The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Q/A#
| Page # |
| Section/ Paragraph |
| Question |
| Proposed Action/Change |
| Q1 |
| 73 |
| L.1.4 Para.5 |
| Are we able to utilize 11X17 landscape pages for tables in the technical volume? If allowed, would it count for 1 or 2 pages? |
Allow 11X17 landscape pages for tables in the technical volume.
Please specify if it counts for 1 or 2 pages.
| A1 |
| You may re-size any pages containing tables or charts that are not legible in the default Portable Document Format page size. Those pages will only count for one page. See the revision to L.1.4. |
| Q2 |
| 75 |
| L.2.1.1.a Para 2 |
| Paragraph 2 states « The Offeror shall complete the yellow fill-ins for key personnel in Attachment J-2 that summarizes the position title, location, and name of the individuals being proposed to fill the key positions ». |
Please clarify if the offeror’s filled-in information only (yellow) from the J-2 should be included in Volume I Technical, or the entire J-2 form? If the whole J-2 is to be included into Volume I, would the J-2 pages count towards the page count of this volume? Volume III Solicitation Package also includes the J-2. Is it the intention of the Government to include the J-2 in both volumes (I and III)?
Include only the section referring to the offeror’s data (the yellow fill-ins) from the J-2 into the Technical Volume and include the entire completed J-2 form in Volume III.
| A2 |
| L.2.1.1.a Para 2 has been revised to only require submission of the Key Personnel names vice the entire Attachment J-2 in Volume I. The completed J-2 shall be submitted in Volume III. |
| Q3 |
| « Scheduled Labor » Tab |
| L-2 Cost-Price Proposal |
| In the L-2 published by the Government the Lead and Supervisory positions are listed as “Exempt”. The classification of these positions as exempt is not in compliance with the Fair Labor Standard Act’s definition for “exempt”. The Lead and Supervisory functions are not exempt categories, they are closely associated with the highest level SCA position in their labor category. |
Change the position classification from “Exempt” to the associated/related SCA class code, and provide allowance for the lead/supervisory duties and/or for the various levels of the associated SCA position.
| A3 |
| The supervisory positions are considered exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act as they meet the definition of an “employee employed in a bona fide executive capacity” per 29 CFR Part 541. The “lead” positions have been re-classified in the solicitation to reflect a non-exempt status and their associated Service Contract Act (SCA) positions. However, it should be noted that a “lead” position of any labor category as identified in Attachments J-1, J-2, and L-2, while not considered “management”, is not an entry-level position and should be compensated commensurately for its level of experience/expertise that is not reflected in the minimum wage determination of the SCA. |
| Q4 |
| Pg. 18 & Tab L001 |
| J-2 & L-2 |
| J-2 states « Naval Architect – This is a part time/ on-call position, expected 800 hours annually » and the L-2 states « Scenario 1, has 2000 hours for Naval Architect for OP1- OP5 » |
Is it the intention of the government to have the cost calculated at 2000 hours annually even though the J-2 indicates 800 hours?
Please clarify which hourly effort estimation is correct.
| A4 |
| For ease of evaluation, the same number of hours (2,000) were used for every position. The hours included in the L-2 pricing scenarios are not necessarily indicative of the actual workload and should not be used as any basis for hiring personnel. Attachment J-2 correctly states the Naval Architect is a part-time/on-call position expected at 800 hours annually. Per Section L 2.2.1.4.a the purpose of the L-2 Attachment is for the Government to use in conducting a cost/price comparison amongst competing Offerors’ proposals. The scenario is fictitious. |
| Q5 |
| Pg. 20 & Tab L001 |
| J-2 & L-2 |
| J-2 states « (2) Salvage Engineers – This is a part time/ on-call position, expected 800 hours annually » and the L-2 states « Scenario 1, has 4000 hours annually for Salvage Engineer for OP1- OP5 » |
Is it the intention of the government to have the cost calculated at 4000 hours even though the J-2 indicates two positions at 800 hours?
Please clarify which hourly effort estimation is correct.
| A5 |
| For ease of evaluation, the same number of hours (2,000) were used for every position. The hours included in the L-2 pricing scenarios are not necessarily indicative of the actual workload and should not be used as any basis for hiring personnel. Attachment J-2 correctly states the Salvage Engineers are part-time/on-call positions expected at 800 hours annually. Per Section L 2.2.1.4.a the purpose of the L-2 Attachment is for the Government to use in conducting a cost/price comparison amongst competing Offerors’ proposals. The scenario is fictitious. |
| Q6 |
| Pg. 22 & Tab L001 |
| J-2 & L-2 |
| J-2 states « Structural Engineer – This is a part time/ on-call position, expected 800 hours annually » and the L-2 states « Scenario 1, has 2000 hours for Structural Engineer for OP1- OP5 » |
Is it the intention of the government to have the cost calculated at 2000 hours even though the J-2 indicates 800 hours?
