RFP_Questions_and_Responses_1.docx
DOCX document 16 KB Posted
- Attached to
- 5. 4. 3 Battlespace Modeling and Simulation
- Solicitation number
- N00421-18-R-0034
About this file
This document contains questions and responses related to a draft request for proposals for engineering and technical support services. The services are required by the Naval Air Systems Command Naval Air Warfare Center 5.4.3 Integrated Battlespace Simulation and Test Simulation Division and include maintaining the Next Generation Threat System synthetic environment generator, Architecture Management Integration Environment, Joint Integrated Mission Model, and support for Distributed Interactive Simulation, High Level Architecture, and Test and Training Enabling Architecture protocols. Key details addressed in the questions and responses include correcting overtime and other direct cost amounts and categories; clarifying labor categories, hours and overtime distribution; removing Service Contract Act and wage determination requirements; modifying degree requirements for certain categories; and confirming a single 60-month period of performance with no option periods.
View the file
Other files
Show all 32
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Question #1: Section L, paragraph 3.5.1 ODCs (Page 76 of 86): ODCs are listed at $1,925,000 per year but are not broken out separately into Material and Travel. If an offeror’s accounting practice is to burden material and travel differently, could the government state the amounts for material and travel separately for each year?
Section L, paragraph 3.5.1 ODCs has been corrected from the yearly ODC amount of $1,925,000 to $1,750,000. Additionally, the ODC’s have been separated into Material and Travel amounts as shown below and within solicitation amendment (#0002).
| Yearly |
| Material |
| Travel |
| Total |
| Year 1 |
| $1,150,000 |
| $600,000 |
| $1,750,000 |
| Year 2 |
| $1,150,000 |
| $600,000 |
| $1,750,000 |
| Year 3 |
| $1,150,000 |
| $600,000 |
| $1,750,000 |
| Year 4 |
| $1,150,000 |
| $600,000 |
| $1,750,000 |
| Year 5 |
| $1,150,000 |
| $600,000 |
| $1,750,000 |
Question #2: Section L. 3.5.2 Labor Hours (Page 77 of 86): OT Hours are stated for certain Labor Categories however some Labor Categories have multiple individuals within the Labor Category. For example, there are five (5) Special and Tactical Operations Leader – Aviation Senior with only 60 hours of OT per year to be used for all five individuals. Is it the government’s intent to have 50 hours of OT for each of the individuals filling these positions, thus equaling 250 hours of OT for that Labor Category?
Labor Categories falling into this situation are:
Technical Library Clerk, Technical Writer III, Software Developer (Junior), Software Developer (Journeyman), Software Developer (Senior), and Special and Tactical Operations Leader – Aviation (Senior).
This affects total hours in the first paragraph of 3.5.2 and in 5252.211-9503 LEVEL OF EFFORT (COST REIMBURSEMENT) (NAVAIR) (DEC 2012).
The hours provided within Section L, Paragraph 3.5.2 are correct as shown. The overtime hours should be distributed evenly amongst the applicable FTE’s within each labor category. A note will be added to Section L, Paragraph 3.5.2 Labor Hours for further clarification within solicitation amendment (#0002). Therefore, there is no impact to the total hours within 5252.211-9503 LEVEL OF EFFORT (COST REIMBURSEMENT) (NAVAIR) (DEC 2012).
Question #3: The Service Contract Act (SCA) applies to all Federal contracts, “…the principal purpose of which is to furnish services in the United States through the use of service employees” (FAR 22.1003-1). FAR 22.1003-1 states “This subpart does not apply to individual contract requirements for services in contracts not having as their principal purpose the furnishing of services.”
Department of Labor regulations do not precisely define the concept of “principle purpose,” as it pertains to the SCA but considering the solicitation identifies only 17% of the workforce as “SCA employees”, the remaining 83% of the workforce will be performing non-SCA work (reference Section L 3.5.2 on page 77 of 86). As the technical focus of the SOW is Research, Development, Test and Evaluation (not services covered by SCA or FAR 22.1003-1), the principle purpose of the contract is not furnishing services through the use of service employees but Research, Development, Test and Evaluation through technical and professional employees. Would the government consider removing the SCA component and Wage Determination from this solicitation and the resultant contract as the principle purpose is Research, Development, Test and Evaluation?
