Questions_and_Answers.docx

04/06/2017

Questions and Answers

N00421-16-R-0021

Question 1: The government is providing information technology labor categories with requirements that are insufficient for the tasking required by the labor categories. Will the government provide the qualification as defined by DOD 8570.1-M and NAVAIR 5252.204-9505? Per these instructions contractor staff must meet the criteria with no grace period. Will the government require 8570.01-M related certifications to be met at the time of proposal submission so that a proper technical evaluation of a proposed staff can performed? Without doing so an offeror can propose people who are not qualified to perform the expected tasking.

Please review the applicable directives cited in Section C paragraph 4.4, which provide all the information necessary to propose this requirement. The proposed labor categories should be filled by persons that meet the minimum qualifications as directed in the RFP and meet the clearance, certifications, and training requirements as directed by all applicable references, policies, and instructions. The qualifications of the persons filling the labor categories should be such that the offeror can successfully meet the terms of the QASP.

Question 2: Reference Section L, Part B, para 1.1.1.1 Information Technology Sample Task. This sample task provides a scenario where the AIR-4.11 department has recently hired 10 new government and 10 new contractor personnel, and then provides a list of things to address, some related to the new hires and some are not. In fact several of the 11 “tasks” identified are major tasks in themselves and would require their own individual sample task response. The processes associated with the new hires are standard documented processes which must be followed to do things such as purchase new IT equipment, building access control, network access, and set up of SharePoint repositories. Anyone is capable of attaining and regurgitating a documented process. Amendment 2 even adds a 12th more technical and appropriate task to the Information Technology Sample Task. These 12 tasks will take far more than 15 pages to address. Will the government consider the “12th task” the Sample Task to evaluate an offerors Technical Capability?

Offerors can cite specific resources and references rather than regurgitating processes. No, the Government does not expect to only to see the 12th task addressed in the Sample Task. All 12 tasks should be addressed according.

Question 3: In regards to Solicitation N00421-16-R-0021, the current amendment addresses which labor categories will be SCA and their applicable numbers but we were not instructed on the SCA schedule. Could you please post an amendment that addresses the appropriate SCA schedule?

The SCA labor categories were provided for informational purposes. Since this is not a SCA covered contract, the Government will not be amending the solicitation to provide a Wage Determination number. Webster Field, St. Inigoes, MD is located in St. Mary’s county.

Question 4: Reference Attachment P1, Cost Summary Spreadsheet, the “CPFF Cost Summary Spreadsheet” tab, column A “Subcontractor Labor Cost” suggest the government is looking for a lump sum cost of each subcontractor. Is this correct? Or should the offeror breakdown the subcontractors labor cost by labor category?

Please read the P1 uploaded as part of Amendment 2.

Question 5: The instructions for Attachment P2, Column D require offerors to incorporate information for Functional Area Labor Rate Category yet no Functional Area Labor Categories were specified in the solicitation. Column D on the actual spreadsheet require offerors to provide the Proposed Fully Burdened Rates for Year 1. Please clarify.

Please see the P2 in forthcoming Amendment 4 which will be posted no later than 07 April 2017.

Question 6: IAW with the Government’s response to Question #21 posted in FBO on 16 March 2017, the NAVAIR tripwire amount will be $300,000.00 for each individual proposed. The instructions for Attachment P2, Column D require offerors to incorporate information for Functional Area Labor Rate Category yet no Functional Area Labor Categories were specified in the solicitation. Column D on the actual spreadsheet require offerors to provide the Proposed Fully Burdened Rates for Year 1. Please clarify.

Please see the answer to Question 5.

Question 7: The revised Attachment P2 Instructions provided in Amendment 0002 for Column D Individual Designator require offerors to enter the corresponding Position Number as found on Attachment XX which was not incorporated in the solicitation by the amendment. Would the Government consider revising the instructions to require offerors to use the instructions initially provided in Amendment 0001 posted in FBO March 7th, 2017 to complete Attachment P2, Column D Individual Designator?

