Additional Questions on N0016721R0004 9Jun2021.pdf

Questions and Answers

N00167-21-R-0004 Amendment 0002 9 June 2021

Question 1. Under 4.1.2, Subfactor B – Resource Management, it is explicitly stated that, “Offerors may propose additional individuals under Key Personnel labor categories and/or additional Key Personnel labor categories with different titles, if believed necessary for effective management and coordination of required effort.”. However, is it also permissible for offerors to propose additional individuals under additional non-Key Personnel labor categories if it is believed to be necessary for effective management and coordination of the required effort?

Answer 1: Yes, as stated in Section L, Subfactor B – Resource Management paragraph 2 Labor Mix The Offeror may propose a different labor mix, but shall explain deviations from the estimate. Caveat: The Offeror shall not deviate from the total number of hours specified in Section B.

Question 2. Regarding the Government’s answer to previous Question 9: NSWC states: “FAR 52.246-18 Warranty of Supplied (sic) of a Complex Nature remains in the solicitation. Please be advised that the prescription for use of this FAR Clause allows for use with research and development contracts, like the one contemplated with this Solicitation.”

We believe that this is an incorrect interpretation of the prescribing clause. The prescribing clause is intended to be applied to a “fixed-price supply or research and development contract”. This is not a fixed-price supply or R&D contract. Additionally, FAR 46.705 states in part, “Except for the warranties in the clauses at 52.246-3, Inspection of Supplies-Cost-Reimbursement, and 52.246-8, Inspection of Research and Development-Cost-Reimbursement, the contracting officer shall not include warranties in cost-reimbursement contracts...”. Clauses 52.246-3 and 52.246-8 are properly incorporated into the solicitation.

Based on the above, we respectfully request FAR 52.216-18, Warranty of Supplies of a Complex Nature be removed in its entirety.

Answer 2: Clause 52.246-18 is removed from the solicitation. See Amendment 0002.

Question 3. Regarding the Government’s answer to previous Question 17: NSWC answered only the first part of the questions posed for #17. Could you please provide a response to the second part of this section which reads, “Additionally, how will this transition plan be evaluated in Section M? If no transition plan is required, it will provide a cost savings to the Government, and these cost savings should be scored more favorably.”

Answer 3: Section L 4.1.3.4 has been revised to clarify whether an incumbent contractor responding to this Solicitation is required to submit a Transition Plan. Offerors, to include the incumbent contractor, are advised that the Government will evaluate Transition Plans in accordance with the terms of this Solicitation, to include assessing the tasks and items identified above. Additionally, all offerors are reminded that their Transition Plan must be consistent with the other volumes of its proposal (e.g., Volume I-Technical, and Volume III-Cost/Price). See Amendment 0002.

Question 4. Regarding the Government’s answer to previous Question 19. We don’t believe that NSWC answered this question fully. The following answer was provided to this same question under NSWC solicitation N0016720R3012, “It is acceptable to list all proposed tasks an employee will support under a single line, as provided in (the staffing plan)”.

Could you please clarify if it will be acceptable to list all of the tasks that an employee is proposed to support along with estimated hours on a single line in the staffing plan for solicitation N00167-21-R- 0004?

Answer 4: It is acceptable to list all proposed tasks an employee will support under a single line, as provided in Attachment 10.