Attachment_VII_-_Questions_and_Answers.docx

COTF Adjudication To All Questions 15 March 2017 Vendor Questions

1. The Labor Category Rate Matrix lists a CVN Supply Systems T&E Specialist under 50 Division in the Base Year but there are no hours provided. Will that information be provided by the government?

a. ANSWER – Completed and provided in attachment 1

2. The CVN Supply Systems T&E Specialist under 50 Division appears in the Base Year only. Is there a requirement in the option years? If so, at what LOE?

a. ANSWER – Completed and provided in attachment 1

3. The PWS has no Personnel Position description for any 60 Division support, nor are any 60 Division support requirements included in Attachment I. Will 60 Division programs be included in this omnibus? If so, will Attachment I and the PWS be amended to allow us to price those positions?

a. ANSWER – Completed, 60 Division has been added to the respective documents for inclusion into the contract

4. Can you please elaborate on what cost data is required other than a completed Attachment I? The solicitation is not explicit as to what the Government expects is the way of supporting cost data.

a. ANSWER – The Labor categories are firm fixed price and so no cost data is required for the labor categories. Pricing data submitted will include labor rates for each labor category as specified for evaluation of Volume II Price Factor of the solicitation. This is a Firm Fixed Price contract, so the only “cost” data that is required are Not to Exceed cost figures for Travel and Other Direct Costs identified from the Labor Category Rate Matrix.

5. page 5 of the Solicitation references OCI but section INSTRUCTION TO OFFERORS makes no mention of OCI or where you would like OCI related information provided.

a. ANSWER – The Instruction to Offerors section of the revised solicitation describes that non-priced, non-evaluated OCI related information shall be inserted in Volume III. OCI’s will be addressed again at the Task Order level at time of Task Order solicitation to consider the new system under test.

6. The released Attachment I does not have a costing element for the Program Manager, as it does for the Scientist, Tech Editor, etc. Is this the Gov't's intention?

a. ANSWER – Completed and provided in attachment 1

7. The released Solicitation PWS and Attachment I does not have any positions listed for Code 60 as it does for Codes 40, 50, 70, 80, & LCS. Is that the Gov't's intention?

a. ANSWER – Completed, 60 Division has been added to the respective documents for inclusion into the contract

8. The released Attachment I has discrepancies in Warfare Codes between the years, is this the Gov't's intentions?

a. ANSWER - Corrected

9. Code 50 CVN Supply Systems T&E Specialist is only in the Base Year.

a. ANSWER – Corrected in all respective documents.

10. Code 70 DDG1000 Total Ship Test Management Specialist, HM&E/Integrated Power System Specialist, DDG1000 Air Warfare/Combat Systems Specialist is only in the Base Year

a. ANSWER – Corrected (added) in attachment 1

11. DDG1000 Seamanship Specialist, DDG1000 Gun Systems Specialist, DDG1000 AS Warfare/Mike Warfare Specialist is only in Option Year 2.

a. ANSWER – Option Year 2 is consistent with the base and option year 1.

12. There is a great disparity in the detail contained in the Personnel Labor Category Requirements listed between the Codes. The qualifications are so specific and detailed that they border on unrealistic and improbable to fill. Is this the Gov't's intention?

a. ANSWER – The PWS has been revised

13. Code 50, Joint Strike Fighter Specialist has listed Technical Assistance Agreements which has no relevance to Personnel Qualifications.

a. ANSWER – Technical Assistance Agreements has been defined within the Code 50 Joint Strike Fighter Specialist labor category and added to earlier pages of the solicitation for clarity and reference.

14. Will there be a Level of Effort table included as an attachment or amendment to the solicitation?

a. ANSWER: See Attachment I – Labor Category Rate Matrix

15. Are there any Key Personnel, and if so, are resumes required for those individuals?

a. ANSWER: The terminology “Key Personnel” will has been replaced with “all labor categories.” Resumes are not required.

16. Wage Determination. On page 68 of the solicitation, it states “Wage Determination #2015-4341 Revision 2, Date of Revision: 12/29/2015 is applicable for this acquisition.” A new revision was released 12/31/2016. Should the more current version apply to this acquisition?

a. ANSWER – The original Wage Determination attachment with the solicitation has now been replaced with a new attachment, Wage Determination No: 2015-4341, revision No 3, Date of revision: 12/30/2016. The more current wage determination applies.

17. Since not all documents were released by the government when the solicitation was released will the deadline for questions to the government be extended to allow the offerors the opportunity to digest the information after the remaining documents are finally released?

a. ANSWER: Attachments were released on January 24, 2017. There are no plans at this time to extend the deadline for questions of 1400 (Eastern Standard Time) on February 1, 2017.

18. Paragraph 4.0, page 20, says “The contractor is required to submit for those positions identified as “Key Personnel” for review and evaluation with their technical proposals for award purposes. Further, the contractor will be required to submit for identified labor categories for review and approval prior to performance on any applicable task order award.” The only place the words “Key Personnel” are specifically stated is on page 44, paragraph 4.3.1.80 “Minimum Personnel Requirements” in the Expeditionary Warfare Section and page 48, paragraph 4.3.1.LCS “Minimum Personnel Requirements” in the LCS Division section. Yet neither section says what the Key Personnel are. Please clarify the expectations for “key personnel” for the solicitation submission. Are there key personnel for this proposal? Or are the key personnel required at the Task order level (e.g., key resumes for award of the overall IDIQ, or only for the Task Order solicitations)?

a. ANSWER: The terminology “Key Personnel” will has been replaced with “all labor categories.” Resumes are not required.