The Government has considered this information and the SCA component and Wage Determination will be removed from this solicitation within solicitation Amendment (#0002).
Question #4: Degree requirements in Section 3.4.1.4 (page 22 of 86) for Software Quality Assurance Analyst and Tester (Senior), and Aerospace Engineer (Junior, Journeyman, and Senior) require, among other skills, a BS degree in Aerospace Engineering. While specific Aerospace Engineering degrees and experience support the Statement of Work and tasking, individuals having other engineering disciplines, combined with specific modeling and engineering experience are extremely valuable to the effort, specifically Section 3.3.4 – Development and Engineering Support (reference page 18 of 86). Would the government consider modifying the degree requirements for the Software Quality Assurance Analyst and Tester (Senior), and Aerospace Engineer (Junior, Journeyman, and Senior) to include other engineering disciplines, such as computer, electrical, electronics, or mechanical engineering?
The Degree/Experience Requirements for Software Quality Assurance Analyst and Tester, Senior within Section C, Paragraph 3.4.1.4 – Professional Labor Category Degree/Experience Requirements will be updated to remove the “BS degree in Aerospace Engineering” requirement and will be updated to reflect a requirement for an “MS/MA degree in a technical discipline relevant to the functional description” within solicitation amendment (#0002).
The Degree/Experience Requirements for Aerospace Engineer (Junior, Journeyman, and Senior) will remain unchanged.
Question #5: As this procurement contains over $9,600,000 of Material and ODCs, would the government consider an additional labor category of Logistician or Procurement Clerk to support requisition planning, documentation, and preliminary purchasing activities?
The Government has considered this request and will not be adding an additional labor category of Logistician or Procurement Clerk.
Question #6: In Section L 3.0 (page 69 of 86), the table showing the various volumes and section numbering for Volume one skips Section 1.1.1. Could the government verify that there is no Section 1.1.1?
Section 1.1 – Understanding of the Work within the Section L, Paragraph 3.0 table will be updated to correct the numbering from 1.1.2, 1.1.3, and 1.1.4 to 1.1.1, 1.1.2, and 1.1.3 respectively within solicitation amendment (#0002).
Question #7: Attachment P6 CLIN Breakout Sheet references “Option Periods” yet the solicitation discusses that this will be for 60 months, with no mention of a Base and Option Years. Could the government confirm that the resultant contract will be a single, 60-month period of performance as indicated in 5252.211-9507 (Period of Performance (NAVAIR)(SEP 2013) (Reference page 2 and 32 of 86)?
The Government confirms that the resultant contract will have a single, 60 month period of performance. The Attachment P6 CLIN Breakout Sheet will be updated within solicitation amendment (#0002) to update the terminology for each Worksheet from “Option Period” to “Execution Year”.
Question #8: The attached P6 CLIN Worksheet has several columns, seemingly set as a standard P6 that can be used across several different CLIN scenarios. In this solicitation, with Regular and OT hours for both on- and off-site, but rolling up to a single Labor CLIN at the IDIQ level, will the government permit offerors the latitude to structure the P6 to logically show these hours and cost, as long as it accounts for the hours stipulated in Section L. 3.5.2 Labor Hours?
The Government intends for the offeror to utilize Column I within the P6 Attachment to propose labor hours in accordance with the Section L, 3.5.2 Labor Hours. The hidden columns between I-AE within Attachment P6 are not intended for use and should remain hidden. As stated within the “Instructions” tab within Attachment P6, the Offeror should utilize column C to insert a "K" if the worker will be performing at the Contractor's facility or a "G" if performing in Government spaces. In addition, as indicated in the “Instructions” tab the offeror is not required to utilize the Government’s labor categories which were pre-populated in Column A and has the latitude to insert additional rows if necessary as long as the integrity of formulas are maintained throughout Attachment P6. The offeror should clearly identify the overtime hours within Attachment P6.
Question #9 Please detail the cyber security workforce compliance requirements (Per SECNAV Manual 5239.2) that apply to each of the software developer, computer programmer, and software quality assurance and tester labor categories as well as the specified 5239.2 specialty area (SA) and proficiency level. This information is required to appropriately price personnel who will execute this task order.
The positions supporting this requirement are not intended to be subject to cyber security compliance requirements Per SECNAV Manual 5239.2.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .