S-1_Bidder_Questions_Answers_7-23_FBO.pdf

QUESTION

NO.

SOLIC.

SECTION

AND

PAGE

GENERAL

SUBJECT

STATEMENT REQUIRING

CLARIFICATION OR QUESTION

ANSWER

7 2 TIER

SOLICITATI

ON

As a S/B MSR KTR notes there is no provision in subject solicitation addressing the possibility of submitting a proposal in response to both the “Big MAC” and the “Little

MAC” tiers of this solicitation. If a contractor is interested in submitting a proposal in response to both tiers , are two separate proposals required or will one proposal suffice.

Two separate proposals are not necessary. Little MAC Offerors shall only submit a proposal in response to the Little MAC requirements. Big MAC Offerors shall submit a proposal in response to all requirements. Offerors should note the MAC specific instructions in Section L of the solicitation.

8 Section C;

SOW 1.1.6;

page 17 of

Section L;

page 127 of

GFM SOW Section 1.1.6 states that GFM cited in the DO will be delivered or made available.

The proposal instructions for Volume

IV – Pre-Award Information requests a description of the company's financial resources to perform two concurrent PMAVs.

In order to correctly respond to this requirement one needs to know the amount and type of GRF/GFE. Please elaborate on what the contractor is required to provide to perform the

PMS and what the Government will furnish (e.g., special tools, test equipment).

Please refer to Attachment S-2 and the latest Force Revision for additional information concerning

PMAV requirements. Offerors are required to provide all necessary tools and test equipment to conduct all requirements simultaneously.

For the purposes of demonstrating financial resources, assume no

GFE/GFM will be provided.

However, during contract execution, GFE/GFM may be provided on a DO by DO basis.

9 Page 54 of

Clauses

Incorporated

By Full Text

HQ F-2-0006 MILESTONES

(NAVSEA) (SEP 1990) – Please confirm that this clause/requirement does NOT apply to Little MAC offerors.

The Amendment will reflect the change that specifies, this clause applies to Big MAC offerors only.

10 Section L;

page 118 of

Submission of

Proposals

Section A. Proposal Structure, item

(6) states: “The proposals must be prepared using the Times New Roman typeface at a font size no smaller than

12-points.”

Would the Government allow the use of smaller (i.e., 10 point) font in tables and graphics, with the understanding that this allowance will not be used to subvert proposal page limitations?

No, smaller fonts will not be allowed.

11 Section L;

page 118 of

Submission of

Proposals

Section A. Proposal Structure, item

(6) states: “The proposals must be prepared using the Times New Roman typeface at a font size no smaller than

12-points.”

Would the Government allow the use of smaller font in proposal headers and footers?

No, smaller fonts will not be allowed.

12 Section L;

page 118 of

Submission of

Proposals

Section C. states: “Offerors must comply with specific information submission requirements found below under Paragraph III entitled, “Technical Proposal”, paragraph IV entitled, “Past Performance”, and paragraph V entitled, “Price

Proposal.”

Amendment will be made to clearly clarify the submission description.

Can the Government please clarify the location of the referenced submission requirements, as a “Paragraph III” is not included below that sentence?

13 Section C;

SOW 1.2.1;

page 20 of

SOW How will the PMS execution be incorporated into an availability? The

RFP suggests it will be considered an

AIT effort. This raises the following questions:

1. Will each of the PMS checks be a separate work item in NMD?

2. Will there be a required project plan/critical path document?

3. How will the availability work list be reconciled with the PMS task list?

4. Will multiple execution windows be available to execute PMS around the availability work?

5. How will this play in the availability certification process?

PMS is not considered an AIT effort. PMS efforts will be directed by the Government and specified on the delivery order.

1. NMD does not track PMS, an

EAM system is utilized.

2. There will not be a required project plan/critical path document.

3. Delivery Order will specify which PMS will be accomplished.

4. Yes, there may be multiple execution windows available for

PMS during CNO Availabilities.

5. There is no certification for PMS, FM or Corrosion Control.

14 Section C General SOW Will the Corrosion Control and the

Facilities Maintenance be included in tasks with preventative maintenance or will separate tasks be competed for each?

Requirements will be defined at the

Delivery Order level.

15 Section C General SOW Does the Government intend to hold task order competitions by single

PMAV; by hull number for a period of time (e.g., 6 months, 1 year); or all hull single PMAVs for a certain period of time?

Requirements will be defined at the

Delivery Order level.