Please clarify which hourly effort estimation is correct.
| A6 |
| For ease of evaluation, the same number of hours (2,000) were used for every position. The hours included in the L-2 pricing scenarios are not necessarily indicative of the actual workload and should not be used as any basis for hiring personnel. Attachment J-2 correctly states the Structural Engineer is a part-time/on-call position expected at 800 hours annually. Per Section L 2.2.1.4.a the purpose of the L-2 Attachment is for the Government to use in conducting a cost/price comparison amongst competing Offerors’ proposals. The scenario is fictitious. |
| Q7 |
| 74 |
| L.2.1 |
| The first paragraph under Volume I: Technical Proposal states “This volume shall… {be} formatted using the same numbering convention as that used in this section of the solicitation. Is it the governments intention for Factor 1.0 Technical Capability to start off with third level bulleting like mentioned. Ie: 2.1.1 Factor 1. – Technical Capability or will the government allow for numbering to start as Factor 1 and go from there? |
Allow for numbering to start as Factor 1 and go from there? Ie: Factor 1.a.X.X vs.
2.1.1 Factor 1.a.X.X.X
| A7 |
| In lieu of the requirement for Offerors to provide a solicitation/proposal crosswalk, the Government desires information in the proposals to be presented as similarly to the solicitation as possible. Each section and paragraph in the proposal shall correspond to a section or paragraph in the solicitation, and they shall be in the same sequential order as the solicitation. The numbering convention can be unique to each Offeror if the information is organized as stated in this response. See the revision to L.2.1. |
| Q8 |
| 81-82 |
| L.2.2.1 |
| The last sentence on pg. 81 states the “Volume shall consist of the following in the below specified order/format and is not subject to any change”. On the top of page 82 under the “Page No.” legend after i. and ii. the actual page “numbering” appears to be replaced by CHAPTER designation only (CHAPTERS 1.0 through 6.0). Does that mean that all pages in this section will carry CHAPTER designation only without an actual page number? Or should perhaps page numbering start with “Page 1” for each Chapter separately? |
Allow for the page numbers in the footers to follow standard page count formatting (i.e.: Page 1, Page 2, Page 3 etc. instead of Chapter 1.0, Chapter 2.0)
| A8 |
| The proposed formatting is acceptable. See the revisions to L.2.2.1. |
Para. 2.3 Is the Government requesting that actual page numbering be replaced with CHAPTER designation only (CHAPTER 1.0 - CHAPTER 5.0), without actual page numbering in the footer of the page?
Allow for the page numbers in the footers to follow standard page count formatting (i.e.: Page 1, Page 2, Page 3 etc. instead of Chapter 1.0, Chapter 2.0)
| A9 |
| The proposed formatting is acceptable. See the revisions to L.2.3. |
| Q10 |
| 86 |
| L.2.3.1.2 |
| The Government states that “All Section L Attachments completed by the offeror” must be included in this requirement. |
Regarding L-1 Is it the Government’s intention to have the offeror include the most recent L-1 published by the government, as available on sam.gov, prior to proposal submittal, i.e. the L-1 that includes the questions and the answers?
Regarding L-2 This Attachment is the Cost-Price Data and it is part of Volume II. Please clarify if the completed L-2 should also be included in Volume III - Chapter 2 Solicitation Documents?
Allow for the offeror to not include L-1 and L-2 as attachments in Chapter 2.0 Solicitation Documents requirement.
| A10 |
| No Section L attachments are required under Chapter 2.0 in Volume III. See the revision to Section L.3.1.2. |
| Q11 |
| 86-87 |
| L2.3.1.2 & L.2.3.1.3 |
| The RFP states in both 2.3.1.2 (Chapter 2.0) and 2.3.1.3 (Chapter 3.0) that L-4 and L-5 are required in those sections. Is it the Government’s intention to have L-4 and L-5 included in both sections? |
Specify if the Government would like the offeror to include Attachments L-4 and L-5 in Chapter 2.0 or Chapter 3.0 or in both Chapters.
| A11 |
| Attachments L-4 and L-5 are only required under Chapter 3.0 in Volume III. See the revision to Section L.3.1.2. |
| Q12 |
| 18 |
| C.2.2.2.2 |
| In the statement of work Section C.2.2.2.2.c The offeror is required to “Utilize a commercially provided and licensed SUPSALV approved inventory management system” |
Question 1: Is it the Government’s intention to exclude Enterprise for inventory management?