19. Page 5, first line, says “This contract is one of a set of Multiple Award Contracts (MAC).” Is the intent of the solicitation to issue a MAC per warfare division or a single MAC for the entire command?

a. ANSWER – This solicitation is a standalone MAC and will be executed over a 3 year ordering period, at which time the government will make its future intentions known to our industry partners.

20. Why are there no labor category listings or specific requirements for the C4I&Space Division in this solicitation? Is that division being excluded from this solicitation?

a. ANSWER – Code 60 has been added

21. Is this intent of the solicitation to also cover the process divisions at COMOPTEVFOR such as 01A, 01B, 01C, and 01D since page 21 of paragraph 4 says “In addition to the warfare specific labor categories, note the following over-arching categories which may be also be required:

a. Information Systems Security Manager

b. Psychometric Scientist

c. Modeling and Simulation Technician

d. Statistician

e. Technical Editor

a. ANSWER – The above mentioned labor categories (classified as COTF Division) may include work that will be executed within the respective O1A, O1B, O1C divisions, but will not be specified as such within this solicitation

22. Several labor categories in each of the warfare divisions are unnecessarily so specific that the only way to qualify for the work is to bid the incumbent workforce. Making qualifications so specific that only the incumbent can qualify for the work reduces the competition. Is that the intent of the solicitation? We believe portions of the solicitation as written do not give offerors fair and equitable opportunity to compete.

Some examples are listed below. In each example below there is almost no way anyone but the incumbent workforce can qualify for the work leading to no competition and therefore increased cost to the government.

a. Example: Page 24 first paragraph from 40 Division - “f) A minimum of 5 years in the last 10 years of Operational Test experience with CBASS and ACOT torpedoes to include Test Plan development, execution, IEF, and TEMP development.”

b. Example: Page 24, paragraph B from 40 Division – “e) Personnel selected for this tasking must have recent (within last 2 years) experience in operational test events and drafting operational test documentation for the specified system under test.”

c. Example: Page 31, second bullet from the top in the 50 Division section – “Possess recent (with in last year), relevant, Navy specific operational or OT&E experience that involves the use of the following systems: ADMACS, MORIAH, NAVSSI, ILARTS, IFLOLS, LSODS, AN/TPX-42, AN/SPN-41, and AN/SPN-46.”

d. Example: Page 33, Aviation Electronic Attack Specialist in the 50 Division section – “Recent (two of the last three years), relevant experience with Modeling and Simulation (M&S) involving non-kinetic Naval Air Electronic Attack systems, specifically, at least one of the following: Johns Hopkins Applied Physics Lab’s REACT, PINEAPPLE, AMBER or Missile and Space Intelligence Center’s ITASE models.”

e. Example: page 35, PRA Test Bed Specialist in the 70 Division Section – “6. Demonstrated experience (within the past year) in the development of the AW SSD T&E Enterprise LHA-6/SSDS/RAM (ET-05 and ET-06) Test Plans.”

f. Example: page 36, SM-6 Specialist in the 70 Division Section – “9. Recent (within the last three years) direct OT&E experience with SM-6 firing and employment operations and Aegis Baseline 7.1.R and/ or Baseline 9 (series).”

a. ANSWER – For questions 18 a. thru f. – The PWS has been revised.

23. How far in advance of the Task Order commencement does the government intend to identify the requirement (e.g., 14 days, 30 days, etc.)?

a. ANSWER – Requirements will typically be identified 30 days before Task Order commencement, but there could be shorter timeframes for urgent requirements.

24. Para 4.d (M&S specialist) does not have qualification requirements. It merely states responsibilities. Are there qualification requirements? If not, is the M&S Specialist a valid labor category?

a. ANSWER – The PWS has been revised to show qualification requirements for the M&S Specialist.

25. In the 4.3.1.40 series of personnel qualifications, there is a listing for Senior Warfare T&E Specialist as being required to have an engineering or science degree. There is no mention of a labor category that allows for other than an engineering or science degree. Is it COTFs intention that engineering or science degreed personnel support the division?

a. ANSWER – There are 3 labor categories (Senior Test and Evaluation Specialist, Statistician, and Cybersecurity) of the 13 listed that specify a 4 year degree within the 40 division list of labor categories.

26. Request the government define “Recent” as it pertains to personnel qualifications.

a. ANSWER – Clarified the respective requirements where the use of “Recent” was not clearly defined

27. Request the government define “Relevant” as it pertains to personnel qualifications.

a. ANSWER – Relevant defined as used within this PWS is “ Related to the matter at hand”

28. What type of FFP contract is this solicitation, deliverable based or level of effort?

a. ANSWER – This contract will not be a Firm-Fixed Price, Level-of-Effort Term contract as defined under FAR 16.207. Hours were provided in the provided Labor Category Rate Matrix attachment for historical purposes to establish a contract ceiling. Task orders will provide more detail regarding deliverables and performance.

29. It appears that the IDIQ will be awarded based on Best value, trade off. Can we assume that a best value, trade off method will be utilized to evaluate the Task Orders as well? Or will the Lowest Price Technically Accepted be utilized.

a. ANSWER – Task Orders will be evaluated at the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA).

