Govt Response to Offeor Questions_6.11.26.pdf

Gov’t Response to Offeror Questions Shipboard Sensor Support

N0017826R3000

**Note: The response to question 4 has been revised.**

1. Section L, para 3.2 of the Draft Solicitation (dated 13 May 2026) stipulates “…Offerors shall provide three past performance references, if available, which shall reflect recent experience performed within the last three years [emphasis added] of the solicitation release date…In addition to these three past performance references, Offeror shall submit one additional past performance reference for each subcontractor proposed to perform more than 10% of the total labor hours, if available.”

Will the Government consider revising the experience currency requirement from three years to five years in order to increase the number of qualified offerors?

Answer: At this time the Government is not considering revising the past performance recency definition from three to five years. Please note that this solicitation includes recent changes to NAVSEA’s approach to Past Performance for SeaPort RFPs, where Past Performance will be rated on an Acceptable/Unacceptable basis. An Offeror will not be considered unacceptable based on a lack of recent/relevant Past Performance.

2. Upon review of the B50 recompete solicitation in PIEE, we realized there was no final SOW included. Will that be provided as an update?

Answer: All documents posted in PIEE are in their final versions.

3. There was an FCL requirement listed in the previous solicitation. Does the government wish to have this same requirement on the current RFP?

Answer: The facility clearance requirement is specified in the Statement of Work, which is Attachment 01 of the RFP.

4. SOW Section C.3.6 was omitted from the Technical Approach response requirements on Page 66 of the RFP. Was C.3.6 omitted intentionally?

Answer: A solicitation amendment will be issued to add C.3.6 Documents, Logistics, Procurement, and Inventory Support to the technical approach response.

5. I have been reading into the subject opportunity and see that the effort is planned to be competed as a full and open task order through SeaPort NxG under the NAICS 541330 with a five year period of performance. Is this an accurate understanding of the requirement? Additionally, I see that the effort is planned to be a follow-on to a contract held by Amentum Services (N0017822F3012.) Is this the correct incumbent contract?

N0017826R3000 Answer: The answer is yes to both questions.

6. Section L, subsection 3.2 indicates that Attachment 03 is the past performance reference template.

Attachment 03, as provided with the solicitation, is the QASP and not the Past Performance Template. There is no past performance template provided with the solicitation. Request the Government to provide the required template/format for Past Performance submissions in a forthcoming amendment.

Answer: A solicitation amendment will be issued to include the Past Performance Reference as Attachment 10.

7. Certain labor categories, such as Inventory Manager, Production Manager, Illustrator and

Shipboard Manager, do not have obvious eCRAFT/SCA mapping. Recommend that the Government provide the desired eCRAFT/SCA mapping for task order labor categories to ensure a fair competitive landscape.

Answer: The solicitation will not be amended to include desired eCRAFT or SCA mapping.

8. Please clarify the meaning of the “I” in the “Senior Engineering Technician I” labor category.

Typically, a senior engineering technician labor category is identified as the SCA labor category of Engineering Technician V or VI (30085/30086).

Answer: The “I” is intended to differentiate between the two senior engineering technician labor categories: one key and the other non-key, but with distinct qualifications.

9. If an offeror determines that they do not have an OCI, is an OCI Mitigation Plan still required to be submitted, as indicated in Section L subsection 3.4.4 first paragraph. Or is the Corporate OCI Policy and the statement of negation sufficient submission, as described in Section L, subsection 3.4.4, paragraph “Step 2”?

Answer: An OCI Mitigation Plan is only required if OCI issues are present or anticipated.

In light of this clarification mentioned in Step 2, the Government interprets the first sentence of section L, 3.4.4 to be stating where the Mitigation Plan shall be submitted, not that it must be submitted in all circumstances.

10. Attachment 7, the Staffing Plan Template, has two columns for Option Year 4 (columns L and

M). Is the second Option Year 4 in Excel column M for meant to be used for a potential 6-month extension? If so, recommend that the Government update the Staffing Plan Template. Additionally, the Cost Summary Format (Attachment 8), and Section B would need to be updated to allow for pricing this additional performance period.

Answer: The duplicate column for Option Year 4 was inadvertent. The upcoming solicitation amendment and delete the duplicate column. There is no 6-month extension.

11. In Exhibit A, Data Item No. A008, Block 16 Remarks, the text for Block 12 says, “C4.6 and C.6

Monthly Concurrent with the Monthly Report”. In the SOW, there is no section C4.6. Can the government confirm that this is referring to C.5.6 Mandatory Training Log for monthly delivery of A008 concurrent with the monthly report?

