that all offerors are on equal footing?

5) In an effort to reduce cost to the Government by reducing speculation and interpretation, and to equalize all offerors, could a Level of Effort (man-hours and material) for trained safety observers (3.22) be included? This LOE pool could also be utilized for the trained safety observers that are required to be assigned for Supervisor personnel (3.23) that will be entering confined spaces when requested by the Supervisor. This (3.23) is currently an impossible requirement to price.

The Government will be providing a temporary 1MC system for this solicitation.

All Category I NAVSEA Standard item shall be invoked as written, without further reference.

78. Regarding 123-11-001, Fuel Oil Tank Group One, 2, 3, 4, 4 and 6.

Paragraph 3.2 directs contractors to repair bolting rings for manholes in each tank group.

There is nothing describing the repairs.

Please provide direction and describe the repairs required or add a LOE paragraph to cover for repairs.

Please refer to work item 992-31-001 for the required repairs on the bolting rings for manholes.

79. In response to Question #15:

Questions and Answers received (see No.15) indicate no change to definition of minor delays (8 hours) will be made even though previous fixed price solicitations have defined minor delays as 2 hours or less.

A definition of 8 hours puts excessive burdens and risks on the contractor/subcontractors. Besides being inconsistent with prior solicitations, the loss or delay of a full shift is unreasonable and will require the prime contractor and all supporting subcontractors to price in an allowance for such excessive delays in their offers.

Please reconsider this request in the interest of all parties.

The government shall enforce minor delays as stipulated in Section 3.2 of the solicitation and in accordance with applicable NAVSEA standard items.

80. Response to Bidders Questions; No. 2 and No. 33 posted on 30 January 2015, “Refer to the upcoming Amendment which will reference one original and 4 copies within Section L.”

Amendment No. 1 as posted at approximately the same time as Bidders Questions with no clarification. Are these reference answers directed to a forth coming Amendment No. 2? Would it not be more convenient to only require submittal via e-mail?

The requirements are currently in conflict with each other – please confirm that proposals are to be emailed per 2.0 INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE SUBMISSION OF OFFERS on page 74 OF 93, which would indicate that no hard copies are to be delivered.

See answer to question 51.

81. Regarding 980-90-015, SA 80315K Replace AFFF & CMWD SOPVS AIT Support

Paragraph 3.10.1 mentions prerequisite crew training for low level tests and 3.10.2 states to assist Ships Force with testing systems.

Please confirm all training and testing will be accomplished by the AIT and the contractor is not pricing 3.10 – 3.10.2.

Recommend 3.10 – 3.10.2 be deleted

A government activity will be accomplishing work in 3.10 to 3.10.2 during the contract period.

82. Regarding 980-90-003, OA 74435, 79353 & 80083:

Errata No. 1 deleted reference 2.5, 2.6 & 2.8 from the specification, however, the specification directs the contractor to accomplish work in accordance with these references.

Please either provide the missing references or delete the requirements of the specification to accomplish work in accordance with said references.

ANSWER:

980-90-003 - is “CANCELED” and is replaced with 980-90-018 in Addendum Two.

83. Errata No. 1 deleted reference 2.5, 2.6 & 2.8 from the specification, however, the specification directs the contractor to accomplish work in accordance with these references.

Please either provide the missing references or delete the requirements of the specification to accomplish work in accordance with said references.

980-90-003 - is “CANCELED” and is replaced with 980-90-018 in Addendum Two.

84. In Section B, paragraph 1.3, the solicitation states, “. . . subcontractors proposed to complete efforts under the trade rate schedule may not be proposed as separate material or ODC charges.”

Given that the contractor cannot anticipate and propose all of the possible subcontractors needed to accomplish growth and new work in the course of execution of the resultant contract, will the contractor be permitted to propose subcontractors who were not initially proposed to complete efforts under the trade rate schedule as a separate ODC charge with the appropriate burdens and profit applied?

See the answer to question 69.

85. Regarding 655-80-001, ShipAlt DDG-51-79196D, Self Service Laundry Transition;

Accomplish:

The pages contained in the RLAR 1126958 reference file provided on the initial Government CD/DVD show no reference to “RLAR 1126958”. Please provide RLAR 1126958 documents or delete paragraph 2.6 from work item.

See Answer to question (from BQ set 1 to same question) RLAR 1126958 and the contents therein is applicable to the USS MITSCHER (DDG 57)

86. Please provide all applicable General Arrangement drawings for USS MITSCHER (DDG 57).

ANSWER:

Please request access to Naval Ship Engineering Drawing Repository https://199.208.213.105/webjedmics/login/newWinRootFrameSet.jsp .

87. Regarding 980-90-006, OA and SA 79362 AWS Seawater Flow Meter, AIT Support:

Para. 3.1 asks the contractor to transport tool box to and from the supply. Where is the supply located?

The government is in agreement. Work Item will be corrected in an upcoming Errata.

88. Regarding 456-90-001, ShipAlt DDG51-78512K, AWS: ACB12/TI12 MMSP Upgrade for DDGS; accomplish:

It has come to our attention that there are 2 missing references from the reference folder 456-90- 001, they are:

• 2.14 LAR 01002/DDG51/1147688 Revise ECW PPG to Suit Maintenance Envelope in RR2

• 2.15 LAR 78512/DDG57/1148230 Cable Ladder Assembly Call Out Discrepancy

Will these references be furnished? Please advise.

89. Regarding 150-11-007, 320-80-001, 523-80-001, 630-80-001, 655-80-001, Various (Ship Check related):

In ship checks conducted over the past two days, offeror observed that subject work items have already been completed on the ship made available for ship check. offeror is unable to accurately assess all that will be required to accomplish these work items using USS GONZALEZ. It is requested that the Government provide an alternate Norfolk-based vessel for ship check. Please advise.

USS…