N00421-18-R-0038_DRFP_Questions_-_3.pdf

Number REF/#: Industry Question/Comment Government Response

Section L 5.3 5.3 Cost Proposal Instructions, Section 2.1 Direct Rates: The straight time hourly rates shall use a 40-hour work week for the conversion of salaried employees to the hourly basis and shall be exclusive of loading factors (i.e., vacation, sick leave, holidays, overhead, G&A, fee)

Q: It is unusual to see hourly rate calculated exclusive of vacation, sick and holidays as that effects the proposed productive man-year.

Recommend rates inclusive of vacation, sick and holidays and exclusive of overhead and G&A. If not please clarify intent of this calculation.

Section 5.3, Section 2.1 Direct Rates will be updated in the Final RFP to clarify the intent of this language.

Section L 5.3 Section 2.3 "In addition, Offerors shall submit any applicable DCMA/DCAA approved Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRAs), and Forward Pricing Rate Recommendations (FPRRs), and identity whether the proposed rates are applicable to any of those documents. The Offeror and proposed subcontractors shall also provide the most current DCAA Provisional Billing Rate Approval Letter, DCAA Final Billing Rate Approval Letter, and any other information necessary to substantiate the proposed indirect rates."

If an Offeror provides an approved FPRA for proposed rates, no further substantiation is required for those rates.

Section L 5.3 Paragraph 2.7 – ODCs (Government provided) : If the Offeror chooses not to burden ODCs, then the Offeror shall propose an H-clause to identify this special term and condition

Q: If the offeror’s disclosure statement doesn’t clearly indicate burdens will not be applied on ODC’s the addition of an H-Clause appears to be an “investment” or “corporate challenge” as the offeror will either be forced to take a loss for these funds or spread the cost to other government contracts.E25 This appears to conflict with Government direction provided in Section L; Volume General Instructions which state: “The Government is not soliciting any Offeror investments. Investments, management challenges (i.e. indirect rate caps), or contributions of resources and/or equipment will not be acceptable as substantiation for a lower cost.”

The Government is reviewing this language. Please refer to the Final RFP for all updates.

SOW 3.1.6.2

and shall ensure that all provisions stated herein shall be clearly and effectively communicated to all Subcontractors

Flow Down - The Prime Contractor shall manage all Subcontractors IAW their Management Plan (A006) providing support under this contract. All provisions of this SOW shall flow down to Subcontractors providing support under this contract.

This should also include Safety Plans. Recommend proposal language captures how we meet requirements of flow down in compliance with this contract.

The Offeror should address how the proposal meets the requirements identified in 3.1.6.2.

(Ref. Section L 2.1 and Attachment MS-1 Cross Reference Matrix 2.1.1)

SOW 3.1.7.6.4 Safety Shoes The Contractor shall be responsible for providing any safety shoes required by the Contractor workforce to support the tasking identified in this SOW. Safety shoes are not a direct cost reimbursable item to the Material or ODC CLINs of this contract. All safety shoes used must meet the Occupational Safety and Health Standards Number 1910.136 Foot Protection.

If working with an unionized workforce, then consider having access to CBA in order to read requirements for supplying safety boots and frequency of replacement. Boots can cost anywhere from $120-$200 per pair, per year, per employee in some cases.

Please help us understand the cost exposure to adequately project into proposal.

The frequency for replacement of safety boots is variable and dependent on mission requirements.

The current Range Support Service does not operate under a CBA.

SOW 3.1.10.1. The Contractor shall document their training and certification program and process in their Management Plan (A006). The Contractor shall use NAVFAC P-300 and NAVFAC P-307 as a template for developing operator certification requirements. NAVFAC P-307 governs crane operation. In order to establish certification procedures, we need to ensure we will be given access to Navy Crane Center certification training website.

Recommend clarification from USG.

The Government is reviewing this language. Please refer to the Final RFP for all updates.

SOW 3.1.13 Environmental Compliance The Contractor shall operate IAW all Federal and local environmental regulations. This para is very vague and does not provide specific guidance and requirements for compliance with specific programs required for the performance on this contract. Recommend revision by

USG

It is not possible or feasible for the Government to provide specific guidance and requirements for operating in compliance with all Federal and local environmental regulations because during contract execution the contractor will be working in various locations in CONUS and OCONUS. The Contractor must be aware of all Federal and local environmental regulations associated with the location in which they are working to ensure they operate in compliance with those regulations.

Section L Proposal Instructions, 4.1 Per the RFP: “It is requested that one paper copy and one electronic copy on a CD-ROM of Annex A (Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Table MS-2 (Small Business Requirement); Table PP-1 (Past Performance Contract Data); Table CE-1 (Corporate Experience Element Contract Reference Matrix); and Annex B (Final Versions of Previous SOW/PWSs/Other Supporting Documentation for Past Performance and Corporate Experience) be submitted three weeks prior to the submission date/time specified on Standard Form 33 (Block 9).

Will these Tables need to be re-submitted again with the final proposal submission?

If no changes to the information provided early, it is not necessary to resubmit the tables. However, in accordance with Section L, the offeror should reference the early submission and indicate that no changes were made in the Proposal Submission. Please note the request for early information of 3 weeks will be changed to 2 weeks.

Ref: "In the official proposal submission, please indicate any changes made to the information delivered three weeks early in the submission provided on the date and time specified in Block 9 of Standard Form 33 of the solicitation. If no changes are made, please state so at the beginning of Volume 1 (Executive Summary), Volume 3 (Past Performance), and Volume 4 (Corporate Experience)."

Section L Proposal Instructions, 4.1 Per the RFP: “It is requested that one paper copy and one electronic copy on a CD-ROM of Annex A (Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Table MS-2 (Small Business Requirement); Table PP-1 (Past Performance Contract Data); Table CE-1 (Corporate Experience Element Contract Reference Matrix); and Annex B (Final Versions of Previous SOW/PWSs/Other Supporting Documentation for Past Performance and Corporate Experience) be submitted three weeks prior to the submission date/time specified on Standard Form 33 (Block 9).

Does the number of copies change for the final submission with the early submission requirement of the above listed tables?

The Government is only requiring submission of number of copies listed in table G-3, however, should an Offeror's early submission information change the offeror shall provide the updated information in compliance with the required number of copies.

Section H, Clause 5252.215-9505 NAVAIR Clause 5252.215-9505 Exclusive Teaming Arrangements which inhibit competition indicates the preferred teaming arrangements for solicitation N00421-18-R-0038 to be non-exclusive. Within Section L 1.

General; guidance from the Government indicates an entity such as the prime, a JV and JV members, or any subcontractor with a different CAGE Code/DUNS than the Offeror can contribute to Corporate Experience and past performance evaluations. Section L 1. General; further states that Past Performance and Corporate Experience can be offered by other entities if the prime proposes the subcontractor to perform at least 20% of the proposed total cost for the contract.

Q: Was it the intention of the Government to place these two statement in conflict, as non-exclusive teaming arrangements initiated by a prime to a subcontractor do not normally contain any guaranteed workshare based on percentage of the total proposed cost. Based on NAVAIR Clause 5252.215-9505 guidance, would the Government remove the required 20% share of the total contract or consider a reduction to a 5-10 % share of the total contract?

The statements in Section L, Part A, paragraph 1, are not in conflict with one another. The paragraph states that only "principal entities" will be used in the Past Performance and Corporate Experience evaluations. As stated in the paragraph, the "following entities are defined as principal entities and only principal entities will be used in the Past Performance and Corporate Experience evaluations: (a) the prime contractor; (b) JV Team Members; and

(c) other entities that are proposed to perform at least 20% of the proposed total cost for the contract; and/or (d) entities that are proposed to perform a critical function, in the performance of the resulting contract". The Government will not remove the 20% requirement for entities to be considered a principal entity.