30. Para 1.2. discusses computer assets for on-site work.

a. Will the government provide ODC payment to the offeror if the offeror must work off-site due to workstation limitations where the offeror must provide the computer assets?

a. ANSWER – For each Task Order awarded the government will provide at a minimum 1 laptop and associated hardware/software (if any). In the event that workstations become limited forcing the offeror to work from their off-site location, the contractor issued the government furnished laptop will continue to use same to execute the requirement IAW the prescribed PWS

b. Additionally, will the government be providing software certificates for an off-site contractor to access the COTF servers and drives from a non-COTF issue computer?

b. ANSWER – The government will not be issuing any software certificates for any hardware that is NOT the property of the government and identified as GFE.

31. Are offerors expected to propose estimated Travel/ODC at the IDIQ level as a part of Vol II Price Proposal?

a. ANSWER – The attachment, Labor Category Rate Matrix, includes Not to Exceed (NTE Amounts for Travel and Other Direct Costs (ODCs) for each performance year and the Six month “Option to Extend” period. As part of Volume II, offerors are not expected to propose Not to Exceed (NTE) amounts for Travel and ODCs for each performance year in the completed Labor Category Rate Matrix for submission as it has been provided by the Government. Also part of Volume II, the Standard Form 1449 (Continuation Sheet) will be completed with CLIN Items for Travel and Other Direct Costs with the identified NTE amounts from the Labor Category Rate Matrix.

After the contract(s) are awarded, travel and ODCs (if applicable) will again be identified with separate NTE values for each individual task order to conduct task order competitions.

32. In order to devise a competitive costing strategy, could the government please provide an overview of the contracting strategy to be utilized at the Task Order level. Will Task Orders be Firm Fixed Price, T&M, CPFF? Will they be Best Value or LPTA?

a. ANSWER – Task Orders will be FFP, using Lowest Price Technically Acceptable.

33. There are no Key Personnel positions identified in the Solicitation. Please confirm that this is the government’s intention.

a. ANSWER – Key Personnel have now been identified as Labor Categories within the PWS for consistency.

34. There is no requirement for Key Personnel resumes identified in the Solicitation. Please confirm that this is the government’s intention.

a. ANSWER: No resumes are required to be submitted.

35. CDRLs 13, 14, and 15 are not consistent when referred to throughout the document (page 12/13, page 20). Request gov clarify CDRLS 13, 14, and 15.

a. ANSWER – The CDRL’s listed within the PWS A0001 thru A014 have been corrected.

36. Position Descriptions for Code 50, bottom of page 28, require Submarine experience, this doesn’t seem reasonable. Please confirm.

a. ANSWER – First reference to the use of the word “Submarine” under position descriptions for Code 50 is found on page 35 at the bottom under Naval Rotary Anti-Surface Warfare/Anti- SUBMARINE Warfare Specialist. All other references within Code 50 refer to Anti-Submarine.

37. Are Vendors going to be able to see Questions submitted from other Vendors, and Answers provided by the Government?

a. ANSWER: Yes, a Questions and Answers document will be posted as an attachment to the solicitation, N0018917R0017, on the FBO.gov website.

38. Please confirm the deadline for the receipt of questions. FBO and section page 63 of the solicitation state: "The deadline for receipt of questions is 1400 (2 PM) Eastern Standard Time on February 01, 2017."

39. Page 70 of the solicitation states: "questions concerning the solicitation should be submitted via e-mail to the contract specialist, Monti Dutti at Monti.Dutti@navy.mil no later than 1:00 pm, Eastern Time (ET), on 24 January 2017." (Also, looks like they spelled your email wrong)

a. Answer (38 and 39) : The deadline for questions is 1400 (2 PM) Eastern Standard Time on February 1, 2017. Questions shall be submitted via email to the Contract Specialist, Monti Dutta at monti.dutta@navy.mil Note the correction in the email address for receipt of questions.

40. There are 6 solicitation attachments listed on page 13 that are not posted on FBO. Can the Government please make these available before the deadline for questions?

a. ANSWER: All six solicitation attachments were posted on https://ww.fbo.gov on January 24, 2017.

41. I believe the specific Past Performance form you want us to utilize is also missing from the posting.

a. ANSWER: With solicitation, see Attachment II – Past Performance Information Form and Attachment III – Past Performance Report Questionnaire.

42. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix says that there is a base year and 2 option years. The solicitation says that there will be a 3 year base year and one 6 month option year. Please clarify the intent of the solicitation and provide the correct Labor Category Rate Matrix to be used for proposal submissions.

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been updated to show the 3-year Base/Year 2/Year 3 Period

43. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix line 36 says there is a CVN supply systems T&E specialist yet there are no labor hours associated with it in the Base Year. Please clarify the hours to be used for submission. Also, this position does not exist in the two option years. Was that intentional?

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected

44. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix line 87 “Technical Editor” has a numerical value of “$168,518.40” hard coded whereas no other lines have a value entered. Was that intentional?

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

45. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix. Line 88 says “Base Year” yet it is in the Option Year section. Is that intentional?

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

46. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix. Line 153 says “Base Year” yet it is in the Option Year section. Is that intentional?

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

47. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix. Line 163 says “Base Year” yet it is in the Option Year section. Is that intentional?

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

48. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix. Line 231 says “Base Year” yet it is in the Option Year section. Is that intentional?

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

49. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix. 70 Division labor categories change from one year to the next. Was that intentional?

