RFP QA MATRIX_POSTED_02102021.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 49 KB Posted Feb 10, 2021

Attached to: SeaPort NxG IDIQ MAC Rolling Admissions 2021
Solicitation number: N0017821R7000
Issued by: Department of the Navy Naval Sea Systems Command

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
J.3 Pre-Award Accounting System Questionnaire_FY21_V2.docx	DOCX document	Jan 26, 2021
N0017821R7000_0001_RA_RFP_Amendment.pdf	PDF	Jan 26, 2021
J.1_Contractor Information Spreadsheet_FY21_V2.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 26, 2021
RFP QA MATRIX_POSTED_01252021.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 25, 2021
J.2_System for Award Management Certification_FY21.docx	DOCX document	Jan 11, 2021
J.1_Contractor Information Spreadsheet_FY21.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Jan 11, 2021
J.3 Pre-Award Accounting System Questionnaire_FY21.docx	DOCX document	Jan 11, 2021
N0017821R7000_RA_RFP_FINAL_01112021.pdf	PDF	Jan 11, 2021

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Sheet1

	Question Number	Date of Question	Verbatim Question	Answer	Page # RFP	Para RFP
	1	1/11/21	The question below seeks to clarify Section 5.3.2 (page 46): Are contractors eligible to bid as a SeaPort NXG prime if they directly support systems that are a) relied upon by the DON and all other branches of the armed forces, such as the DoD Automated Biometrics Identification System (ABIS) or b) replacing DON developed systems such as the Afghan ABIS?	Your proposal submitted in response to the rolling admissions solicitation will need to clearly demonstrate/state your company’s direct navy experience	46	5.3.2
	2	1/12/21	Page 43, Para 3.11 - Are Joint Ventures permitted to submit a bid?	Yes, Joint Ventures are permitted to submit a bid. Offerors are referred to sections C.10.3 and L.3.11 for requirements regarding Joint Ventures
	43	3.11
	3	1/12/21	Page 45, Para 5.3.1 - With regard to proof of Prime Contract, would the first page be sufficient or do you require the complete award?	The first page of a contract would be suffcient.
	45	5.3.1
	4	1/12/21	Page 43, Para 3.11 - Can a JV prime hold individual prime Task Orders on SeaPort-NxG	Any task orders issued would be in the name of the SeaPort NxG MAC holder, which in this case, would be the joint venture. Individual members of the joint venture are not, in and of themselves, contract holders. See Section C.10.3 and L.3.11 for requirements on Joint Ventures.
	43	3.11
	5	1/12/21	I need to download controlled documents for solicitation notice ID N0017821R7000, SeaPort NxG IDIQ MAC Rolling Admissions 2021. I have attached my DD2345. Can you instruct me on the proper procedure?	Attachments were made public. THey may have to be downloaded individually, not using the Download All function.	FBO	FBO
	6	1/12/21	As a current prime awardee under the SeaPort NxG IDIQ. I would assume that this Rolling Admissions solicitation is to add industry to the existing awards or are we too to respond for an extension to the SeaPort NxG program?	Current SeaPort NxG MAC holders do not need to submit a proposal under this rolling admissions. **Added to description on beta.sam.gov that existing NxG MAC holders do not need to submit a proposal for RA.	General	General
	7	1/12/21	Page 50, paragraph 3.1.2 3.1.2 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s technical proposal as acceptable/unacceptable. Offerors are required to describe recent (last 10 years) and relevant DON experience (direct Department of Navy experience) in at least one of the 23 functional areas subcategories as defined in Sections C.
QUESTION: Will the Government accept work done for the United States Marine Corps as relevant DON experience?	The USMC is part of the Department of the Navy.	50	3.1.2
	8	1/12/21	Question. We understand that in order to “qualify” for an award, a vendor must be able to show experience in direct support of the Navy. However, we have work with the DLA that supports directly several Naval Bases and Shipyards. Does this type experience demonstrate capability in one or more of the 23 functional areas?	Your proposal will need to clearly demonstrate/state your company’s direct navy experience	46	5.3.2
	9	1/12/21	Reference: RFP Page 46 of 51, paragraph 5.3.2 The requirement for experience in direct support of the DON applies only to the prime Contractor and is based on the unique nature of the mission of the DON and the support necessary to successfully execute that mission. Offerors must have performed work under the MAC or BPA i.e., received award of a Task Order under a SeaPort MAC and performed those services. Question: Use of Other Transaction Authority (OTA) contracts have been on the increase in the last five years and have resulted in companies having direct support to the DON outside normal FAR based contracts. OTAs are officially awarded to a consortium to manage, with award of individual efforts made to one or more of its members. Our company was awarded two separate OTAs and as a result we are providing direct support to two Navy organizations on separate OTAs: 1) U.S. Fleet Cyber Command (FCC)/U.S. TENTH Fleet (C10F) and 2) Naval Surface Warfare Center Indian Head Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technology Division. We believe that OTAs that have direct work with the DON meet the qualifications required for the SEAPORT NXG contract. Do you concur?	Your proposal submitted in response to the rolling admissions solicitation will need to clearly demonstrate/state your company’s direct navy experience resulting from the OTA. Please ensure that your proposal includes a copy of the OTA as stated in Section L.5.3.3 for verification purposes.	46	5.3.2
	10	1/12/21	Please confirm that the Small Business (SB) goals provided in the Solicitation Section L, paragraph 5.8.1 on page 48 (20% Small Business, 5%, Small Disadvantaged Businesses, 5% Women-Owned Small Businesses, 3% HUB-Zone, 3% Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business concerns) should be based on the amount of subcontracted work and not the amount obligated on the contract (subcontract value vs. contract value). Paragraph 5.8.1 states that these goals should be based on "total planned subcontracted dollars". However, paragraph 5.8.3 on page 48 indicates that "the subcontracting plan must state that the proposal goals are based on total obligated dollars" which indicates contract value. As an example of the difference, please consider that if a firm won $10M of work under the contract and subcontracted $1M of that work, a 20% subcontract value SB goal requires at least $200,000 worth of subcontracts to be awarded to SB to meet this goal. However a 20% contract value SB goal requires at least $2M worth of subcontract to be awarded to SB to meet this goal.	Correct. An offeror’s subcontracting goals should be based on what an offeror anticipates as their “total planned subcontract dollars” as stated in 5.8.1. The intent of Section L.5.8.3 is to make sure the offeror knows how the reporting is expected. We will clarify this by amendment to state the following:

