Q&A_6_MAR_2018.pdf

SeaPort-NxG Q&A, 3.06.18

SeaPort-NxG Questions and Answers 6 March 2018

Q49a. Can more than one subsidiary of a corporate entity hold a MAC if the overarching corporate entity itself is not bidding for a MAC and the subsidiaries have their own different CAGE codes?

A49a. No. (See also Q15)

Q49b. Or if a holdings company or corporate entity is awarded a MAC on Seaport-NxG and declares all CAGE codes of all subsidiaries at the time of bid, could any subsidiary bid on task orders under the MAC held by the corporate entity?

A49b. Yes. (See also Q15)

Q50. The FBO notification dated Feb. 28, 2018 indicates that a document containing questions and answers is being posted. I cannot find the document. Is it possible that it did not post?

A50. The FBO amendment attachment did not post correctly on 28 Feb. It was posted successfully on 1 Mar. The following are all the attachments to date:

1. Q&A 14 Feb 2018

2. CDCA Updates on SeaPort Brief

3. Q&A 27 Feb 2018

4. Announcement 1

5. Q&A 6 Mar 2018

Q51. I am looking to register my business in SEAPORT, but the rolling admission is closed.

When is it open?

A51. There will be no more rolling admissions for SeaPort-e. Interested, qualified companies are encouraged to submit a proposal in response to the upcoming SeaPort-NxG solicitation.

Q52. We have been tracking the SeaPort-NxG procurement for some time and noticed that the draft RFP and additional responses to questions were posted on FBO.gov yesterday. Is there something specific I need to do to register my company for the solicitation?

A52. The draft RFP has not been posted on FBO.gov yet. There is no registration for the solicitation. Recommend you periodically check FBO.gov for the posting of the Draft RFP and the ultimate formal RFP.

Q53. I attempted to find solicitation N0017818R7000 on NECO. However, it appears this solicitation does not exist on NECO.

A53. The solicitation for SeaPort-NxG will only be posted on FBO.gov. See Q1.

Q54. Would a SEAPORT E task order for work performed on a joint program – includes Navy aircraft, US Marine Corps aircraft and Air Force – be acceptable as a US Navy experience for SEAPORT NxG?

A54. It would if the work performed was in direct support to the Department of the Navy.

Offerors are cautioned that just because a contract is issued by a Department of the Navy DODAAC (even a SeaPort-e contract/task order) does not guarantee that the work meets the requirements of “direct support to The Department of the Navy.”

Q55. Would the Government please consider following a limited price evaluation similar to other Multiple Award MACs such as RS3 where only a handful of LCATs are priced as part of vendors proposal submission?

A55. No. SeaPort-NxG will not have capped rates or a set of master labor categories that are tied to the overarching SeaPort-NxG MAC therefore there is no pricing required at the SeaPort-NxG MAC. Additionally, it is estimated that the preponderance of Task Orders issued under SeaPort-NxG will be issued as cost-reimbursement type orders which require a cost realism analysis as part of Task Order evaluation and award. (See also Q30)

Q56. Would the Government please provide more insight as to whether Technical and Management Volumes will be required as part of vendors proposal submission? If so how will these be evaluated?

A56. Typical technical and management volumes will not be required. The information that is provided by the offerors to meet the experience requirement (See Q7) will be verified (not evaluated) by the Government. The SeaPort-NxG RFP will contain specific proposal requirements.

Q57. If a contractor has experience in functional areas: 1. Software Engineering, Development, Programming, and Network Support and 2 Research and Development Support on a Navy Contract, then are they eligible for the NxG solicitation to submit a proposal for all 23 functional areas?

A57. Experience in any one functional area in direct support to The Department of the Navy is required to be awarded a SeaPort-NxG MAC. The MAC awards will not designate which of the functional areas awardees are qualified or eligible for. All awardees receive all functional areas. Post-award of the MACs, awardees may propose on any Task Order solicitation issued under the SeaPort-NxG MACs for any of the 23 functional areas that they chose.