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

50. Is the no intended/expected support for 01B, 01C, or 01D under this contract? There are no labor categories or mention of those divisions.

a. ANSWER – O1B, O1C and O1D will not be specifically called out in this solicitation, although some of the support identified under the COTF will correlate over to the respective divisions.

51. Is it intentional that only 80 Division cites a Junior Warfare T&E Specialist? Are the other divisions not including that option?

a. ANSWER – Only 80 Division will utilize the Junior Warfare T&E Specialist.

52. Is it intentional that 60 division is not represented in the labor matrix?

a. ANSWER – Code 60 has now been added to the respective areas within the solicitation

53. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix. 50 and 70 Divisions do not have any “generic-type” labor categories listed to account for flexibility in the future as new programs are tested at the command. Is this intentional? It appears, at least for these two divisions, that they do not anticipate the need for new personnel qualifications throughout the life of this solicitation after the base contract is awarded. How does the command intend to handle new program requirements for contract labor if no labor categories apply? Note: 40, 80, and LCS Divisions all presented generic enough labor categories that those divisions can absorb changes if new work is needed.

a. ANSWER – The PWS has been revised to reflect the government’s intentions for this solicitation, additionally; Any NEW work that arrives at COTF for future testing and the current solicitation does not cover the required labor skill sets as written, a formal modification will be submitted to all the MAC incumbents.

54. Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix. The labor hours listed in the matrix do not reflect the reality as the command is currently executing. Is that intentional?

a. ANSWER – The PWS has been revised to reflect the government’s intentions for this solicitation and to provide industry with a historical value.

55. Attachment 1 – Labor Matrix column J refers to ODCs. What kind of ODC can the offer expect to be able to charge (e.g., printing costs, computer costs for off-site, etc.)?

a. ANSWER – The ODC CLINs to be established are to support at the Task Order Level and will not be used to purchase any ADP hardware/software unless it will be a standalone test tool in support of the SUT.

55. Attachment III – Past Performance Questionnaire. If the offeror is planning to use current COTF Prime support as a PP, is COTF COR going to fill out the PP Questionnaire?

a. ANSWER – The COTF COR will provide a response to any request for Past Performance Feedback

56. Attachment IV – DD254. In the past OMNIBUS the facility clearance (block 1a) was SECRET. This time it is Top Secret. Is that intentional?

a. ANSWER - A minimum security clearance of SECRET is required for personnel supporting tasks. Any personnel proposed to work on any effort shall be eligible for necessary clearances to immediately begin performance at the time of task award. A minimum security clearance of TOP SECRET may be required on individual Task Orders and will be identified on a separate DD254 at time of task order solicitation. In order for the government to be able to use the MAC up to and including Top Secret, we had to identify the highest level that would executed on the DD254.

57. Attachment VI – (OCI listing) under DD(X) subcontractor line says to see appendix for listing. Please provide the appendix to ensure that no OCIs exist.

a. ANSWER – Corrected OCI listing for clarity

58. Solicitation Document – page 44. Para 4.3.1.80 further discusses key personnel. Is that list of 10 labor categories the place where the government wants the offeror to submit key resumes (e.g., PM)?

a. ANSWER – The use of the word Key Personnel has been replaced with the word Labor Categories throughout the PWS. No resumes are to be submitted for consideration. See Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate matrix, which identifies all of the required positions (labor categories) for each performance year with the estimated hours for each labor category.

59. Solicitation Document – page 48. Para 4.3.1.LCS also specifies key labor categories. Is it the government’s intention that the offeror present key resumes for all positions listed in the para 4.3 series for each division? If not, how many positions does the government see as required, and what positions?

a. ANSWER – The use of the word Key Personnel has been replaced with the word Labor Categories throughout the PWS. No resumes are to be submitted for consideration. See Attachment 1 – Labor Category Rate Matrix, which identifies all of the required positions (labor categories) for each performance year with the estimated hours for each labor category.

60. Solicitation Document – page 16. If building an IEF is to be covered under para 2.d, why is CDRL A012 not included?

a. ANSWER – CDRL A012 has been added

61. Solicitation Document – Para 2.b and 2.d are ostensibly the same. How can the offeror distinguish between the two?

a. ANSWER – Para 2b, (Operational Test Design Development) and Para 2d, (Operational Test Planning), Test Design is responsible for the implementation of MBTD across the Force. Test Planning and Analysis is responsible for the analytical rigor applied to all test planning documents and reports across the Force. It is for this that we have two separate tasks as well as independent CDRL’s that support each of these tasks. Additional information is available for each of these tasks within the OTD Manual at:

http://www.public.navy.mil/cotf/OTD/OTD%20Manual.pdf

62. Solicitation Document – QASP, pages 8 – 13. What specifically defines accuracy within 3%? The document says “No rejected reports due to major discrepancy” yet the rate is 3%. That standard is unclear.

a. ANSWER – All areas within the QASP have been clarified.

63. Solicitation Document – QASP, pages 8 – 13. What specifically defines timeliness within 3%? The document says “Within 14 calendar days after receipt of applicable background documentation, unless otherwise agreed upon in advance with the OTD” yet the rate is 3%. That standard is unclear.

a. ANSWER – All areas within the QASP have been clarified.

64. Solicitation Document – Please clarify when the ODC CLIN is expected to be used.

a. ANSWER – The ODC CLIN is to be used at the Task Order Level to support SUT.

65. Solicitation Document – Section 2.0 a. through h., pages 15 – 17. Please verify that the government is happy with the CDRLs as listed in each task paragraph since several do not make sense. Example, the only CDRL listed in paragraph e. “Test Execution” is CDRL 005 which is M&S centric not test execution centric.

a. ANSWER – Tasks and associated CDRL’s have been revised.

66. Solicitation Document – Section 2.0, para f., page 17. “Operational Test Data Analysis” discusses “a 5 x 5 consequence versus likelihood risk matrix shall be used as the basis for all risk assessments” yet the command does not do this anymore as per recent guidance from the 01C process division in COMOPTEVFOR. Is the intent to contractually bind the offerors to produce deliverables using procedures that the command no longer uses?

a. ANSWER – The PWS has been updated to reflect current practices and procedures.

67. Solicitation Document – Section 2.0, pages 15 – 17. This section has very specific CDRLs listed for each of the tasks. Can the offerors then infer that these are the only CDRLs that will be attached to these tasks when the task orders are let?

a. ANSWER – The CDRL’s (A001 thru A015) are a list of all the final products that will be expected at the task order level. It is inferred that there are other bi-products that will be completed to support completion of these CDRL’s.

68. Solicitation Document – Section 3.0, pages 17 – 20. This section lists the specific deliverable associated with each CDRL. Will the government submit Task Orders that include additional requirements within a CDRL even though the CDRLs have been defined in the overarching contract as has been done in the current OMNIBUS contract and task orders?

a. ANSWER – The specific tasks (listed in section 2.0) and their associated CDRL’s are the “deliverables/ products” that that will be seen at the task order level.

69. Solicitation Document – Section 3.0, page 19, CDRL A008 says the monthly progress report is due not later than the 15th of the month. At the task order level on the current OMNIBUS this has been modified in certain cases to say the 5th of the month. Will these types of modifications be allowed to be made to the base contract when a task order is solicited on this contract or can the offerors expect that the government will adhere to the base contract requirements?

a. ANSWER – The Task Orders will be executed IAW the base contract.

70. How does the government anticipate handling changes to processes or procedures over the life of the contract? In many cases, a change in process or procedure results in a significant increase in manpower or hours required to complete a deliverable. Under the current OMNIBUS being executed, the awarded companies were generally expected to absorb the increases with no fair or equitable adjustments being allowed.

a. ANSWER – The government as well as its industry partners will be expected to identify those instances when the scope of work originally awarded is going to change due to the governments change in process or procedure that will require a modification to the existing Task Order prior to the work being done. The awarded task order cannot be modified until an authorized representative (Contracting/Ordering Officer) approves the modification and executes the mod in accordance with the FAR or other applicable regulations, at which time the contractor will then be authorized to execute work in support of that modification. Any work conducted that is not within the scope of the awarded task order/contract can be considered to be an Unauthorized Commitment. The ADA prohibits the federal government from entering into a contract that is not "fully funded" because doing so would obligate the government in the absence of an appropriation adequate to the needs of the contract. Contractor is hereby not authorized to enter into any Unauthorized Commitment.

71. Solicitation Document – Section 2.0 a., page 15, “Documentation Review” contains CDRL A016 yet no CDRL exists in section 3.0. Please clarify.

a. ANSWER – The CDRL’s have been revised to be consistent throughout the PWS.

72. Solicitation Document – Section 2.0 f., page 17, “Operational Test Data Analysis” lists CDRL A017 yet no CDRL exists in section 3.0. Please clarify.

a. ANSWER – The CDRL’s have been revised to be consistent throughout the PWS

73. Solicitation Document – Section 2.0 h., page 17, “Administrative Support” lists CDRL A015 yet no CDRL exists in section 3.0. Please clarify.

a. ANSWER – The CDRL’s have been revised to be consistent throughout the PWS

74. Solicitation Document – QASP, all of paragraph 2.0 and 3.0. The QASP refers to the CDRLS as CDRL N0XX. The remainder of the document (paras 2.0 and 3.0) refers to the CDRLs as CDRL A0XX. Please confirm that the two methods of labeling the CDRLs are the same.

a. ANSWER – The CDRL’s and QASP have been revised to be consistent throughout the PWS

75. Attachment I (Labor Category Rate Matrix) – does not include the Option 6 Month Labor Categories or Hours. Please advise how to price this period.

a. ANSWER – A revised Attachment 1 (Labor Category Rate Matrix) has been included with labor categories and associated hours identified for that additional option 6 month period after year three.

76. Solicitation, Page Number 5, Paragraph One, Under Minimum and Maximum Quantities: What is the purpose of the yellow highlights. Does the contractor need to fill in this information and submit with proposal?

a. ANSWER – The Minimum and Maximum Quantities section is completed and inserted into the contract at time of award by the Contract Specialist. The contractor shall not fill out the Minimum and Maximum Quantities section in the Solicitation.

77. Solicitation, Page 20, Section 4.0, Paragraph One, Minimum Personnel Requirements – “Key Personnel” as described in this paragraph – Is Resumes required for these positions or just a verification in the proposal of having these talents?

a. ANSWER – Use of the words “Key Personnel” have been replaced with the words “Labor Categories”. No resumes are to be submitted in support of this solicitation.

78. Given that we are already 9 days into the window, and no questions have been answered, respectfully request a solicitation response deadline to be requested. Many of the answers to questions have direct impact on how the proposal response is developed (e.g., is the Task Order a FFP deliverable of LOE based, key resume identification, etc.)

a. ANSWER – The solicitation response deadline has been extended to 9:00 AM EST on April 17, 2017.

79. On page 72 the solicitation states “** Offerors are to submit one master CD ROM with three (3) separate files (Technical, Past Performance and Price).” It is unusual for the non-cost and cost material to be included on the same CD.

Question: Would the government prefer two separate CD’s, one with non-cost material and one containing only cost material?

a. ANSWER – The requirement for providing CDs has been removed from the solicitation. No CDs need to be provided.

80. On page 73 the solicitation states “Additionally, offerors may submit, as part of its (up to) three (3) past performance contracts, a combination of up to three (3) delivery orders (DOs), task orders (TOs), technical direction letters (TDLs), and/or technical area tasks (TATs) placed under an ID/IQ or BPA. Such a combination of DOs, TOs, TDLs and or TATs must also meet the requirements stated above: each individual example in the combination must demonstrate at least one (1) year of completed performance and have been performed within five (5) years of the solicitation issuance date.”

Question: Would the Government consider modifying the requirement for each of the combined DOs, TOs, TDLs and or TATs to demonstrate 1 year of completed performance to requiring a minimum of 6 months of completed performance since some task order do not last a year and some that have been underway for less than a year may be highly relevant in contributing to demonstrating superior past performance?

a. ANSWER – The language for past performance has been changed to the following in the revised PWS:

“Such a combination of DOs, TOs, TDLs and or TATs must also meet the requirements stated above: each individual example in the combination must demonstrate at least six (6) months of completed performance; however, offerors are encouraged to provide references that meet scope and magnitude of work performed. All referenced work shall have been performed within five (5) years of the solicitation issuance date.”

81. On page 65 the solicitation states that “In addition, performance data will only be assessed for those references demonstrating at least one (1) year of completed performance prior to the closing date of the solicitation.”

Question: Would the Government consider modifying the requirement, in the case of combined DOs, TOs, TDLs and or TATs as allowed in the Instruction to Offerors on page 73 of the solicitation, to demonstrate 1 year of completed performance to requiring a minimum of 6 months of completed performance since some task orders do not last a year and some that have been underway for less than a year may be highly relevant in contributing to demonstrating superior past performance?

a. ANSWER – See answer to Question 80.

On page 68 of the solicitation the Past Performance Confidence Assessment Ratings table is included twice. Question: Is the second table a duplicate or is a different table missing?

b. ANSWER – The duplicate table has been removed.

82. There are no hours allocated in the 50 Division base year for the CVN Supply Systems T&E Specialist.

Question: Was this intentional?

a. Attachment 1 has been updated to reflect hours in the respective labor categories.

83. Cell 13B is labeled: Base Year Total – 40 div.

Question: Should this correctly be labeled: Base Year Total - COTF div

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

84. Cell 87B is labeled: Base Year Total - COTF div Question: Should this correctly be labeled: Option Year 1 Year Total - COTF div

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

85. Cell 163B is labeled: Base Year Total - COTF div Question: Should this correctly be labeled: Option Year 2 Year Total - COTF div

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

86. Cell 87E has the value $168,518.00 hard coded in.

Question: Is this considered a plug number or should this cell contain the formula “=+C87*D87”

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

87. The RFP’s Key Positions are primarily limited to the O1A-D Divisions; however, O1A-D contract support is not discussed as an area of support across the warfare divisions.

Question: Will the government consider broadening the key labor categories so offerors may demonstrate their full T&E capabilities to support COTF across the command?

a. ANSWER – The government intends to only submit for those divisions identified within the current revision of the solicitation N00189-17-R-0017, COTF Div, 40 Div, 50 Div, 60 Div, 70 Div 70 Div 80 Div and LCS Div.

88. The RFP does not appear to list all Divisions within COTF.

Question: Does the Government intend to add 01A-D, 60 Division, LCS, and 90 Division to the Omnibus?

a. ANSWER - The government intends to only submit for those divisions identified within the current revision of the solicitation N00189-17-R-0017, COTF Div, 40 Div, 50 Div, 60 Div, 70 Div 70 Div 80 Div and LCS Div.

89. The RFP mentions over 200 supported programs but there appears to be a heavy emphasis on CVN 78 and DDG 1000 within the Personnel Position descriptions.

Question: Does the government intend to use more broad T&E positions descriptions at the IDIQ level to allow for more specific qualifications requirements at the Task Order level?

a. ANSWER – The PWS has been revised to support this direction.

90. Section 4.3 (Minimum Requirements for each Personnel Position – Warfare Specific) of the RFP states that “the contractor is required to submit for those positions identified as “Key Personnel” for review and evaluation with their technical proposals for award purposes”.

Question: Will the government please further clarify the format for these submissions such as nameless resumes? Additionally, what are the resume page limit restrictions and will they be counted against the overall technical volume page limit?

a. ANSWER – No resumes are to be submitted in response to this solicitation. Section 4.3 of the amended RFP has been extensively revised from the original RFP. As one example, Section 4.3.1.80 of the revised solicitation replaced the term “Key Personnel” with “Labor Categories.” With the regard to the Labor Categories, apart from the submission of a Management Plan and Staffing Plan relating to paragraph 4.0 (Minimum Personnel Requirements) and the completion of the Labor Category Rate Matrix attachment, there are no instructions to identify qualifications and/or experiences of specific individuals in a proposal.

91. Section 4.2.c (p22) of the RFP states that the Psychometric Scientist “requires graduate level credits in the following two areas: (1) social science research methods (e.g., for psychology/demography/behavioral economics/or similar) and (2) development of test/measures/surveys, which addressed reliability & validity”.

Question: Will the government please further clarify the minimal acceptable graduate level credits per designated area?

a. ANSWER – The minimal acceptable level of credits will remain stipulated as “Graduate Level” and at no time will the government add a numerical value to this same requirement at the Task Order Level.

92. On page 21 of the solicitation document, it requires the personnel to have either SECRET or TOP SECRET clearance. The DD254 requires TOP SECRET. Can the small business prime contractor have SECRET and the subcontractor have TOP SECRET?

a. ANSWER - A minimum security clearance of SECRET is required for personnel supporting tasks. Any personnel proposed to work on any effort shall be eligible for necessary clearances to immediately begin performance at the time of task award. A minimum security clearance of TOP SECRET may be required on individual Task Orders and will be identified on a separate DD254 at time of task order solicitation. The Prime Offeror will have to provide support at the required level as stipulated on the DD254 at time of Task Order Award.

b. Additionally, the paragraph cited on the above page (question 88) has been re-written as stated above to better clarify for our industry partners.

93. On page 73 of the solicitation document it states that “Offerors shall contact their past performance references and request that each reference complete the attached “Past Performance Report Form” in lieu of the Past Performance Report Form can the offeror submit the CPARs for that past performance?

a. ANSWER – No.

94. CLIN 0001’s period of performance is from July 25, 2017 to July 24, 2020 for a base period of three years. On the Attachment I: Labor Category Rate Matrix, does row 6 “Base Year”, row 81 “Option Year I”, and row 156 “Option Year 2” together equal the base period for CLIN 0001?

a. ANSWER – CLIN 0001 covers labor for all three performance years. There are no Option Years in the anticipated award.

95. In comparing the Attachment I: Labor Category Rate Matrix” and the Schedule B CLINs…

a. Does CLIN 0001 equal the total of Column H rows 7, 8, and 9?

b. Does CLIN 0002 equal the total of Column I rows 7, 8, and 9 (total of $1,350,000.00) for travel?

c. Does CLIN 0003 equal the total of Column J rows 7, 8, and 9 (total of $30,000.00) for ODCs?

d. Does CLIN 0004 equal column H row 10?

e. Does CLIN 0005 equal column I row 10 ($225,000.00)?

f. Does CLIN 0006 equal column J row 10 (5,000.00)?

ANSWER – The Labor Category Rate Matrix has been significantly changed and replaced. Therefore, Question 95 (and its subparts) addressing specific row references in the original Labor Category Rate Matrix are no longer applicable. Please refer to the revised Labor Category Rate Matrix that has been posted as a replacement of the original Labor Category Rate Matrix. All column and row references for this answer refer to the revised Labor Category Rate Matrix only:

a: CLIN 0001 equal the total of Column H rows 5, 6, and 7.

b: CLIN 0002 equal the total of Column I rows 5, 6, and 7 (total of $1,350,000.00) for travel.

c: CLIN 0003 equal the total of Column J rows 5, 6, and 7 (total of $30,000.00) for ODCs.

d: CLIN 0004 equal column H row 8.

e: CLIN 0005 equal column I row 8 ($225,000.00) f: CLIN 0006 equal column J row 8 ($5,000.00).

96. On the “Attachment I: Labor Category Rate Matrix” what does the “O” in column A mean (rows 36 & 68)?

a. ANSWER – The inconsistent letters previously seen within attachment 1 have been removed for clarity

97. On the “Attachment I: Labor Category Rate Matrix” row 36 “CVN Supply Systems T&E Specialist”, column C “Hours” is left blank. What are the anticipated hours for this labor category for the base year?

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been updated

98. On the solicitation document on page 20, “Minimum Personnel Requirements” the following personnel are identified as key personnel:

· Program Manager

· Information Systems Security Manager

· Psychometric Scientist

· Modeling and Simulation Technician

· Statistician

· Technical Editor

On page 44, “4.3.1.80 Minimum Personnel Requirements” the following personnel are identified as key personnel:

· Program Manager

· Junior Warfare Systems T&E Specialist

· Senior Warfare Systems T&E Specialist

· Statistician

· U.S. Navy Diving Specialist

· Naval Special Warfare Specialist

· Chemical Biological Radiological Specialist

· Explosive Ordinance Disposal Specialist

· Naval Surface Warfare Specialist

· Small Boat/Craft Specialist

On page 48, “4.3.1.LCS Minimum Personnel Requirements” the following personnel are identified as key personnel:

· Program Manager

· Surface Warfare Specialist

· Air Warfare Specialist

· Mine Countermeasures Specialist

· Anti-Submarine Warfare Specialist

a. Please clarify if these 21 labor categories are key personnel?

ANSWER – The words “Key Personnel” have been replaced with the words “Labor Categories for clarity.

b. Is a resume and/or bio required for each of these 21 labor categories?

ANSWER – Resumes are NOT to be submitted in support of this solicitation.

c. Is a resume required? Is a bio required?

ANSWER - No Resumes or Bios are to be submitted in support of this solicitation.

d. Are commitment letters required for each of these 21 labor categories?

ANSWER – No. Our industry partners must be able to provide the skills sets identified within the PWS at time of Task Order Award.

e. Do the individual resumes have a length requirement to them?

ANSWER – Resumes are NOT to be submitted in support of this solicitation.

f. Do resumes count against the page count?