16 HQ E-2-

QUALITY

MANAGE

MENT

SYSTEM

REQUIRE

MENTS

(NAVSEA)

(APR

2017), page

Quality

Assurance

Requirements

HQ E-2-0015 QUALITY

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

REQUIREMENTS (NAVSEA) (APR

2017), page 52, states “The Contractor shall provide and maintain a quality management system that, as a minimum, adheres to the requirements of ANSI/ISO/ASQ 9001-2015 Quality

Management Systems and supplemental requirements imposed by this contract... Existing quality documents that meet the requirements of this contract may continue to be used.” In accordance with the guidance set forth by the International

Standards Organization (ISO), companies have until September 2018 to start using an ISO 9001:2015

Quality Management System.

NAVSEA Standard Item 009-04 references both the 2008 and 2015 standards. Please clarify whether or not compliance to ISO 9001:2008 is acceptable for the submission of proposals.

Offeror’s shall comply with the requirements of HQ E-2-0015.

17 Section L, Page 121, Technical Volume, Each single side of a piece of paper shall be counted as one page toward the 90-page limit, with the exception of the following items. This may conflict with earlier instruction on page 118, A. Proposal Structure, requiring proposals being formatted to print out single-sided.

The proposal structure requires pages to be single sided, this requirement applies to the

Technical Proposal.

18 1.2.1

PLANNED/

PREVENTI

VE

MAINTEN

ANCE (PM

Pg. 20

QA

Inspections

The sub-bullet on pg 20 states, “The assigned QA Inspector will monitor the total number of jobs completed throughout the availability and ensure at least 15% of the executed MRCs receive a surveillance check.”

Regarding the requirement that at least

15% of the executed MRCs receive a surveillance check, please clarify the term “surveillance check”. Is it a

Navy-style PMS spot check, which requires the evaluator to observe the performance of the MRC from beginning to end, or a random check to ensure that the proper materials are on hand, the personnel are qualified, the MRC is being followed in the correct order, and work is being performed safely?

The QA inspector has the authority to randomly review/observe the execution of an MRC and ensure that procedures are being followed and the proper safety measures are in place.

19 Section

1.2.1

PLANNED/

PREVENTI

VE

MAINTEN

ANCE

(PM)

Pg. 21

Asset

Management

Section 1.2.1 PLANNED/

PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE

(PM) has a requirement that states:

“The Contractor shall utilize an

Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) database or equivalent system, such as

MAXIMO.” Having performed this work on the LCS ships and having performed similar work for many years, we do not see purpose nor benefit in having an EAM. EAMs are expensive to purchase and will require significant time to set up. Please clarify what assets the Contractor will be managing in the EAM? Request that the Government eliminate this requirement.

The Navy Maintenance Database

(NMD) does not track PMS therefore an EAM system must be used by the Contractor for this purpose. The Government will not eliminate this requirement.

20 Section L, Technical

Volume, F

Resource

Capabilities, F.

Resource

Capabilities

“Provide a staffing plan for this contract period of performance including current contracted and projected workload; shifts; and staffing levels, including but not limited to J-3 Force Revision, J-4

LCSRON Compartment Cleaning

Instruction, J-5 TUM, and J-6 Work

Authorization Form. Provide additional details on a staffing plan to support the anticipated growth projected for each year. Describe how two (2) concurrent PMAVs will be staffed.”

Please clarify how work will be segregated between task orders. For

Maintenance work will be segregated at the Delivery Order

(DO) level. The DO will specify the work requirements, hull number and duration of the maintenance period.

example, will each task order cover a specific PMAV, a series of PMAVs for a specific ship or some other type of structure?

21 Section L, Volume IV, Pg 127

Company

Solvency

Volume IV requires that offerors proposing for the Little MAC, provide a narrative description of the offeror’s financial resources to perform at least two (2) concurrent

Preventative Maintenance Availability work packages. Please quantify the value of a PMAV work package according to the LOE that such a

PMAV would require.

Please refer to the answer provided for Question #8, above.

22 Volume III

Past

Performanc e, Pg 125

Past

Performance

Instructions for the Past Performance volume state that the offeror may provide no more than five (5) Past

Performance Questionnaires.

However, the Past Performance volume has an unlimited page count and does not specify the number of past performance examples that it may contain. This leaves open the possibility that the Government’s intention is to allow an unlimited number of past performance citations to be submitted in the Past

Performance volume even though only up to five of them may have questionnaires submitted. Please clarify if there is a limit to the number of past performances that can be submitted in the Past Performance volume.

The Past Performance will have a

35 page limit, excluding the questionnaire responses from the 3rd parties. The Amendment will reflect the update.

23 Would the Government please extend the proposal due date for fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of issuance of final Q&A in order to give contractors adequate time to respond and incorporate changes into their proposals?

The Government will not extend the proposal due date. The proposals are due 20 November 2017.