Please see the P2 in forthcoming Amendment 4 which will be posted no later than 07 April 2017.

Question 8: Please clarify Page 42 which states Engineering Scientist Senior (Key) 2 yet on page 112 it implies there are Engineer Scientist Senior (Key) 4 {8000 hours}. Is it estimated to be 2 or 4 key’s.

Please see Amendment 3, which provides a breakdown of the key and non-key hours.

Question 9: The Instructions for Attachment P1 Cost Summary Worksheet state that subcontractors should delete rows 22-48. This would delete the rows for Indirect Costs. Are the subcontractors supposed to submit their package without showing indirect rate/cost detail – or did the government mean for subcontractors to delete rows 43 -54 (Subcontractor Labor Costs – assuming team member who is already a subcontractor will not have any subs beneath them)?

Please see the updated Attachment P1 and its instructions included as an attachment to Amendment 2 of the RFP.

Question 10: Amendment 2 appears to remove several solicitation Sections, such as Section D, F, I and most of H. Will the government be releasing a conformed copy of the Solicitation to include the changes made with Amendment 2?

Please see Amendment 3.

Question 11: The government states that this is a Performance Based Contract and the offeror can propose the labor hours and mix that it feels is necessary to achieve a desired outcome. However, the government has not provided sufficient information for any non-incumbent to submit a best value offer as the solicitation only provides general work descriptions expected in performance. For instance, in PWS para 3.1.1 states “The Contractor shall troubleshoot and repair the above listed systems aboard ships as required.” How often is this required? Where are they performed (an offeror may have people in those port areas which they could propose as a cost savings to the government)? This appears written to favor the incumbent. For any offeror other than the incumbent to have a fair opportunity to provide a credible bid on this Indefinite Quantity contract, Will the government either provide greater detail as to how often all tasks are performed, or provide the hours per labor category to build ceiling as the government did on similar solicitation N00421-15-R-0015, N00421-15-R-0016, N00421-15-R-0003 and N00421-15-R-0001

The Government feels that any Offeror with a credible understanding of the work has sufficient information to propose to this requirement. Please review Amendment 3, which provides the maximum estimate of hours per labor category that will be used to determine Section B ceiling.

Question 12: Reference page 2 of 86, the Summary of Changes states “This RFP is for a Performance Based Indefinite Quantity Indefinite Delivery (IDIQ) contract.” A performance Based contract is when the government provides the desired outcome and the Offeror provides the level of effort to perform the desired outcome. According to FAR Part 16.501-2, IDIQ contracts are used to acquire supplies and/or services when the exact times and/or exact quantities of future deliveries are not known at the time of contract award. These two types of contracts seem to contradict themselves. How can the government expect an Offeror to know the level of effort to propose if the government does not know the level of effort?

Please see the answer to Question 11.

Question 13: Reference Section I, (which is absent in amendment 2) which incorporates 52.216-22 Indefinite Quantity (Oct 1995) which indicates this is an Indefinite Quantity contract. FAR 16.504 (b) states “Contracting officers may use an indefinite-quantity contract when the Government cannot predetermine, above a specified minimum, the precise quantities of supplies or services that the Government will require during the contract period.” The solicitation provides a government estimate of 515,000 hours, and does provide an estimate of the breakdown of hours to the labor categories. However, Section L para 3.8.2 states an “Offerors can propose a mix of labor categories based on their understanding of the work being requested.” If the government cannot predetermine the precise quantities (ie…labor categories and hours) it will require, how does the government expect an offeror to predetermine these quantities and be evaluated on a level playing field with other competitors, especially the incumbent? This provides an easy mechanism for any non-incumbent to have their technical score downgraded as “not understanding the level of effort required”.

Please see the answer to Question 11.

NOTICE:

This formally ends the question and answer period for this solicitation. The Government reserves the right to answer future questions at its discretion.