QA Master List 2 Nov 2021.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 15 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Operation and Maintenance of Philadelphia Inactive Vessels and CG/LSD Modernization Detachment Norfolk
- Solicitation number
- N00024-21-R-4203
About this file
This document contains a question and answer log pertaining to solicitation number N00024-21-R-4203 for operation and maintenance of inactive vessels in Philadelphia and the CG/LSD Modernization Detachment in Norfolk. Key details include that proposals were due by November 1, 2021 for the Department of the Navy Naval Sea Systems Command. The solicitation requires operation and maintenance of inactive vessels in Philadelphia including development of standard operating procedures. It also requires maintenance support at the CG/LSD Modernization Site in Norfolk through Option Year 2. The question and answer log provides revisions and clarifications to the solicitation such as page limit increases, removal of unnecessary requirements, corrections to references and tables, and an extension of the proposal due date.
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 52 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Philly Inactive Ships RFP Q&A
| No. | Date Submitted | Source Document | Page | Section/Paragraph | Question/Concern | RFP Change/Resolution Recommendation? | Government Response |
| 1 | 9/28/21 | RFP | 41 | C.5.3.2 | Is item 15, Video Tape of ship required to be included in the Disposal Reporting Letter? | Recommend removal of video tape requirement | "Tape" has been removed from the video requirement |
| 2 | 9/28/21 | RFP | 49 | C.7.3 | Is comparable military experience considered in lieu of the stated minimum requirements for the Maintenance Manager position? | Recommend allowing comparable military experience to qualify toward meeting the minimum requirements for the position. | Language allowing relevant Military experience in lieu of stated requirements has been added |
| 3 | 9/30/21 | RFP | 60, 140 | C.9.0, L.3.2.1, M.2.2 | Section L.3.2.1 states that "The Government will evaluate the degree to which the resumes meet the qualifications designated as required in the section below and demonstrate the individuals’ competence to perform the work required in the Section C." Section C.9.0 and Section L.3.2.1 place a requirement of "Active Secret Security Clearance" a time of proposal submission for all key personnel as well as several non-key personnel positions. This is a significant advantage to an incumbent contractor - particularly as this is a Total Small Business Set-Aside (FAR 19.5) contract. Will the Government please remove the requirement for active security clearance at time of proposal submission. | By stating that the Government will "evaluate the Offeror’s proposed Key Personnel to determine the degree to which they meet the minimum qualifications and experiences required to successfully execute the efforts outlines in Section C and demonstrate the ability to perform the work associated with the position for which the individual is proposed. Those proposals that demonstrate key personnel with relevant qualifications and experience that exceed the Section C requirements may be evaluated more favorably." Provides an unfair advantage to the incumbent as well a detriment to small business concerns. We recommend that you remove the requirements in C.9.0, L.3.2.1 for active security clearance at the time of proposal submission for the following positions: 1) Project Manager (Philadelphia) (KEY PERSONNEL) |
2) Production Supervisor (Philadelphia) (KEY PERSONNEL)
3) Maintenance Manager (Philadelphia)(KEY PERSONNEL)
4) Quality Assurance/Inspection Manager Operation Manager (Philadelphia)
5) Marine Inspector (Philadelphia and Norfolk)
6) Assistant Maintenance Manager Site Manager (Norfolk)
| 7) Assistant Site Manager (Norfolk) | Language clarifying the Security Clearance requirements has been added | |||||||