ANSWER – Resumes are NOT to be submitted in support of this solicitation.

99. On page 21 of the solicitation document “4.2 Minimum Requirements for each Personnel Position” lists a Program Manager as the first key personnel, yet the “Attachment I: Labor Category Rate Matrix” doesn’t include this labor category.

a. Is a Program Manager supposed to be added to the first section of column B?

ANSWER – The respective documents have been corrected for clarity.

b. If so how many hours for the Program Manager for the base year, option year 1, and option year 2?

ANSWER – Please see the corrected version of attachment 1

100. Per our conversation today regarding the RFP in the Subject line I explained that Gryphon Technologies LC has been listed in “government provided information” regarding Prime and Sub Contractor prior or existing relationships. Specifically, this was done in the referenced RFP attachment (OCI), which states that Gryphon Technologies is a subcontractor to Northrup Grumman on the DDG-51 program. In our internal OCI review, we cannot establish this relationship and believe that there has possibly been a mistake.

a. ANSWER – Gryphon was NOT a Sub-Contractor under Northrup Grumman. The revised OCI attachment no longer lists Gryphon as a sub-contractor under Northrup Grumman.

101. In RFP attachment I (Labor Category Rate Mix) there are no hours for CVN Supply Systems T&E Specialist (row 36), is this correct?

a. ANSWER – Attachment 1 has been corrected.

102. In RFP attachment I (Labor Category Rate Mix), column A, what do the "B" and "O" mean at rows 7 and 36 respectively?

a. ANSWER - Attachment 1 has been corrected and all random letters have been removed for clarity

103. In the RFP, page 73, second paragraph, "offerors may submit, as part of its (up to) three (3) past performance contracts, a combination of up to three (3) delivery orders (DOs)...placed under an ID/IQ." Is it acceptable to do this for more than one of the three past performance examples (i.e. PP submission #1 is an aggregation of three TOs, and PP example #2 is also an aggregation of three different TOs).

a. ANSWER – YES, but clearly identify which tasks correspond with which task order and periods for each task order.

104. If the answer to #103 above is Yes, can the two aggregations be from the same IDIQ?

ANSWER – YES, provided that example #1 and example #2 are different IDIQs.

105. In the RFP, Requirements for Proposal Content, Proposal Page Limitations on page 71, it states that for Vol I, Non-price proposal, Technical Approach, the page limit is 50. Does the government intend to limit page count in each subsection; the Staffing Plan and/or the Management Plan?

a. ANSWER – No.

106. The RFP, page 93, section 52.222-46, states “As part of their proposals, offerors will submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract… Supporting information will include data, such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, used in establishing the total compensation structure.” Since there are no Key Resumes required in the RFP, does the government require this information to be supplied in MAC level proposals? If the government does require this information in this proposal, please specify the format and section of the proposal where it should be presented. Additionally, does this requirement extend to subcontractors included in the respondent’s proposal?

a. Answer – Yes, this compensation supporting information is required to be supplied in MAC level proposals. In addition, the Labor Category Rate Matrix (Excel spreadsheet) in Pricing Volume II is required to support the burdened labor rate. Yes, this requirement extends to subcontractors included in the respondent’s proposal.

107. In the RFP, page 20, 4.0 Minimum Personnel Requirements (and page 44 para 4.3.1.80 and page 48 para 4.3.1.LCS) states “The contractor is required to submit for those positions identified as “Key Personnel” for review and evaluation with their technical proposals for award purposes.”

1. Please specify which positions the Government considers "Key Personnel?"

a. ANSWER – The words “Key Personnel” have been replaced with the words Labor Categories throughout the solicitation for clarity.

2. What information (resume, etc.) and in what section of the proposal does the government want this information presented?

a. ANSWER – NO resumes are to be submitted in support of this solicitation

108. In RFP Attachment I (Labor Category Rate Matrix) 50 Division Aviation Warfare section.

a. Is it intended that some of the personnel positions listed in RFP Page 29 paragraph 4.3.2.50 are not listed?

a. ANSWER – The Labor Category Rate Mix (attachment 1) has been corrected to reflect the complete listing of Labor Categories.

b. Additionally, is it intended that all personnel position titles match the RFP?

a. ANSWER – The PWS and Attachment 1 will now align with each other.

109. In RFP Attachment III (Performance Report/Questionnaire Form) when citing performance as a subcontractor is it acceptable to list the "Company's Name" as "Sub Name, subcontractor to Prime Name"? It follows, is it acceptable to list the "Contract /PO Number" as "Subcontract/PO to Prime contract"?

a. ANSWER – Yes. The government understands that many of the offerors were subcontractors so it is acceptable to list the “Contract/PO Number” as “Subcontract/PO to Prime contract.”

110. RFP page 28, para 4.3.1.50, Minimum Requirements for All Offerors. Is sub paragraph b. correct in indicating that experience relevant to the subsurface and subsurface C4ISR warfare areas is required (since this is the Air Warfare section)?

a. ANSWER – This has been removed for clarity

111. RFP Page 8-13, paras 1 – 15 “CDRL . . .,” All CDRL numbers in the QASP start with an “N” while all CDRL numbers in the PWS start with an “A”. Which is correct?

a. ANSWER – All CDRL’s listed have been corrected within the solicitation (A001 thru A015)

112. RFP Page 12, para 13 “CDRL . . . N013, Information Assurance Test Report, this CDRL…