2.1.2 The proposals will be accessed utilizing the Microsoft Windows 7 Operating System. Proposal information shall be submitted using the following applications: Microsoft Word 2010, Microsoft Excel 2010, Microsoft PowerPoint 2010, and Microsoft Project 2010

Q: Can the Government accept Windows 10 operating system and higher Microsoft applications, such as MS Word 2016, MS Excel 2016, MS Power Point 2016 and MS Project 2016?

Yes.

Section L, Paragraph 2.4(2) This paragraph requires, where possible, for offerors to provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments to utilize each SB concern. This documentation typically is in the form of a signed Teaming Agreement (TA).

Q: Does the Government require offerors to provide copies of signed TAs to meet this requirement? If so, due to the length of a typical TA, would the Government allow them to be placed in an Annex and exempt them from any page count requirements?

For "enforceable commitments", the Government requires letters of commitment, Joint Ventures, mentor/protégé agreements, or other demonstrations of commitment (i.e. binding commitments that will become enforceable/contractual requirements).

This information will be provided in one of the Annexes. This will be updated in the Final RFP.

Section C, SOW, para 3.1.4.4.1 The RFP states OT is approved by the COR during the Budget Letter process.

Q: If there is unpredictable overtime, how will it be approved?

In the Budget Letter process, the COR allocates the authorized LOE Regular and OT hours for the period of performance. The Budget Letter will include unscheduled overtime. Clarification will be provided in Final RFP.

Section C, para 3.3.53.2 Para 3.3.53.2 references “3.3.3 Detailed Support Requirements. No such reference exists in the SOW and the term “Detailed Support Requirement cannot be found elsewhere in the draft RFP.

Q: Please clarify.

The correct paragraph reference is "3.3 Detailed Support Requirements" and this reference will be corrected in the Final RFP.

Section C, para 3.4.2 Q: Is it correct to assume the number in parenthesis represents the number of FTEs requiring a clearance?

The number in parenthesis represents the number of Security Clearances for the Labor Category.

Section C, 5252.211-9509 Incorporation of Contractor’s Technical Proposal

Q: Confirm that the Government intends to incorporate the Offerors Mission Support Volume into the awarded contract.

Based on the referenced clause, the Government intends to incorporate the awardees Mission Support volume by reference. In addition, Section L of the Draft RFP states "Offerors are advised that the Government may incorporate any part of the Offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government, into the final contract."

Section L, Part A, 1.General, 4th paragraph, and Section L,

5.3 Cost Proposal Instructions

In Section L, Part A, a JV Team Member is defined as the entities that make up the Joint Venture. In Section L, 5.3 Cost Proposal Instructions, there are pricing requirements for the JV Team Member.

Q: Please confirm that the pricing requirements for a JV Team Member are only applicable to the extent that the JV Team Member is separately priced, which is typically the case in an “unpopulated” JV. There are other Joint Venture arrangements that are considered “populated” and do not require separate pricing of the JV Members.

This is correct. Populated JVs do not require separate cost submittals and would only need to submit the CA-1 Cost Attachment for the JV. If the JV is unpopulated, the team members of the proposed JV shall submit individual cost model spreadsheets as required. The cost submittal for the JV Team member could be submitted on a CA-2 as long as all JV team members and any proposed subcontractors roll up to the CA-1 Cost Attachment.

Section L, Part A, 1.General, 4th paragraph Q: Will the Government be amenable to the establishment of a non-incorporated Joint Ventures, such as 1) an Informal Joint Venture (defined as a written agreement between two or more individual business entities which are affiliated companies under the control of the common parent company (highest level owner)) or 2) an Equity Joint Venture (non-incorporated)? In both cases, an Equitable or Informal Joint Venture would not be a separate legal entity

No. Per Section L, Part B, Volume 1 a. (3) "All joint ventures that are proposed shall provide their Joint Venture legal document with agreement(s) in Annex D (Joint Venture Agreement)."

Section L, Part A, 1.General, 4th paragraph Since JV Team Members or Informal JV Affiliate Members, already have the same investment, liability, and risk of performance as the prime.

Q: will the Government consider removing the requirement of 20% of the proposed cost of the contract?

No, the Government has defined principal entities as "(a) the prime contractor;

(b) JV Team Members; and (c) other entities that are proposed to perform at least 20% of the proposed total cost for the contract; and/or (d) entities that are proposed to perform a critical function, in the performance of the resulting contract."

Section L, Part A, 1.General, 4th paragraph Q: If the Joint Venture is populated (thus no separately submitted pricing of the Joint Venture members), is it correct to assume that the requirement for performance of the JV member to perform at least 20% of the proposed cost of the contract is not applicable?

There is no requirement for the JV member to perform at least 20% of the proposed costs.

All JV Team Members are defined as principal entities. The 20% performance requirement applies to other entities in order to be considered for Past Performance and Corporate Experience evaluation.

Section L, Table G‐3 Proposal Structure A Joint Venture Agreement is different from a Teaming Agreement.

Q: Please clarify if the Government is requesting copies of both the Joint Venture Agreement (with its JV partners) and Teaming Agreements (with potential subcontractors).

The Government is requesting copies of both the Joint Venture Agreement (with its JV partners) and Teaming Agreements (with potential subcontractors).

This table will be updated to clarify in the Final RFP.

Section L Volume 2, para 2.1.1 To the extent conflicts of interests are identified by an offeror pursuant to

5252.209-9513 ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST

INSTRUCTIONS (SERVICES),

Q: Will the information required for submission with the offerors proposal response to be included in Volume 2?

Q: If so, we respectfully request this information be excluded from the page count.

Yes. As a reminder, page counts listed in Section L are only "suggested pages".

Section B and Section L Volume 2, para 2.2 Transition Phase-In Plan

Paragraph 2.2 of Volume 2 states, “Offerors shall submit a detailed plan covering the transition phase-in period of 90 days, prior to the start of the base period of performance …” Section B does not include a CLIN for the Phase-In Period.

Q: Please clarify how Phase-In will be funded and reimbursed under the awarded contract.

There is no CLIN for the Transition Period as it precedes the beginning of the period of performance of the contract. As a result, the transition period will not be funded.

Section L Volume 2, para 2.2 and Section M Q: What is the contract type for Phase-In? There is no CLIN for the Transition Period as it precedes the beginning of the period of performance of the contract. As a result, the transition period will not be funded.

Section L, Volume 5 Cost The RFP states, “The Government is not soliciting any Offeror investments. Investments, management challenges (i.e. indirect rate caps), or contributions of resources and/or equipment will not be acceptable as substantiation for a lower cost.”

Q: Is it correct to assume this statement does not apply to Phase-In?

There is no CLIN for the Transition Period as it precedes the beginning of the period of performance of the contract. As a result, the transition period will not be funded. The Section L verbiage related to investments and management challenges will be updated in the Final RFP to clarify the Government's intent.

General Q: Is there an acronym list? Yes. An acronym list is provided in the Technical Exhibits folder of the

Technical Library CD.

General Q: Could you provide a list of the systems that are operated and maintained on this contract?

Q: Could you provide O&M manuals and User’s Guides?

The systems that are operated and maintained on this contract are listed in the SOW paragraphs under 3.3 Detailed Support Requirements. O&M manuals and User's Guides will be provided after contract award.

General Q: Is there a defined configuration management process/system used on this contract?

Q: Could you provide the documentation for this process/system?

ATR has a high level Configuration Management Plan that will be provided after contract award.

3.1.3 Management Information System and Contract Status

Reporting

Q: Does the Management Information System (MIS) currently exist? Is it available to the winning contractor? Will the information contained within the MIS be made available to the winning contractor?

The MIS is a new requirement and the Atlantic Test Range does not currently have an MIS.

30 3.1.3.1.1 Q: What are the NMCI restrictions that would not allow access? There are no known NMCI restrictions that would not allow access.