5.8.3 The subcontracting plan must state that the offeror understands the reporting of the proposed goals is based on actual total obligated dollars of the contract (not per task order).

48	5.8.1
11	1/12/21	Solicitation Section L, paragraph 5.3.1 on page 45 allows one, but not more than three contracts to demonstrate the firm’s recent and relevant experience. Please clarify whether all 3 of those contracts must demonstrate support of a single functional area subcategory, or may each contract be used to demonstrate experience for different functional area subcategories	Offerors need only provide proof (at least one but not more than three contract) of recent and relevant experience in 1 of the 23 functional areas.	45	5.3.1
12	1/13/20	Do you anticipate that not only Full and Open, but also Small Business awards may occur as a result of this On Ramp?	Yes	General	General
13	1/13/21	I was wondering if SeaPort IDIQ only for companies that are within NAICS 541330 ? How about those services ?

Can other types of companies apply ? How about a photographer who does training films, drone videos, portraits, etc.

All work solicited under SeaPort-NxG is based on a single NAICS, 541330, with the military and aerospace equipment & military weapons exception, which specifies average annual receipts for the past three years of $41.5M.	46	5.3.2
14	1/13/21	The cover letter required by this paragraph supersedes and replaces the “First Page” requirements referred to in FAR 52.215-1, Subsection (c)(2). Bullet point 2 asks for both DUNS Number and SAMMI Number. Can this be changed to DUNS Number or SAMMI Number to match the Attachment J1 Column J requirements (Column J:DUNS or SAMMI)	The SAMMI (System for Award Management Managed Identifier) number is a new, unique identifier for federal contractors used within SAM that will eventually replace the DUNS number. It has not been distributed to contractors to date so the reference will be removed and not required.	J.1	J.1
15	1/13/21	We have experience with Engineering Support Services that fit in a few of the 23 functional are subcategories supporting Engineering shipboard services and support development of significant alterations to existing systems for the United States Coast Guard (USCG) Ships and Cutters for the Department of Homeland Security. Would these services count towards our experience and mapping to the requirements? Currently, it reads in direct support of DON, these services are very similar in nature to the services we provide to the USCG ships and cutters. We have DON personnel on staff supporting these efforts.	Your proposal will need to clearly demonstrate/state your company’s direct navy experience.	46	5.3.2
16	1/13/21	It looks like in the listing for the subject solicitation, it shows a date of Jan 07, 2021 as the last date modified, however when I open the opportunity there are no documents added beyond the presolicitation from July 2020. Am I missing something?	All that was updated was information in the description on beta.sam.gov.	FBO	FBO
17	1/14/21	We have a mentor/mentee relationship with our small business Joint Venture partner. The JV, as a separate entity, has a separate Cage Code/DUNS #. As two separate legal entities, would that not fit the definition restricting legal entities from having only a one prime positions on Seaport NxG?	Joint Ventures are limited to a single contract. See Section C.10.3 and L.3.11 for requirements on Joint Ventures.
JV	JV
18	1/13/21	We are a small business under our primary NAICS and our alternate NAICS. If we bid seaport-e, C.12 appears to say we would be treated as a large business. I say that because our yearly revenue exceeds the revenue size standards for Seaport-e’s NAICS.

1. Could you advise if this interpretation is correct?

2. Since we are a small business (just not for this NAICS but everything else we do), would we actually be required to do a Subcontracting Plan C9.2 and C9.3? It seems counterintuitive that a small business would be required to do such a plan.

SeaPort NxG MAC offerors with revenues exceeding the $41.5M threshold in NAICS 541330 are considered “other than small”. As such, these offerors are required to submit a subcontracting plan that meets the requirements set forth in Section C.9.2.	C.9.2	C.12
19	1/13/21	• Page 45: 5.3 Technical Proposal; 5.3.1 – “Each of the two major categories is further broken down into twenty-three (23) functional area subcategories. Offerors are required to submit a description of their recent and relevant experience in one of the 23 functional area subcategories listed below, in either engineering support or program management support that was in direct support of Department of the Navy (DON).”

o It is understood the Technical Proposal must reference direct work in support of the Department of the Navy (DON). If awarded a SeaPort NxG MAC contract will the awardee have the ability to use other Department of Defense (DoD) past performance similar to a Task Order (TO) performance work statement at the TO level? Awardees will have to follow requirements established in the specific Task Order solicitation for past performance.

45	5.3.1
20	1/13/21	Page 17 of 51: C.10.3 – Joint Ventures (JVs): Would the government allow for a Mentor-Protege Joint Venture to receive an award as a small business if the Mentor has an existing Seaport NxG prime contract as a large business?