Questions 2: Can the Government confirm if they consider Enterprise (a custom system built off of databases that are commercially available) a commercially provided and licensed SUPSALV approved inventory management system?
Allow for custom systems built off of databases that are commercially available.
| A12 |
| It is not the Government’s intent to exclude the Enterprise for inventory management. The Government considers Enterprise a commercially provided and licensed SUPSALV-approved inventory management system. |
| Q13 |
| 29 |
| C-204-H002 |
| The ATO requirement in the RFP is referenced with NIST 800-171 with only 7 controls. Navy Cybercommand for an ATO requires 402 controls. The RFP NIST reference will not provide the full compliance for ATO requirements. |
Recommend replacing the RFP listed NIST 800-171 with: NIST-800-53r5, NIST 800-61r2 and include sp800-34r1 BIA for annual reviews.
| A13 |
| This is a misunderstanding of the clause C-204-H002. The clause states “The Contractor shall fully implement…800-171.” OR if variance is needed, the contractor must provide POAM to cover information systems affecting the contract. Any POAM must include at a minimum those seven controls. |
| Q14 |
| 72 |
| L.1.3 |
| This RFP does not appear to be set up in PIEE yet. When do you expect is will be set up to receive proposals? |
Add solicitation to PIEE
| A14 |
| The Government has revised the instructions to require submission via DoD SAFE. |
| Q15 |
| J-1, 1 |
| Key Personnel |
| "The offer must complete the Key Personnel assignment table in Attachment J-3" however, Attachment J-3 is the DD254. |
Eliminate requirement if completion of J-2 is sufficient or provide new table to be completed.
| A15 |
| The J-1 “Description” tab has been revised to remove references to proposals or Offerors. Please follow the solicitation instructions for completion of the J-2. |
| Q16 |
| 82 |
| L, and L-2 |
| Under the current contract SUPSALV pays a “Facility Fee” the cost of which is included in all TO awards. This Facility Fee is not addressed in the solicitation Section L pricing instructions or L2 pricing scenarios. What costs are captured and paid for by that fee and will this practice continue under the proposed contract? |
Provide guidance that may affect pricing of indirect costs.
| A16 |
| The facility fee utilized on the current contract is a fee passed to SUPSALV customers to cover general facility costs. It is a percentage determined by the Government, as necessary, during the execution of the contract. This facility fee is used during execution and is not required for proposal or evaluation purposes because it is not a differentiating factor between Offerors’ cost/price proposals. |
Please confirm the following positions are SCA positions as shown on the Required Staffing Mix tab and not exempt as shown on the various state tabs. o Lead Accounting Clerk III o Supply Supervisor
Add SCA Codes and remove "Exempt" on the state tabs.
| A17 |
| Please see Q3/A3 above. |
| Q18 |
| J1 and L2 |
| 2nd tab |
| What is the meaning of the asterisk next to the SCA Code 21040 for the Supply Supervisor? |
Provide an explanation for the asterisk.
| A18 |
| The Supply Supervisor position is actually considered “exempt” (see Q3/A3 above) and therefore the J-1 “Required Staffing Mix” tab has been updated accordingly. |
| Q19 |
| J1 and L2 |
| Hawaii tab |
| Please confirm the correct SCA Code for the Maintenance Trades Helper is 23580. |
Correct SCA Code typo.
| A19 |
| Yes, the correct SCA code for the Maintenance Trades Helper is 23580. The attachments have been revised accordingly. |
| Q20 |
| J1 and L2 |
| 2nd and 3rd tabs |
| There is a discrepancy between the number of Technical Writer II (or below) on tabs 2 and 3. |
Clarify if the correct quantity is 3 or 4 Technical Writer II (or below) personnel.
| A20 |
| The documents are correct. The “Required Staffing Mix” tab of Attachment J-1 has three Technical Writer II positions under “Configuration Control” and one Technical Writer II position under “UWSH”. All four are Virginia positions. |
| Q21 |
| P76 |
| 1st Paragraph |
| This paragraph refers to the ESSM Operations Guide. Section 10-1 on Page 10-1 of that Guide refers to the ESSMMIS User’s Guide. Please provide a copy of that guide. |
Make a copy of the ESSMMIS User’s Guide available to prospective bidders who have completed the proposal Terms of Use document.
