Bidder's_Q&A__2.pdf

N00024-17-R-4404 Bidder’s Questions and Answers #2

1. Paragraph C.3.4.3.2 indicates the contractor will submit a property report in their custody by 15 October annually IAW CDRL A038. CDRL A038 indicates the report is due annually 01 January. Which is correct?

a. The property report is due annually on 01 January. The reference to 15 October will be removed from the Statement of Work via Amendment 0002.

2. Paragraph C.3.4.3.4 indicates the contractor will submit a materials and supplies purchased report monthly IAW CDRL A049. CDRL A049 indicates the report is due annually 01 January. Which is correct?

a. The materials and supplies purchased report will be submitted monthly and then annually for the year. Please see revised CDRL A049 provided via Amendment 0002.

3. CDRL A046 requires first submission of the Five-year Paint Plan on 01 January 2017.

Please clarify the first submission due date?

a. The first submission of the Five-year Paint Plan will be 01 January 2018. Please see revised CDRL A046 provided via Amendment 0002.

4. Attachment J-5 lists Janitorial duties. There is no Janitor listed in the Direct Labor Category Table or Section H of the RFP

a. The Government confirms that the hours intended for the janitorial effort is included in the Labor trade code in the Direct Labor Category Table and Section H of the solicitation.

5. Paragraph C.5.7.2 reference attachment J-8. Section J of the RFP lists Attachment J-8 as reserved. There is no Attachment 8 in the proposal documents provided by the government.

a. There is no Attachment J-8; the reference will be removed from the Statement of Work.

6. Other Direct Costs, Travel, and Materials. The table provided states Pearl Harbor. Also, $0 for San Diego?

a. The Government has revised the Other Direct Costs, Travel, and Materials table in Section L to correct the title to “Bremerton and San Diego” as well as split out the total ODC’s for each site.

7. Attachment S-3 states that the completed questionnaire be forwarded no later than 15 March 2017. This attachment also includes conflicting information on who the form is to be sent to, listing Sheila Utzl and Justin Lessel on the first page of the attachment but Sheila Utzl and Lisa Carll on the last page of the attachment. Could you please clarify when completed questionnaires are due and who they should be forwarded to. We would request that the due date for the questionnaires be sufficiently after the response to this question is posted to allow for the questionnaires to be completed and forwarded to the correct parties.

a. The Government confirms that the Past Performance Questionnaires will be due May 31, 2017. Past Performance Questionnaires will be submitted to Sheila.utz1@navy.mil and lisa.carll@navy.mil.

8. Page 120 states that the offeror must demonstrate an understanding and capability to accomplish the requirements of Section C as it relates to INACTSHIPMAINTO Pearl Harbor. Would the Government please clarify if this should be INACTSHIPMAINTO Bremerton?

a. The Government confirms that the reference should be to Bremerton. Section L will be revised via Amendment 0002.

9. The table at the top of page 127 also references Pearl Harbor. Would the Government please clarify if this should be Bremerton?

a. The Government confirms that the reference should be to Bremerton. Section L will be revised via Amendment 0002.

10. During the San Diego Site Visit, the Government Site tour guide stated that all three CGs moored to pier 8 is in the same INACT status and the contractor would be responsible for PWS execution on all three CGs. OPNAVINST 9000.6 dated 18 MAY 2015 states on page 6 of Enclosure (3): "Except as otherwise provided in this instruction, at a point defined by the MOA noted in paragraphs 3 through 5 and following completion of the I- CMAV, the following must occur: Ship CO and COMNAVSURFOR organizational responsibility for all aspects of affected CG and LSD ship operations, to include safety, security, and maintenance, including the tag-out program per reference (h), section 1.3.1, will respectively transfer from the phase I CO and COMNAVSURFOR to COMNAVSEASYSCOM." Can the government confirm that it is the execution if this MOA that transfers responsibility to INACT Ships and the contractor's responsibility for PWS execution?

a. The Government confirms that it is the execution of the MOA that transfers responsibility to INACT ships and the contractor’s responsibility for the Statement of Work execution.

11. During the San Diego Site Visit, the Government Site tour guide stated that all three CGs moored to pier 8 are in the same INACT status and the contractor would be responsible for PWS execution on all three CGs. OPNAVINST 9000.6 dated 18 MAY 2015 states on page 6 of Enclosure (3): "Except as otherwise provided in this instruction, at a point defined by the MOA noted in paragraphs 3 through 5 and following completion of the I- CMAV, the following must occur: Ship CO and COMNAVSURFOR organizational responsibility for all aspects of affected CG and LSD ship operations, to include safety, security, and maintenance, including the tag-out program per reference (h), section 1.3.1, will respectively transfer from the phase I CO and COMNAVSURFOR to COMNAVSEASYSCOM." Since there is no reference to the tag-out program in the RFP's PWS, is it accurate that the contractor is therefore not responsible for the CG/LSD's tag-out program?

a. The Government confirms that the Contractor is not responsible for the CG/LSD’s tag-out program.