Joint Ventures are a legal entity; mentor-proteges relationships are not legally joint ventures. In either case, contractors are limited to a single contract. Please refer to Sections C.10 and L.3.11 for information.	17	C.10.3
21	1/13/21	J.2 System for Award Management Certifiction_FY21 – Shall only the Prime Offeror complete the J.2 System for Award Management Certifiction_FY21 or shall Prime Offeror and all Teaming Partners/Subcontractors listed on J.1_Contractor Information Sheet, Tab – Team Member Info?
Only the prime offeror needs to complete attachment J.2.	J.2	General
22	1/14/21	If we are a subcontractor on the current Seaport NxG, do we need to submit a proposal under the rolling admissions? Is there a difference from being a prime compared to a sub?	Team members/subcontractors of existing SeaPort NxG Prime MAC holders may continue to work in their current capacity and are not required to submit a proposal under this rolling admissions if they do not wish to become a SeaPort NxG Prime MAC holder themselves. That is a business decision that your organization needs to make. However, if the team member/subcontractor wishes to hold their own NxG MAC, they are required to submit a compliant proposal	General	General
23	1/15/21	SAM.gov Solicitation Notice, No Page Number, Attachments/Links — How can offerors access, if necessary, the three attachments that are visible on SAM.gov but inaccessible because they are “controlled,” have an “X” marked aside each one, and are referenced as “deleted attachments” in a downloadable file titled, “Deleted Attachments.txt.”	THE 3 ATTACHMENTS (J.1, J.2, AND J.3) HAVE BEEN MADE PUBLIC AND CAN BE DOWNLOADED INDIVIDUALLY.	FBO	FBO
24	1/15/21	RFP SF33, Page 1, Box 7 — Which organization address should offerors use when preparing their proposal cover pages? The solicitation package refers to two discrete addressees and suite numbers:

• Comptroller C1B, 17632 Dahlgren Road, Suite 202, Dahlgren VA 22448-5154

• NSWC Dahlgren Division, 17632 Dahlgren Road, Suite 157, Dahlgren VA 22448-5154	SF33, BLOCK 7 IS THE ISSUING OFFICE FOR THIS SOLICITATION. PLEASE FOLLOW INSTRUCTIONS IN SECTION L.2 REGARDING SUBMISSION OF OFFERS AS PROPOSALS MUST BE SUBMITTED ELECTRONICALLY, NOT BY MAIL.	Block 7	Block 7
	25	1/15/21	RFP, Page 50 of 51, Paragraph 3.1.1 — Does SAMS need to reflect NAICS 541330 at time of award or throughout the proposal evaluation period?	AN OFFEROR’S SAM RECORD MUST REFLECT NAICS 541330 AT THE TIME OF THE PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AS PART OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS. (See M.3.1.1)	50	3.1.1
	26	1/15/21	RFP, Page 50 of 51, Paragraph 3.1.1 — May an offeror bid and remain eligible for award if SAMS reflects a NAICS other than 541330?	SEAPORT OPERATES UNDER A SINGLE NAICS. AN OFFEROR’S SAM RECORD MUST REFLECT NAICS 541330 AT THE TIME OF THE PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AS PART OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS.	50	3.1.1
	27	1/15/21	RFP, Page 50 of 51, Paragraph 3.1.1 — How does the government prefer that the offeror “accurately portray its size status” if the offeror references a NAICS other than 541330 in SAMS?	AN OFFEROR’S SAM RECORD MUST REFLECT NAICS 54330 AT THE TIME OF THE PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AS PART OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS.	50	3.1.1
	28	1/15/21	RFP, Page 50 of 51, Paragraph 3.1.1 — If an offeror’s SAMS reflects a NAICS 541330 upon submission of its proposal but is changed to a NAICS other than 541330 before the Navy’s award decision, will the offeror remain eligible for award?	SEAPORT OPERATES UNDER A SINGLE NAICS - 541330. AN OFFEROR’S SAM RECORD MUST REFLECT NAICS 54330 AT THE TIME OF THE PROPOSAL SUBMISSION AS PART OF THE EVALUATION PROCESS AND BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT THE CONTRACT PERIOD.	50	3.1.1
	29	1/15/21	RFP, Page 18, Paragraph C.14 — Are offerors required to provide an OCI statement in their proposal? If so, in which proposal file should offerors include their OCI statement(s)?	Offeror’s need to provide a statement in their proposal cover letter of the determination of a potential Organization Conflict of Interest (OCI) in accordance with Section L.6.5. If an OCI does exist, offerors must submit the OCI plan required under L.4.3 in accordance with the naming convention. An amendment will be issued to clarify this.	18	C.14
	30	1/15/21	RFP, Page 41 and 42, Paragraph 2.3 — What is the maximum file size for an offeror’s all-inclusive submission if they choose to submit their proposal through multiple emails? (e.g., 15 MB equates to 3 emails of no more than 5 MB per email.) How many emails may an offeror use to submit its package?	There is no maximum number of emails nor file size for the entire proposal, only maximum is 5MB per email. The server will not allow more than 5MB per email or the attachments will be stripped. The server also does not allow for .zip files as they too will be stripped.	41	2.3
	31	1/15/21	RFP, Page 42, Paragraph 2.4 — Does a cover page and/or TOC count against the technical proposal 5-page limit? Or, alternatively, should offerors omit front matter from the technical proposal and use the first page for only substantive content that corresponds to instructions per RFQ Section L 5.3	Coverpage and Table of Contents do not count agains the technical page count.	42	2.4
	32	1/15/21	RFP, Page 42, Paragraph 4.3 — What if any formatting instructions apply to the proposal file titled, “*Experience Supporting Documentation (if applicable)”?	There is no specific format or page limit for supporting documentation.	42	4.3
	33	1/15/21	RFP, Page 42, Paragraph 4.3 — Please clarify the page limit instruction for “Experience Supporting Documentation (if applicable).” The table assigns no page limit whereas the asterixed foot note states that a page limit applies. The asterix is applied to the “Page Limit” header cell and the specific line item for “Experience Supporting Documentation (if applicable).”	There is no page limit on supporting documentation.	42	4.3
	34	1/15/21	RFP, Page 44, Paragraph 4.3 — Two questions per the Document Name instructions. Should offerors use their company name to replace the “Company” or “Name” reference? And what should the offeror insert in lieu of the option that is not chosen, e.g., if company name is used in lieu of “Company,” what should be used in lieu of “Name”?	YES, REPLACE "COMPANY" and/or "NAME" with the Company name that is proposing. The naming convention for COMPANY NAME is not two separate items, it is the COMPANY NAME but with an underscore if the company name is more than one word. For example "XYZ Consultant" should read XYZ_Consultant".	44	4.3
	35	1/15/21	RFP, Page 47, Paragraph 5.5.2 — What is the minimum and maximum number of teaming partners that an offeror may propose?	There is no limit on the number of teaming partners an offeror can submit. Section L.5.5.2 will be updated accordingly in an amendment.	47	5.5.2
	36	1/15/21	We are a small business focused solely on Construction Management Services. Would this rolling admission be worthwhile to us to submit a proposal?	Your proposal will need to clearly demonstrate/state your company’s direct navy experience.	General	General
	37	1/15/21	1. On Page 44, sect L.4.3. The naming convention chart lists maximum page limits for each section. The Technical