| A21 |
| Chapter 10 of the ESSM Operations Guide was out of date when the solicitation was issued. The current Inventory Management and Work Control Systems is called ESSM Enterprise. A copy of the current User’s Guide can be located at the following link: https://essm.sharefile.com/d-s9e6bb6b453df467d8e152c90da0fd249. |
Small Business Participation The RFP directs the offeror to use the total contract ceiling of $350,000,000 when applying the percentage goals. Since small business goals are defined as percent of the total subcontracted work, wouldn’t it be more appropriate to use the total ODC dollar amount instead of the contract ceiling?
Replace the contract ceiling reference with total ODC dollars.
| A22 |
| As this is an IDIQ, it is not possible to know what the ODC dollar values would be or for the Government to provide a meaningful/realistic value to use as a basis for subcontracted dollars. Furthermore, the Government cannot assume that all scheduled labor would be direct labor. Therefore, the ceiling value for this resultant contract is the value upon which the small business participation shall be calculated. |
| Q23 |
| 78 |
| Para. 9 Contract Transition/ |
Phase-in Question 1: What is the time frame (#days) that the Governments allows for transition?
Question 2: Is the transition cost reimbursed by the Government? If yes, is there budget or ceiling?
Specify.
| A23 |
| The Government will allow for six weeks of transition. The transition costs will be funded through task/delivery orders as appropriate to the successful Offeror. There is no pre-assigned budget but the successful Offeror can assume at a minimum the key personnel as listed in J-2 will be funded for the transition period. See the revision to Section L. |
| Q24 |
| 73 |
| L.1.4 Para.5 |
| Are we able to utilize 11X17 landscape pages for figures in the technical volume? |
Allow 11X17 landscape pages for tables, charts, and figures in the technical volume.
Please specify if it counts for 1 or 2 pages.
| A24 |
| 11X17 landscape pages for tables, charts, and figures in the technical volume is allowable. 11X17 landscape pages cannot be used for a narrative portion of an Offeror’s proposal. The Government considers 1 11X17 page in an Adobe PDF to count as 1 page for the purposes of page limits. |
| Q25 |
| J-1 / Description Tab |
| Cell A1 |
| We believe the following wording is incorrect and needs to be revised: “All personnel hired to fill a position listed in this table, regardless of total quantity already hired, shall be paid according to the rates in Attachment J-1.” It mixes personnel pay rates with contract category rates. |
Change to: For all personnel hired to fill a position listed in this table, regardless of total quantity already hired, the contractor shall be paid according to the rates in Attachment J-1.”
| A25 |
| The Government concurs with the revision. Please see the revised document. |
| Q26 |
| 18 |
| Attachment J-2 |
| Regarding the Salvage Engineers. The description is that these are PT/on-call positions. Expected 800-hours annually. Is that 800 hours for each of the two salvage engineers requested or the cumulative (400-hours / engineer)? |
Clarify expected PT hours per position to allow pricing.
| A26 |
| It is 800 hours per Salvage Engineer. |
| Q27 |
| 87 |
| L.2.3.1.3 |
| Page 30 states we are to complete Attachment L-5 as part of Chapter 3 of the Solicitation Package. I cannot locate a L-5. |
| A27 |
| L.2.3.1.3 will be revised. It is meant to say “Completion of Attachment L-3 and L-4”. Please complete the Attachments that have been provided with the solicitation. |
| Q28 |
| 86 |
| L.2.3.1.2 |
| Requires Section K Reps and Certs completed by the Offeror. No such section appears to have been included in Section K |
| Provide items to be completed or clarify. |
| A28 |
| Please review and complete the provision FAR 52.204-8 in Section K. |
| Q29 |
| 72 |
| L.1.4 |
| The RFP states "every paragraph, figure, and table shall be numbered with a unique identifier for ease of reference”. |
L-1 Answer is "each section and paragraph of the proposal shall correspond to a section or paragraph in the solicitation, and they shall be in the same sequential order as the solicitation".
Does the government want to see every paragraph numbered?
Please confirm that offeror does not need to number each paragraph as long as the main section or subsection heading is numbered and includes a reference to the corresponding RFP/Solicitation reference number.
| A29 |
| The offeror does not need to number each paragraph as long as the main section or subsection heading is numbered and includes a reference to the corresponding RFP/Solicitation reference number. |