12. Page 27 and 36 of the solicitation states: "[C.5.1.2.2] [C.6.1.2.2] Install Fire and Flood

(F/F) Alarms and Flooding Markers. F/F alarms, in accordance with NSTM Chapter 050, shall be installed within seven (7) working days after receipt of a vessel .... The Contractor shall be responsible for necessary layout, fabrication of components, assembly, and installation of the F/F alarm system. During the San Diego Site visit, the Government Site Tour guide indicated that all material purchased by the contractor in support of the PWS becomes Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) and the installed alarm system was such GFE. No Fire and Flooding alarms are listed in the 229 pages of Government Furnished Property in Attachment J-6 and J-7 of the government's solicitation.

Can the government confirm that the installed flooding alarms are indeed GFE and identify the OEM?

a. The Government confirms that the contractor is required to purchase the components and fabricate the fire and flooding alarms. As these will be purchased by the Government they will become GFE at the end of the period of contract performance.

13. In the 4th paragraph of page 121 the government states "Additional Labor categories (i.e.

non-key personnel) identified in this solicitation will not be used for technical evaluation purposes ..." Paragraph 2 under Staffing Plan on page 121 states ".... Strengths may be assigned to an offeror that proposes firm candidates ...."

Since the Staffing Plan is included in Personnel Resources section of the Technical Approach (page 121) this makes proposal submission requirements seem inconsistent.

How does the government intend to evaluate an Offerer's Staffing Plan relative to the identification of firm candidates in the Staffing Plan of the Technical Approach?

a. The sentence in the fourth paragraph on page 119 of the RFP that begins

“Additional labor categories (i.e., nonkey personnel) identified in this solicitation will not be used for technical evaluation purposes . . .” will be deleted. The last paragraph under KEY PERSONNEL will now state “Offerors shall not submit resumes for NON-KEY personnel with their proposal. However, the Offeror shall include all labor categories (both key personnel and non-key personnel) in the compilation of its cost proposal, and in its Staffing Plan. Its Staffing Plan will be evaluated to the limited extent indicated below under the paragraph entitled

“STAFFING PLAN.”

The Government intends to evaluate an Offeror’s Staffing Plan to the limited extent indicated in the paragraph entitled “STAFFING PLAN,” which states in pertinent part that “information provided in the Staffing Plan will not be used to evaluate the qualifications of personnel, but will be used to evaluate the degree to which the Staffing Plan is consistent with the Offeror’s proposal, and proposes firm candidates that clearly map to the labor categories and hours designated in the solicitation, and are consistent with the personnel, labor categories and hours listed in the Offeror’s Cost proposal.” The RFP requires on page 119 that the Staffing Plan follows a specific format and contain information that includes, but is not limited to, the individual’s name and level of security clearance. Although the Staffing Plan will not be used to evaluate the qualifications of personnel, as stated in the RFP, “strengths may be assigned to an offeror that proposes firm candidates that currently possess required security clearances.”

14. On page 127 the government provides travel and material costs for Pearl Harbor that is to be included in Attachment S-1, Pricing Worksheet.

Did the government intend for these costs to be considered for Bremerton and San Diego requirements vice Pearl Harbor?

a. The Government confirms that the Other Direct Costs, Travel, and Material Costs are for Bremerton and San Diego. The table will be updated via Amendment 0002.

15. Page 121 states "Each resume shall be no more than two (2) pages. Written letters of intent will not be counted in the 2-page limit." Page 118 states:" Individual resumes shall not exceed two pages per resume; the resumes are not included in the 50 page count."

Will the government please clarify if letters of intent are also not included in the 50 page count?

a. The Government confirms that letters of intent are not included in the 50 page count.

16. Section 5 Other Direct Cost, Travel, and Materials of the Volume II (pg. 127) states “Security services and Diving services are NOT considered ODC's.” If these tasks are not ODC’s, will the Labor Category Staffing Table be updated with the following tasks?

a. The Government confirms that the offerors are not to propose labor hours for Diving services. The Government also confirms that offerors are not to propose labor hours for security services at the Bremerton site. The Government has updated the LOE Table to reflect additional hours to be proposed to support security services at the San Diego site. Please refer for Amendment 0002.

17. Are Government furnished facilities provided on site at each location (Bremerton and San

Diego) for this requirement?

a. The Government confirms that facilities are provided on site for Bremerton. The Government has updated the ODC estimate for the San Diego site to account for additional expected effort to procure a facility for contract performance.

18. As the ships at the San Diego site are part of an active fleet, how many active duty crews are currently onboard?

a. The Government confirms that there are 40 active duty personnel per vessel.

19. The LOE provided shows a weekly LOE of ~114 FTE for Bremerton and ~15 for San Diego based on a 1,880 man year. Does this LOE reflect the typical work week FTE requirements for each location, or does the LOE for each site include potential increase for unscheduled or unplanned work? If LOE for unscheduled or unplanned work is included in these totals, approximately how many FTEs are typically required at each location for an average work week?

a. The Government clarifies that ~80 FTEs for Bremerton and ~10 FTE’s for San Diego are required for a typical work week. The estimates of ~114 FTE for Bremerton and ~15 FTE for San Diego reflects the total work for each work week inclusive of the potential increase for unscheduled or unplanned work.