proposal row lists a page limit of 5. The Experience supporting Documentation (if applicable) row lists N/A for a page limit but there is an asterisk next to the submission identification. The asterisk explanation at the bottom of the table states “*The Government will not consider any information presented beyond the last whole word within the

PAGE LIMIT.”

Q: What is the page limitation for supporting documentation? Is it included in the 5 page limit for the technical proposal, that is, is the limit for the technical proposal and all supporting documentation 5 pages or is there an unlimited page limit for the supporting documentation? It is recommended that supporting documentation not be

included in the 5 page limit for the technical proposal.	Experience Supporting Documentation has no page limit (N/A).	44	L.4.3
	38	1/15/21	On Page 45 sect L.5.3.1 the solicitation states “an offeror may provide one (1) description of support from subcategory #1 –Engineering, System Engineering, and Safety and Process Engineering Support, NOT one (1) from the Engineering Support Services category and another from the Program Management Support category. On page 50 section M.3.1.2 states Offerors are required to describe recent (last 10 years) and relevant DON experience (direct Department of Navy experience) in at least one of the 23 functional areas subcategories as defined in Sections C.

Q: Can offerors provide evidence of recent and relevant work in more than one subcategory or are offerors limited

to choose only one of the 23 subcategories and provide evidence of recent and relative work?	Demonstrated direct Navy experience in one subcategory in the SOW is all that is required to have qualifying experience, however, offerors are allowed to submit under more than one subcategory to ensure they can fully demonstrate their experience in at least one of the subcategories referenced in thier Technical Proposal.	45	L.5.3.1
	39	1/15/21	1. Reference: N0017821R7000_RA_RFP_FINAL_01112021.pdf, Page 45 of 51, paragraph 5.2 COVER LETTER.

Question: The instructions for the Cover Letter asks for Offerors to include both a DUNS Number and SAMMI Number. Will the Government clarify if the DUNS Number is the same as the SAMMI Number?

The SAMMI (System for Award Management Managed Identifier) number is a new, unique identifier for federal contractors used within SAM that will eventually replace the DUNS number. It has not been distributed to contractors to date so the reference will be removed and not required.	45	5.2
40	1/15/21	Reference: J.1_Contractor Information Spreadsheet_FY21.xlsx, COMPANY INFO _ J.1 Attachment tab.

Question: Column S asks for “Socio Economic Status - (SDVOSB, WOSB, 8(a), SUBZone” in relation to Contractor Size Information in SAM.GOV. Will the Government confirm SUBZone is an error and should read as HUBZone?

CORRECT, this typo (HUBZone) will be corrected in an amendment.	J.1	J.1
41	1/15/21	3. Reference: J.1_Contractor Information Spreadsheet_FY21.xlsx, COMPANY INFO _ J.1 Attachment tab.

Question: Column S asks for “Socio Economic Status - (SDVOSB, WOSB, 8(a), SUBZone” in relation to Contractor Size Information in SAM.GOV. If an Offeror has multiple socio-economic status designations, such as a company that is designated as both an 8(a) and a HUBZone, which selection should be made from the drop down menu? Currently, Attachment J.1 only allows for Offerors to select one socio-economic designation.

If an offeror has or would like to identify more than one (1) socio-economic designations, please utilize an additional line below in the spreadsheet. Offeror’s socio-economic designations will be verified in SAM.	J.1	J.1
42	1/15/21	4. Reference: J.1_Contractor Information Spreadsheet_FY21.xlsx, COMPANY INFO _ J.1 Attachment tab.

Question: Column AA asks for “Responsibility Certification Checked? (Y/N)” in relation to SAM.GOV REGISTRATION INFORMATION J.2 CERTIFICATIONS. Will the Government clarify if this is referencing FAR 52.209-5: Certification Regarding Responsibility Matters from the Offeror’s SAM.gov record?