| 4 | 10/1/21 | Attachment J-2 | Attachment J-2 | Tab Cost Summary - CLIN 0X01-0X04, Description is for Base Year, should it be Total Proposed Price ? | Correct description column to reflect Base plus Option Years | The "X" in 0X01 refers to all of the 0001 CLINs (0001, 0101, 0201, 0301, 0401) so 0X01 is the total of base year plus all option years combined. Description has been changed to remove ambiguity. | ||
| 5 | 10/1/21 | Attachment J-2 | pages 150 and 151 | Attachment J-2 and Table L-3 from the RFP (pg. 150,151) | TAB GOV Directed LOE , Table LOE - PHILADELPHIA , is missing the first 20 Labor Categories per Table L-3 from the RFP (pg. 150,151 , Project Manager to Electrician Foreman) | Update TAB GOV Directed LOE | Corrected. | |
| 6 | 10/1/21 | Attachment J-2 | page 150 | Attachment J-2 and Table L-2 from the RFP (pg. 150) | TAB CLIN 0X03, Government Provided Travel Cost (Purple Column). Travel cost are not provided in the RFP, only Philadelphia Material, Travel, & ODCs (RFP - Table L-2 - pg 150). | Update TAB CLIN 0X03 to reflect Total ODC Cost(not Travel only) Verify to use Philadelphia Material, Travel, & ODCs (RFP - Table L-2 - pg 150) dollar amounts. | Corrected. Also corrected the purple shaded totals to reflect the Travel, Material and ODC dollar amount tables in the RFP. | |
| 7 | 10/1/21 | Attachment J-2 | page 150 | Attachment J-2 and Table L-2 from the RFP (pg. 150) | TAB CLIN 0X04, Government Provided Travel Cost (Purple). Travel cost are not provided in the RFP, only Norfolk Material, Travel, & ODCs (RFP - Table L-2 - pg 150) | Update TAB CLIN 0X04 to reflect Total ODC Cost(not Travel only). Verify to use Norfolk Material, Travel, & ODCs (RFP - Table L-2 - pg 150) dollar amounts. | Corrected. Also corrected the purple shaded totals to reflect the Travel, Material and ODC dollar amount tables in the RFP. | |
| 8 | 10/1/21 | Attachment J-2 and Schedule B | page 150 | Attachment J-2 and Table L-2 from the RFP (pg. 150), Schedule B (RFP) | TAB CLIN 0X03, Government Provided Travel Cost (Purple Row). The RFP states CLIN 0X03 is Philadelphia Material, Travel, & ODCs. Should the offeror apply Indirect Cost to Philadelphia Material, Travel, & ODCs ($6,496,986 Base Period) to equal ESTIMATED COST (w/ COM) | Worksheet J-2 formulas include Indirect Rate Cost to be applied to ODC. Recommend Schedule B to reflect Total Cost of ODC including Indirect Rate Cost. | No change needed. Offeror should back into the Government given NTE values, such that after application of indirect rates/costs, the total is equal to the NTE value. Section B descriptions already includes the NTE value with "which includes all applicable indirect costs" immediately after. | |
| 9 | 10/1/21 | Attachment J-2 and Schedule B | page 150 | Attachment J-2 and Table L-2 from the RFP (pg. 150), Schedule B (RFP) | TAB CLIN 0X04, Government Provided Travel Cost (Purple Row). The RFP states CLIN 0X04 is Norfolk Material, Travel, & ODCs. Should the offeror apply Indirect Cost to Norfolk Material, Travel, & ODCs ($487,800 Base Period) to equal ESTIMATED COST (w/ COM) | Worksheet J-2 formulas include Indirect Rate Cost to be applied to ODC. Recommend Schedule B also to reflect Total Cost of ODC including Indirect Rate Cost. | No change needed. Offeror should back into the Government given NTE values, such that after application of the Offeror's indirect rates/costs, the total is equal to the NTE value. Section B descriptions already includes the NTE value with "which includes all applicable indirect costs" immediately after. | |
| 10 | 10/1/21 | Attachment J-2 and Schedule B | page 150 | Attachment J-2 and Table L-2 from the RFP (pg. 150), Schedule B (RFP) | Shouldn't Schedule B reflect the Offerors Indirect Rate Cost applied to ODC for CLIN 0X03 and CLIN 0X04? How will the Gov't evaluate different offerors different Indirect Rates if the amount in the calculation is the indicated NTE? | Correct verbiage in Schedule B CLIN 0003 and 0004 to allow for visibility of Indirect Rate Cost on ODCs. | No change required. The NTE's will remain as is at time of award. The totals reflected in the 0X03 and 0X04 tabs will only be used for general evaluation purposes and they will not be used to make upward or downward adjustments during the cost realism analysis of proposals. In other words, Offerors still need to back into the NTE numbers, but they will not be evaluated for cost realism purposes. Cost realism is what we'll use to determine if cost proposals are representative of the technical proposals, LOE, and labor mix proposed, or if they are unbalanced and need to be adjusted for cost realism. | |
| 11 | 10/4/21 | RFP | Sections B & F | Norfolk Labor and ODC CLINs for Option Years 4 and 5 should be removed as work at the CG/LSD Modernization Site will end after Option Year 2 | Remove CLINs 0302, 0304, 0402, and 0404 | CLIN Descriptions for 0302, 0304, 0402, and 0404 have been changed to "reserved" and POPs have been removed. | ||
| 12 | 10/5/21 | Solicitation | 1 | Request a three week extension for the due date of the Solicitation. This is based on the level of complexity the extensive staffing plan and inability to quickly solve any potential staffing in light of COVID mandates and requirements. | Request that the new due date be 23 November to provide the best value and compliant submission. This supports not having a submission on Monday and before the Thanksgiving Holiday. | Date of receipt for proposals has been extended to 15 November, 2021. | ||
| 13 | 10/6/21 | Solicitation | NA | Request a INACT Ship Philadelphia Organizational chart. This is based on the level of complexity the extensive staffing plan. | This supports having the best technical answer. | INACTSHIPMAINTO Philadelphia Organizational Chart has been added as Attachment J-22 | ||
| 14 | 10/11/21 | RFP | Page 138 of 167 | 2.1 Solicitation Response Requirements | In order to properly respond to Factor 1 Technical and Management Approach, as outlined by the RFP in Section L 3.1, request increasing the page limit on this section with additional number of pages (5-10 additional pages) | Increase Factor 1: Technical & Management Approach Page limit from 35 pages. | The page limit for Factor 1 has been increased from 35 to 40 pages. | |
| 15 | 10/11/21 | RFP | Page 26 of 167 | C.3.3.5 Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) | Incorrectly references in Section C.3.3.5 Standard Operating Procedures (SOP). Section C, paragraph C.3.3.5 Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) states “ As a minimum SOPs shall be developed for requirements of paragraphs C.3.3.1, C.3.3.6, C.3.3.7, C.3.4.1, C.3.6- C.3.6.2 and C.5.1.2.1- C.5.1.2.4 and C.5.1.3 – C.5.1.3.6 and C.5.1.4 – C.5.1.4.2 and C.5.1.5 – C.5.1.5.2.14 and C.5.3 – C.5.3.6 and C.5.4 – C.5.7” |
| The references are incorrectly numbered in Section C.3.3.5 Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) . For example: ( 1 ) Reference - C.3.6- C.3.6.2, C.3.6.2 does not exist in Section C. (2 ) Reference - C.5.1.2.1- C.5.1.2.4, does not exist in Section C. | Update references in Section C.3.3.5 Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) | The reference sections have been corrected. | |||||
| 16 | 11/1/21 | Attachment J-2 | N/A | Historical Proposed Rates Tab | Attachment 2 tab labeled “Historical Proposed Rates” requires offerors to put in their own Contractor Fiscal Year (CFY) rates as well as Government Fiscal Year (GFY) rates. Section F states that the contract starts on 6/26/2022. The GFY rates (Oct-Sept) do not seem to be relevant to the proposal. Based on the fact that the CFY rates may need to be weighted to cover the contract period of performance starting 6/26/2022, shouldn’t this tab reflect the contract period of performance proposed rates and not the GFY rates? | No change to the RFP is necessary. The historical proposed rates tab was corrected in cell G5 to reflect CFY 2021. Since multiple offerors could have varying fiscal year accounting cycles, for cost realism purposes, proposed rates should be stated in terms of the Government Fiscal Year cycle (01 October to 30 September). This will allow for an "apples to apples" comparison when completing cost realism for each proposal. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .