LPD_17_QA_1_Final.pdf

NAVAL SEA SYSTEMS COMMAND

N00024-16-R-4409

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS #1

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

1. Regarding the Government’s writing of specifications for manhour/manday and material reserves in the work package, the following language is misleading to estimators when placed anywhere other than the last subparagraph in the Requirements paragraph (para. 3). Throughout the work package, the language consistently reads, “…to accomplish work not previously identified in this Work Item, as directed by the SUPERVISOR”. In theory, if this language is placed anywhere other than in the last Requirements subparagraph, offerors could rightfully not estimate specific subparagraphs that fall subsequent to this language. For example, in work item 233-14-009, the RTR call-out is in para.

3.15, followed by para. 3.16 which calls out 009-32. If the Government expects offerors to specifically estimate para. 3.16 in our bids, you should have the RTR call-out after the 009-32. As an example of how this offeror believes RTR call-outs should be placed for more consistent and accurate bidding, please refer to 233-14-011. In that work item, the 009-32 requirement is in paragraph 3.22, and the RTR call-out is in the last paragraph of the work item, 3.23. In this case, it should be clear to all offerors that all specific requirements are to be estimated PLUS the RTR. For fair and balanced bidding, please clarify your intent in response to this question or change all work items to reflect the Government’s true intent.

a) The Government’s intent was to place the RTR language “…to accomplish work not previously identified in this Work Item, as directed by the SUPERVISOR” in the last subparagraph in the requirements paragraph 3 for all work specifications in Attachment J-1 to cover the entire work item. For consistent bidding, throughout the work package, when the RTR language appears prior to the last paragraph, the Government intends for the RTR to cover the entire work item.

2. The Government’s use of “man-hours”, “manhours”, “mandays” and “man-days” is extremely inconsistent in the SAN ANTONIO work package. Offeror is not requesting wholesale change, but it is requesting more consistency in future spec-writing. With large packages that have to be turned around quickly, inconsistency in specification writing contributes to misinterpretation of requirements or miscalculation in estimating, neither of which makes for accurate availability bidding or smooth execution.

a) The use of the terms “man-hours”, “manhours”, “mandays” and “man-days” in the San Antonio is noted and will be taken into consideration in writing future requirements.

3. Work Items 241-11-002, 262-41-001, 262-42-001, 551-52-002, 634-11-009, 634- 11-010: Paragraph 3.15 states, “Provide 10,300 dollars of material to accomplish work not previously identified in Work Item, as directed by the SUPERVISOR. If the total cost is less than the authorized manday and dollar amounts, remaining funds will be subject to recoupment.” Did the Government mean to also include a man-day reserve, or only material for this work item?

a) The requirement is only authorized for material reservations.

4. In order to afford all contractors ample time to prepare an accurate proposal that will be most beneficial to the Government, it is requested that the bid date be extended by 30 days, to November 16, 2016.

a) Due to the projected award date referenced in the solicitation, 19 January 2017, with an availability start date of 06 March 2017, the program cannot afford to issue an extension to the proposal submission due date.

5. The Category I Standard Items provided in the index section of attachment J-1

Specification package are FY17. However, the Category II Standard Items provided in J-1 are FY16. Page 19 of 92 in the RFP indicates that both Category I and Category II are to be FY17. Will the Government be updating the Standard Items provided?

a) Page 19 of the RFP which states that both Category I and Category II are to be FY17 is correct and bidders should propose accordingly. The index section of attachment J-1 will be updated and provided in a future errata to the work specification package.

6. Work Item: 123-14-002: 009-32 (FY-16 (CH-1)), Table 4, Line 7, Column A, calls for SP-10. Due to the small size of the areas to be touched up, and the small tank sizes, will the Government consider adding a paragraph to accomplish SP-11 (power tool to bare metal) for the areas needing preservation? (para. 3.1)

a) Work Item 123-14-002 does not need revision as SP-11 is already authorized per 009-32 for areas under 10 feet and less than 10 percent of the total area being preserved. SP-10 is authorized for any areas fewer than 10 square feet per the requirements of NSI 009-32. SP-11 will not be added.

7. Section M, Factor 5, states that the price of the basic contract line items numbers

(CLIN) (this amount shall match the total price of all work items plus the incentive). Please confirm there are no incentives.

a) The Government confirms that there are no incentives associated with this solicitation and the language “plus incentive” is removed. Please refer to

Amendment 0001 of the RFP which incorporates this change to Section M, Factor 5.

8. The Contractor requests the shipcheck window be extended through September 30th, 2016.

a) The Government will make the USS Arlington available for ship check through September 27th, 2016.