N0017826R3000 Answer: Yes, it should be 5.6. The upcoming solicitation amendment will correct the reference in Exhibit A..

12. Is there any incumbent/recompete or this is a brand-new project? If yes, could you please provide us with their award number or even if the customer bought similar services in the past.

Answer: Please see page 2 of the RFP for this information.

13. Solicitation; Section L; 3.0 Proposal Organization and Content Pg. 65 Attachment 1 SOW; C.20 Pg. 30 Will the government allow Offerors to utilize the Post Award resume limit of 3 pages listed in the SOW (Section C.20, pg. 30), for resumes submitted with the proposal package?

Answer: No, the resume format and page limitation in C.20 applies to post-award resume submissions only.

14. Resume Format Will the government confirm that the Signed Certification page is excluded from the page limit for resumes?

Answer: The letter of intent does not count against page limitations and must be signed by the contingent hire employee and the Offeror.

15. Attachment 09 Wage determination Wage Determination (WD) 2015-4329 Rev. 32 dated

12/03/2025 was provided with the solicitation. There is a more current WD 2015-4329 Rev. 33 dated 05/13/2026 than what was provided in the solicitation. Can the government confirm if Offerors should use the WD provided in the solicitation (WD 2015-4329 Rev. 32 dated 12/03/2025) or if Offerors should use the most current WD (2015-4329 Rev. 33 dated 05/13/2026)?

Answer: Yes, an updated WD will be provided with the upcoming solicitation amendment.

16. L-216-H001; (d) Pg. 63 Regarding the Small Business participation requirement of 20% - should this be calculated as 20% of hours proposed, 20% of FTEs proposed, or 20% of labor cost proposed?

Answer: Section L, 3.4.3 refers to this requirement as “20% of the proposed total estimated amount of the task order…” The Government interprets this to mean 20% of the total proposed CPFF.

17. Solicitation; Section L; 2.5 File Naming Convention Pg.65 "- Company_Volume_I_Key Personnel Resume for Jane Doe - Company_Volume_II _Past Performance Reference for N00024-##-X-####" The above seems to suggest that there are separate files for each resume and Past Performance. Please confirm that only one file will be submitted for all resumes, and one file will be submitted for all past performances.

Answer: It is acceptable for resumes and past performance references to each be submitted as a single file.

N0017826R3000

18. Solicitation; Section L; 3.3.3 Cost Proposal Narrative; Escalation Pg. 70 May the government confirm that minimal escalation rates in the solicitation are applicable to both non-SCA and SCA labor categories?

Answer: Yes, this is correct.

19. Soliciation; Section L; 252.215-7009 Proposal Adequacy Checklist Pg. 75 May the government confirm if Offerors are to include the Proposal Adequacy Checklist in proposal responses?

Answer: Yes, the Proposal Adequacy Checklist shall be completed and submitted under Volume IV as a portion of the solicitation fill-ins.

20. Solicitation; Section L; 3.3.3 Cost Proposal Narrative; Other Direct Costs (ODCs) Pg. 71 Since travel costs and incidental material costs may be burdened differently with indirect rates, can the government provide the split between travel costs and incidental material costs for the government estimated ODCs and the government estimated surge ODCs?

Answer: The upcoming solicitation amendment will update the ODC table under Section L,

3.3.3 to provide separate amounts for travel and incidental materials. Surge ODCs will remain as a single subtotal; however, any offeror who applies different burdens to travel and materials may do so as if the surge ODCs are split in the same proportions (travel vs.

materials) as the non-surge ODCs for the period.

21. Solicitation; Section L; 3.2 Volume II - Past Performance (Factor 2) Pg. 69 "Offeror shall provide all past performance information in accordance with Attachment 03- Past Performance Reference." Current solicitation attachments list Attachment 03 as the QASP. Will the government provide the Past Performance Reference document?

Answer: See response to question #6.

22. Section L.3.2 of the solicitation, Volume II – Past Performance, states “Offeror shall provide all past performance information in accordance with Attachment 03- Past Performance Reference;”

however, the RFP package doesn’t include a Past Performance Reference document. Can the government provide clarification as to what is required to be submitted for Volume II Factor 2?

Answer: See response to question #6.

23. Is there any incumbent/recompete or this is a brand-new project? If yes, could you please provide us with their award number or even if the customer bought similar services in the past.

Answer: Please see page 2 of the RFP under description section.