attachement_j.5_questions_and_answers_solictation_N0017819R3006_amend__0002_12032018.pdf

Attachment J.5 Questions and Answers Solicitation N0017819R3006

Amendment 0001

Q1. Is this a Small Business Set-aside?

Answer 1. Yes, this effort will be Set-aside for Small Business.

Q2. The FBO posting identifies the Set-Aside as “N/A”, which is interpreted as the solicitation is unrestricted. However, Section M states: “Multiple contracts will be awarded to responsible Small Business Offerors whose proposals represent the Technically Acceptable (TA) after evaluation in accordance with the factors described herein.” Page 45 includes FAR clause 52.219-6, which indicates this solicitation is Small Business Set-Aside. Please clarify.

Answer 2. Set Aside: N/A found on FBO Posted November 21, 2018 is incorrect. The Government intends to solicit Small Business Set-Aside. This will be updated.

Q3. No attachments to the solicitation were included on the FBO posting, only the solicitation itself.

Please provide the following, at a minimum, Attachment J.3 Cost Summary, as Para. L.3.3.1 references this attachment to be used for proper format. If possible, please post all reference Attachments to the FBO posting.

Answer 3. The attachments are provided via Amendment 0001.

Q4. Please confirm that this procurement invokes the Service Contract Act.

Answer 4. Yes, this procurement invokes the Service Contract Act. See FAR clause 52.222-42 and 52.222-49 in Section I.

Amendment 0002

Q5. On the SF-33, Block 9 indicates that 1 original and 1 copy by received at the address in Block 7 in Dahlgren but on the bottom of page 64, it states that proposals are to be submitted electronically.

Answer 5. Section L.1.1. “ Proposals must be submitted electronically, via email in order to be officially submitted for award…email to the Contract Specialist at Charlene.Lowe@navy.mil and Contracting Officer at Dana.Phillips@navy.mil.” Also, Amendment 0002 states in #14 that only electronic submitted documents are required.

Q6. Section L.3.2.2, Sub-factor 1.1, Scenario, page 67: The Scenario can be interpreted different ways depending on the assumptions one makes. In order to provide an accurate as possible response to this Scenario, is it possible to provide additional background information regarding the Scenario? We think that would greatly enhance the Government’s ability to evaluate responses. If not, an Offerror’s assumptions could be significant (and different for each Offeror) in order to illustrate planning capabilities. Our questions wrt the Scenario include:

mailto:Charlene.Lowe@navy.mil mailto:Dana.Phillips@navy.mil

a. What is the cause of the damage;

b. What is the vessel type

c. What is the ship’s location;

d. What is the type of blown fiber? General Cable BLOLITE or Sumitomo NEXTGEN, or both?

e. Does this section of concatenation fall between two tube routing boxes (TRB) or does an FOICB exist in the link?

f. The scenario indicates, but does not quantify; splices are involved. How many circuits of a possible seven route beyond a TRB to a splice tray via mono-duct to at least one end or some similar situation? How many splices need to be replaced?

g. How many, if any, circuits terminate in an FOICB and require furcation to terminate with an ST or similar connector?

h. How many circuits are in the cable (how many ducts are occupied)?

i. What mode of fiber is used (Multimode or Singlemode)?

j. How many fibers comprise each circuit to be repaired- 4, 8, 12?

Answer 6. Per L.3.2.2, Sub-Factor 1.1 Scenario, the Offeror is required to provide their own assumptions for the scenario. The Offeror should clearly articulate their assumptions.