	Yes, Responsibility Certification Checked refers to Reps and Certs under Clause FAR 52.209-5: Certification Regarding Responsibility Matters that is captured in SAM.GOV under a company's registration. A company must certify to the statements contained within the clause to receive an award.	J.1	J.1
	43	1/15/21	Column AE within the Technical Proposal Information columns asks for “Experience as Prime or Subcontractor.” In accordance with the Technical Proposal instructions, paragraph 5.3.1, Offerors can submit one (1) but not more than three (3) contracts/subcontracts. If an Offeror is submitting a prime contract and a subcontract as references, which selection should be made from the “Experience as Prime or Subcontractor” drop down menu? Currently, Attachment J.1 only allows for Offerors to select either Prime or Subcontractor.	Offers need to select according to whether the experience cited was gained as a Prime or Subcontractor.	J.1	J.1
	44	1/15/21	6. References: N0017821R7000_RA_RFP_FINAL_01112021.pdf, Page 48 of 51, section 5.7 ATTACHMENT J.3 – PRE AWARD ACCOUNTING SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE, paragraph 5.7.2; and J.3 Pre-Award Accounting System Questionnaire_FY21.
Question: Will the Government confirm that “Part B” described in paragraph 5.7.2 is referencing questions 1 through 27 on pages 2 through 11 of the J.3 Pre-Award Accounting System Questionnaire_FY21?	Yes. Only part A needs to be filled out and signed and returned. Part B is provided to prepare offerors for an audit after award. An amendment will be issued to clarify the separation.
	J..3	J..3
	45	1/15/21	7. References: N0017821R7000_RA_RFP_FINAL_01112021.pdf, Page 48 of 51, section 5.7 ATTACHMENT J.3 – PRE AWARD ACCOUNTING SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE, paragraph 5.7.2; and J.3 Pre-Award Accounting System Questionnaire_FY21.
Question: Will the Government confirm that Offerors are to choose only ONE of the three options – a), b), or c) – listed on the first page of the Attachment J.3 Pre-Award Accounting System Questionnaire?	Confirmed. Select either a), b) or c) on the first page of Attachment J.3. Only part A needs to be filled out and signed and returned. Part B is provided to prepare offerors for an audit after award. An amendment will be issued to clarify the seperation.
	J..3	J..3
	46	1/15/21	8. References: N0017821R7000_RA_RFP_FINAL_01112021.pdf, Page 48 of 51, section 5.7 ATTACHMENT J.3 – PRE AWARD ACCOUNTING SYSTEM QUESTIONNAIRE, paragraph 5.7.2; and J.3 Pre-Award Accounting System Questionnaire_FY21.
Question: If an Offeror has a DCAA Approved Accounting System, are we required to attach a copy of our most recent DCAA audit report, or provide DCAA Report # or DCAA POC info?	No. Offerors with a DCAA approved Accounting System are not required to attach a copy or reference a DCAA Report # with their MAC proposal.
	J.3	J.3
	47	1/15/21	Question 1: Paragraph 5.3.1 (page 45) – specifically as it pertains to recent and relevant experience in direct support of the Department of the Navy (DON)

Please “clarify” recent and relevant technical experience supporting the DON in that the technical response can only reference (1) of the (12) functional area subcategories defined in the Major Category: Engineering Support Services

even though our experience “maps” to more than (1) one functional area where we have performance on the same contract/subcontract.	Offerors need only reference experience in 1 of the 23 functional area subcategories even if the experience maps to more than one functional area.	45	5.3.1
	48	1/15/21	Questions 2: Paragraph 5.3.3 (page 46) – specifically as it pertains to recent and relevant experience in support of an intelligence scope of work on a contract/subcontract

Please “clarify” if the relevant experience in support of an intelligence scope of work would be considered if it was not in direct support of the DON

	All experience needs to be in direct support of the DON.	46	5.3.3
	49		Attachment J1 : Contractor Size Information in SAM.Gov
if company has multiple Socio Economic Category, i.e. if the company is 8a, WOSB and also HUBZone, how do we fill in J1?	Please use multiple lines/rows for the additional contracts/functional areas/subcategories, socio economic designations or any other column heading.	J.1	J.1
	50		2. When completing Attachment J.1 Contractor Information Spreadsheet, the second tab asks for Team member information. If proposing as a Joint Venture, do we provide each JV member information or is this block reserved for Subcontractors information as in a Teaming Arrangement?

The 2nd tab is requested for subcontractors or team members of the Offeror. It is not mandatory to determine your potential team members at this time. It can be done post award.	J.1	J.1
	51		3. Attachment J.1, Contractor Information Spreadsheet, the first tab asks for 8a entry and exit time.

If an offeror is awaiting the final approval of their 8(a) status at time of proposal submission, and if awarded a Seaport contract, will the awardee be allowed to bid 8a opportunities in the future? Do we get benefit of being an 8a after award?

Offerors shall annotate status of 8(a) certification in their submittal. Once approval is received from the SBA, offeror must notify the MAC contracting officer of the date of certification and include the offeror’s SBA district office. At the task order solicitation level, offerors must have the 8(a) certification upon submission of any proposal at the task order solicitation level.

J.1	J.1
52	1/15/21	4. Attachment J.3 Pre-award Accounting System Questionnaire - If proposing as a Joint Venture and each JV member is DCAA certified does this meet the requirement of paragraph a, or must the Joint Venture itself possess a DCAA Approved Accounting System?
The Joint Venture, as a legal entity, must have a DCAA Approved Accounting System in order to propose on any cost type work at the Task Order Level.

J.3	J.3
53	1/15/21	5. Page 45 Technical Proposal Paragraph 5.3.1

The RFP states, “Offerors are required to submit a description of their recent and relevant experience in one of the 23 functional area subcategories listed below, in either engineering support or program management support that was in direct support of Department of the Navy (DON). For example, an offeror may provide one (1) description of support from subcategory #1 – Engineering, System Engineering, and Safety and Process Engineering Support, NOT one (1) from the Engineering Support Services category and another from the Program Management Support category. An Offeror’s description of recent and relevant experience shall reference one (1) but not more than three (3) contracts/subcontracts (and include contract numbers for verification purposes) in one of the functional area subcategories.”

Can the Government clarify how may relevant experiences are required to be submitted with our proposal response?

Offerors are required to submit a description of their recent and relevant experience in one of the 23 functional area subcategories. This description shall reference one (1) but not more than three (3) contracts/subcontracts (and include contract numbers for verification purposes) in one of the functional area subcategories	45	5.3.1
54	1/15/21	RFP page number: 44

Section: 4.3

Question: Can offerors include a cover page at the opening of the Technical Proposal and Experience Supporting Documentation volumes? If so, can the Government confirm that the cover page does not count against the 5 page limit in the Technical Proposal? These questions are not meant to reference the SF33 cover page.	Cover page will not count towards the Technical proposal page count.	44	4.3
	55	1/15/21	RFP page number: 47

Section: 5.5.1

Question: If an offeror elects to submit more than one contract/subcontract to demonstrate relevant experience, as allowed by RFP section 5.3.1, can the offeror add additional cells in J.1, columns AE through AI, to document each contract individually?	Please use multiple lines/rows for the additional contracts/functional areas/subcategories, socio economic designations or any other column heading.	47	5.5.1
	56	1/15/21	RFP page number: 44

Section: 4.2

Question: If the Cover Letter, Technical Proposal, Experience Supporting Documentation, J.2, and J.3 are developed using Microsoft Office products, can they be published and submitted as PDF files?	Yes. Adobe products are authorized. An amendment will clarify the use of Adobe products are authorized. The requirement will remain that J.1 must be submitted as an Excel spreadsheet	44	4.2
	57	1/15/21	RFP page number: 44

Section: 4.2 Question: Is it acceptable for the SF33 to be submitted as a PDF file?

	Yes. Adobe products are authorized. An amendment will clarify the use of Adobe products are authorized. The requirement will remain that J.1 must be submitted as an Excel spreadsheet	44	4.2
	58	1/15/21	RFP requires the DUNS and SAMMI Number. Is the SAMMI Number the DUNS Number? If not, can you please clarify how to get the SAMMI Number.	The SAMMI (System for Award Management Managed Identifier) number is a new, unique identifier for federal contractors used within SAM that will eventually replace the DUNS number. It has not been distributed to contractors to date so the reference will be removed and not required.
	SAMMI	SAMMI
	59	1/15/21	Can you use the same Contract for multiple Functional Areas Subcategories?	Yes.	General	General
	60	1/15/21	Please clarify that that our reference, can be with Navy but doesn't have to be under a SeaPort MAC as referenced in 5.3.2?	Correct, experience does not have to be under SeaPort MACs. The reference in 5.3.2 is to clarify that if an Offeror was awarded a contract but did not have any orders or work on the contract that the contract could not be used to qualify for experience as no work had occurred.	General	5.3.2
	61	1/15/21	In the supporting documents where we attach the Past Performance SOW, how do you want the Offeror map Past Performance SOW to the SeaPort SOW and functional areas(SOW paragraphs C.3.1 and C.3.2)?	The Technical Proposal is to provide a description of recent and relevant DON experience in one of the subcategories in one of the functional areas. In demonstrating this experience, the Offeror shall provide a contract number if they gained this experience as a prime contractor so that experience can be validated that the contract (or OTA) was actually performed and supporting documentation would not be needed. It is expected that the techincal narrative will discuss the work performed on the cited contracts (or OTAs) and tie that to one or more SOW subcategory areas and reference any supporting documentation submitted. NOTE: Some contracts/OTA/or work efforts may not be verifiable if performed as a subcontractor or if the scope or contractual document is one that is non-reportable into any Government electronic database (EDA/FPDSNG/CPARS) or the Government Point of Contact is no longer available for validation. Supporting Documentation would be needed to verify the work efforts in these cases.	General	C.3.1
	62	1/15/21	If an Amendment is issued under this RFP, should the Offeror attach the SF 30 with the SF33? Or should the Offeror complete block 14 of the SF33 to include all Amendments and not include that actual SF 30 Amendment.	No	Amenment	Amendment
	63	1/15/21	If a Prime Contractor (Offeror) has an DCAA Approved Accounting System, and marks X for paragraph 5.7.1 sub-bullet a), does the Offeror still need to complete Part B? Also, does the Government want a copy of the DCAA letter approving the Offeror’s Accounting System?
If the Offeror is a Small Business, should we indicate in the Cover Letter that the Subcontracting Plan is not applicable due to the Offeror being a Small Business.	Only part A needs to be filled out and signed and returned. Part B is provided to prepare offerors for an audit after award. An amendment will be issued to clarify the separation. No copies of past Audits or DCAA letters is requested.	DCAA	5.7.1
	64	1/15/21	Please confirm that the Offeror doesn’t need to respond in our proposal to Section 6.0 regarding OCI.	Section L paragraph 6.5 specifies that If the offeror determines that a potential organizational conflict of interest does not exist at any tier, the offeror shall include a statement to that effect in its response to this solicitation. Offeror’s need to provide a statement in their proposal cover letter of their determination of a potential Organization Conflict of Interest (OCI) in accordance with Section L.6.5. If an OCI does exist, offerors must submit the OCI plan required under L.4.3 in accordance with the naming convention. An amendment will be issued to clarify this.	OCI
	65	1/15/21	Can the Offeror use US Marine Corp experience for this opportunity.

Yes, the United States Marine Corps is a part of the Department of Navy and would qualify.	General
66	1/15/21	For Past Performance, can an Offeror utilize recent awards? Is there a minimum performance time requirement?	There is not a minimum period of performance of the work to qualify for a SeaPort NxG MAC.	General
67	1/15/21	Would the government allow a cover page (title page) to accompany the Technical Proposal, Supporting Documentation, and Subcontracting Plan, and not count against page count?	They are allowed and will not count agains the page count.	General
68	1/15/21	1. Does work as a subcontractor supporting a prime contract to the DON qualify as experience in direct support to the DON (Solicitation para 5.3.2, pg 46)?
Yes, subcontractor work may qualify as experience. The Technical Proposal must demonstrate recent and relevant DON experience in one of the subcategories in one of the functional areas. In demonstrating this experience, the Offeror shall provide a contract number so that experience can be validated that the contract (or OTA) was actually performed. It is expected that the techincal narrative will discuss the work performed on the cited contracts (or OTAs) and tie that to one or more SOW subcategory areas and reference any supporting documentation submitted. NOTE: Some contracts/OTA/or work efforts may not be verifiable if performed as a subcontractor or if the scope or contractual document is one that is non-reportable into any Government electronic database (EDA/FPDSNG/CPARS) or the Government Point of Contact is no longer available for validation. Supporting Documentation would be needed to verify the work efforts in these cases.	General	5.3.2
69	1/15/21	2. Does holding a prime contract with NIWC-Atlantic for the newly awarded 8(a) Incubator IDIQ program qualify as experience in direct support to the DON (Solicitation para 5.3.2, pg 46)?	The Technical Proposal is to provide a description of recent and relevant DON experience in one of the subcategories in one of the functional areas. In demonstrating this experience, the Offeror shall provide a contract number if they gained this experience as a prime contractor so that experience can be validated that the contract (or OTA) was actually performed and supporting documentation would not be needed. It is expected that the techincal narrative will discuss the work performed on the cited contracts (or OTAs) and tie that to one or more SOW subcategory areas and reference any supporting documentation submitted. NOTE: Some contracts/OTA/or work efforts may not be verifiable if performed as a subcontractor or if the scope or contractual document is one that is classified or non-reportable into any Government electronic database (EDA/FPDSNG/CPARS) or the Government Point of Contact is no longer available for validation. Supporting Documentation would be needed to verify the work efforts in these cases.	General	5.3.2
70	1/15/21	3. If the proposer is a Joint Venture (JV), does experience from either JV member qualify as experience in direct support to the DON (Solicitation para 5.3.2, pg 46)?
Experience from either JV member can be used to qualify.
71	1/15/21	4. May we assume the response for question 7 on loaded hourly labor rates should be “N/A” since rates are not required by the solicitation at this time (Pre-Award Accounting System Questionnaire, question 7, pg 5).
Only part A needs to be filled out and signed and returned. Part B is provided to prepare offerors for an audit after award. An amendment will be issued to clarify the separation. No copies of past Audits or DCAA letters is requested.
72	1/15/21	Solicitation pg. 45 of 51 para. 5.3.1 If a contractor is only allowed to submit descriptions of recent and relevant experience in “one of the functional area subcategories listed”, will the awarded contractor have access to all the Task Orders issued on the IDIQ MAC, or will the awarded contractor only have access to the Task Orders issued under the major category (i.e., Engineering Support or Program Management Support) of the associated functional area subcategories they provided descriptions of experience for?	Offerors only need to qualify under one subcategory to receive an NxG MAC. During task order competitions Offerors are allowed to propose on work under any subcategory.
73	1/15/21	Solicitation pg. 42 of 51 para 2.4 and pg. 46 of 51 para 5.3.3 If the evidence of recent and relevant experience was completed as the Prime Contractor and not in support of an intelligence scope of work, is further supporting documentation (contract cover page, SOW, etc.) required?	The Technical Proposal is to provide a description of recent and relevant DON experience in one of the subcategories in one of the functional areas. In demonstrating this experience, the Offeror shall provide a contract number if they gained this experience as a prime contractor so that experience can be validated that the contract (or OTA) was actually performed and supporting documentation would not be needed. It is expected that the techincal narrative will discuss the work performed on the cited contracts (or OTAs) and tie that to one or more SOW subcategory areas. NOTE: Some contracts/OTA/or work efforts may not be verifiable if the scope or contractual document is one that is non-reportable into any Government electronic database (EDA/FPDSNG/CPARS) or the Government Point of Contact is no longer available for validation. Supporting Documentation, such as the contract coverpages, would be needed to verify the work efforts in these cases.
74	1/15/21	Solicitation pg. 46 of 51 para 5.3.2 and 5.3.3 If the evidence provided for support to the DON is for a Single-Award IDIQ, with Task Orders awarded as the Prime, do we need to provide supporting docs such as the Contract and TO Cover Pages, or will it be sufficient to provide the Contract number and any associated Task Order numbers?	The Technical Proposal is to provide a description of recent and relevant DON experience in one of the subcategories in one of the functional areas. In demonstrating this experience, the Offeror shall provide a contract number if they gained this experience as a prime contractor so that experience can be validated that the contract (or OTA) was actually performed and supporting documentation would not be needed. It is expected that the techincal narrative will discuss the work performed on the cited contracts (or OTAs) and tie that to one or more SOW subcategory areas. NOTE: Some contracts/OTA/or work efforts may not be verifiable if the scope or contractual document is one that is non-reportable into any Government electronic database (EDA/FPDSNG/CPARS) or the Government Point of Contact is no longer available for validation. Supporting Documentation, such as the contract coverpages, would be needed to verify the work efforts in these cases.
75	1/15/21	Solicitation pg. 44 of 51 para 4.3 Can the gov’t clarify what is counted in the page limit guidelines; for example, will a cover page, table of contents or index be included in the page limits? Additionally, if a company needs to provide supporting documents for the Technical Proposal, do those count against the page limit, or can they be a separate appendix?	Cover page and Table of Contents will not count against the Technical proposal page count. Supporting documentation do not count and can be a separate appendix.
76	1/15/21	Attachment J.1 Contractor Information: Spreadsheet In the “Contractor Size Information” section the drop-down field for Socio-Economic status only allows for one of the Socio-Economic categories to be selected. If a company has more than one (e.g. WOSB, SDVOSB, 8a) how should this be marked?	Please use multiple lines/rows for the additional contracts/functional areas/subcategories, socio economic designations or any other column heading.
77	1/15/21	Page Number: 45