Q58. Under Seaport-e, small businesses of all sizes and socio-economic status were able to obtain a prime contract and provide services directly to the Navy. The Navy bought many different types of services under Seaport-e, many of which were not primarily 541330/$38.5 including a high volume of program management and engineering services tasks. Small business (SB) of all sizes still had a shot because they could get a Seaport prime contract and compete for work directly as demonstrated by your market research. Under SeaPort Next Generation SB who focus on program management services or engineering services have little chance of winning the limited number of SeaPort Next Generation prime contracts and the ensuing task orders. This is because they won’t be able to compete successfully against the mature businesses that are more than twice their size, but who will still qualify as “small” under the $38.5M size standard the Navy has chosen as the single primary NAICS code for the IDIQ.

This competitive dynamic is not speculative as it is clearly seen by the size of the winning SB prime contractors on the OASIS vehicle in the larger NAICS code lanes – namely - the larger the NAICS code for the lane, the larger the sb prime contractors are within those lanes. As we understand Seaport Next-Generation, the SB primes will all be considered “small” under the IDIQ primary $38.5M NAICS code. These SB primes will be priming task orders on program management and engineering services under the IDIQ, though under the NAICS codes truly applicable for the program management and engineering tasks most if not all of the Seaport Next Generation “small” primes would not be considered small. That really hurts the businesses that actually are considered small by the SBA for providing these program management and engineering services under the applicable NAICS codes such as 541611, 541330, 541990, etc. Moreover, these “small” Seaport Next Generation IDIQ award winners will have no incentive to sub to small businesses who actually are small under the applicable program management services or engineering NAICS codes because they won’t be required to have small business subcontracting plans because they are “small”, under the $38.5M primary IDIQ NAICS code. The likely result will be that the majority of small businesses who provide program management services or engineering services will be shut out of Seaport Next Generation and by extension the Navy. If our understanding of the Navy’s Next Generation strategy is correct, there are serious implications for naval innovation, the Naval defense industrial base, and fairness to small businesses as a whole. Given the likely volume of program management and engineering tasks for which the $38.5M primary NAICS is not appropriate, will the Navy consider creating separately competed lanes for “business services” and “engineering (excluding the $38.5M exception)” under the same type of contracting model as OASIS? If not, then how is the Navy’s Seaport Next Generation CONOPS fair to small businesses legitimately operating as small businesses in the program management services and Engineering (without the exception) NAICS codes?

A58. SeaPort has always used only NAICS code 541330/$38.5. SeaPort-e historically has and continues to have vigorous and healthy competition amongst the ~3,200 contract holders, 90% of which are small businesses. SeaPort-e has been very successful supporting small business; since its inception 551 different small businesses have won task order competitions for work directly supporting the Department of the Navy. Further 54 different small businesses have grown to other than small in large part as a result of the work they won under SeaPort-e.

The Navy's plan for SeaPort-NxG is to follow the SeaPort-e model to the greatest extent in order to maintain that healthy competitive atmosphere and continue to support the Navy's industrial base, in particular the small business industrial base that the Navy relies on today.

Q59. As you know that there has been several contracts and proposals that have come out on SEAPORTE for IT related projects for Defense Health Agency (DHA) for example: Defense Health Readiness Engineering Support and Defense Health Agency Cybersecurity Risk

Management Operations Support at SCC Atlantic. Will these types of contracts for DHA count as support of the Navy for a contractor to bid SEAPORT NxG?

A59. See A 58. Not all work contracted for via SeaPort-e is in direct support of the Department of the Navy. SSC Atlantic, as a working capital activity, provides a diverse range of support services to multiple federal organizations, including DHA. These orders are examples of work contracted via SeaPort that is not in direct support of the Department of the Navy and therefore, based on this experience alone, the Contractor would not be qualified for SeaPort- NxG.