Paragraph Number: Section L, 5.3.1

When reading through this paragraph, it is unclear on how a company is supposed to submit a proposal that details their capability to meet multiple Function Areas. If a company can provide services for multiple Function Areas, do they just need to prove their capabilities for one Function Area in order to get onto the SeaPort Next Generation contract, and then prove their individual Function Area capabilities at the Task Order level?

	Yes, the solicitation states that offerors are required to submit a description of their recent and relevant experience in one of the 23 functional area subcategories, that was in direct support of Department of the Navy (DON) for the MAC award
	78	1/15/21	Since the due date for questions fall on a US Federal Holiday would the government consider moving the date by 1 day to 1/19?	No.
	79	1/15/21	Question: Does 5.3.2 mean that only the offeror submitting as a prime is expected to submit experience in direct support of DON or does it mean only experience as a prime can be submitted which would conflict with section 5.3.3.	Only the Prime is expected to submit experience in direct suport of DoN.
	80	1/15/21	The RFP states that information contained in the proposal is to be developed utilizing Microsoft Office Products only. Will the Government allow MS Word-developed proposal documents (Cover Letter, Technical Proposal, etc.) to be submitted as PDF files?	Yes. Adobe products are authorized. An amendment will clarify the use of Adobe products are authorized. The requirement will remain that J.1 must be submitted as an Excel spreadsheet
	81	1/15/21	45 of 51 “For example, an offeror may provide one (1) description of support from subcategory #1 – Engineering, System Engineering, and Safety and Process Engineering Support, NOT one (1) from the Engineering Support Services category and another from the Program Management Support category.”.
Question: To be fully compliant in a response, would the government confirm that an offeror is required to provide only one (1) description of support in direct support of the Department of Navy from either subcategory?	Offerors are allowed to submit more than one experience under differing SOW subcategories. Demonstrated direct Navy experience in one subcategory in the SOW is all that is required to have qualifying experience, however, Offerors are allowed to submit under more than one subcategory to ensure they can fully demonstrate their experience in at least one of the subcategories referenced in thier Technical Proposal.
	82	1/15/21	46 of 51 L.5.3.2 - “The requirement for experience in direct support of the DON applies only to the prime Contractor and is based on the unique nature of the mission of the DON and the support necessary to successfully execute that mission.”

L.5.3.4 - “The Government will not consider the experience of individual employees or of team members as qualifying experience for a proposed prime Contractor.”

Since we have affiliates with DON experience and CPARS, would the government allow the use of our affiliate experience in direct support of the DON to satisfy the requirement in section L.5.3.3 for evidence of recent and relevant technical experience providing support to the DON?	The RFP is not requesting Past Performance in these sections. It is specifically asking for direct experieince to establish Technical Capabiilites of the Prime proposal submissions. Only the Prime Offeror’s technical experience (not past performance) will be validated for award based on evidence of recent, relevant technical experience in one of the 23 functional areas in direct support of the DoN. Prime Contractors will not be able to use the experience of teammates or affiliates to satisfy SeaPort-NxG’s technical requirement of providing direct support to the DoN.
	83	1/15/21	Does a DCAA letter from 2007 meet the requirement of 5.7.1 (a), page 47 of the solicitation? DCAA does not “approve” accounting systems, but they will say it is adequate.	If DCAA has stated that your accounting system is adequate, then please select a) on Attachment J.3.
	84	1/15/21	1. Page 44, paragraph 4.2. Are Offerors allowed to edit SF 33 and attachment J.2 and J.3 headers and footers to include information such as company logo, solicitation number, and page number?	The SFF 33 signature page becomes a contractual document with the official signature and cannot be modified to include company logos. Attachments can be modified.
	85	1/15/21	2. Page 45, paragraph 5.3.1 Can the Government confirm is projects may be ongoing to need to be 100% complete?
	There is not a minimum period of performance of the work to qualify for a SeaPort NxG MAC so the project does not have to be 100% complete.
	86	1/15/21	3. Page 45, paragraph 5.3.1 Can the Government confirm if Offerors are allowed to submit projects for subcategories under both service areas? For example, 1 project under Engineering Support Services, 1. Engineering, System Engineering, and Safety and Process Engineering Support AND 1 project under Program Management Support Services, 1. Financial Analysis and Budget Support.
	Yes, Offerors are allowed to submit projects for subcategories under both functional service areas. Demonstrated direct Navy experience in one subcategory in the SOW is all that is required to have qualifying experience, however, Offerors are allowed to submit under more than one subcategory to ensure they can fully demonstrate their experience in at least one of the subcategories referenced in thier Technical Proposal.
	87	1/15/21	Page 43, paragraph 3.10 Can the Government provide instructions for off-ramping if we have a sister company on the current Seaport contract and we now want to submit with a different sister company. Do we need to off-ramp before or award contract award?
	No. Off-ramping does not need to occur prior to an affiliate or sister company proposing on this solicitation. If an award is made to an affiliate or sister company, then post award one of the entities will have to close their MAC.

This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Feb 10, 2021.