3.1.3.1.2 The government shall have access to “all information maintained in the

MIS”.

Q: Does this mean that contractor proprietary information would not be allowed to be maintained in the MIS?

No, the contractor may maintain proprietary information on the MIS if they so desire.

3.1.3.1.2 Q: For the purpose of the MIS, what is considered “real-time”? For the purpose of the MIS, "real-time" means that contractor data that is input is processed within milliseconds so that it is available virtually immediately for viewing by the Government.

3.1.3.2, Monthly Financial Report The Monthly Financial Report does not appear to reference project funding tracking (or JONS).

Q: Does that mean that the contractor is not required to track expenses by project?

The Budget Letter requirement in SOW Section 3.1.3.7 Budget Letters will be used to track expenses by project. The Budget Letters are incorporated in the Monthly Financial Report requirement described in SOW Section 3.1.3.2 Monthly Financial Report.

3.1.3.7, Budget Letters Q: How detailed are these Budget Letters? How many Budget Letters are issued in a normal year?

The level of detail for the Budget Letters is defined in SOW Section 3.1.3.7.

On average there are fifty Budget Letters established each FY.

3.1.11.4.2, Hazardous Material Q: Can we get a list of what HAZMAT is used/stored on this contract and where it is being used/stored?

The list of HAZMAT utilized and the locations is very extensive with over 300 products located at multiple work locations in certified HAZMAT storage lockers. This list will be provided after contract award during the transition period.

3.1.12.7, Civil Engineering Support Equipment Q: What kind of “special purpose vehicles or equipment” would be considered Civil Engineering Support Equipment (CESE)?

Q: Does this include mobile telemetry; instrumentation/communications support vehicles and/or mobile control room support equipment?

Range mobile systems, instrumentation, and equipment that is mounted/installed on vehicles and/or trailers that are driven or trailered on public roadways and that require license plates are considered Civil Engineering Support Equipment. This includes, but is not limited to, the Range mobile telemetry van, the mobile PRISM system, and the Transportable Range Operation Control system.

3.3.1.3.14, Assist with the preparation and distribution of Range resource utilization metrics.

Q: Could you provide the “Range resource utilization metrics” that are to be tracked and distributed?

Range resource utilization metrics include, but are not limited to, the following:

# of Test and Training Events scheduled, cancelled, and completed.

# of Test and Training Event hours scheduled, cancelled, and completed.

# of each type of Test and Training Event scheduled, cancelled, and completed.

$ amount charged per customer per month and year.

# of stores/ordinance releases per month and year.

# of hours scheduled and charged for each range resource per month and year.

IEEE J-STD-016-1995 Q: IEEE J-STD-016-1995 was withdrawn in 2006, is there an alternative that may be used instead?

In the Final RFP, ISO/IEC 12207 Systems and Software Engineering — Software Life Cycle Processes will replace IEEE-J-STD-016-1995 in the SOW Applicable Documents Section 2.5 Industry Standards.

PWS 3.1.5.2 Q: Some positions require travel up to 30% of the time.” Question: Will the government identify these positions?

The positions that could require travel up to 30% of the time are:

Engineering Technicians.

Field Engineers (Operations Managers in the Final RFP).

Management Analyst, Senior Engineers Project Managers

PWS 3.2.8.1.2 The Contractor shall conduct physical security checks of all secure data pipes at the end of each workday as required IAW the daily rotational schedule.”

Q: Will the Government expand on this requirement?

Secure data pipes are used to meet Range Operational Security (OPSEC) requirements when distributing classified data, voice, and video within the Range facility. The contractor will assist the Government in maintaining the security of the data pipes, ensuring they have not been subjected to unauthorized accessed or broken into, by conducting physical inspections on a daily basis.

PWS 3.3.35.1 Q: Will the Government post a listing of all government-owned vessels and watercraft to be operated and/or maintained by the contractor?

This information can be found in the Technical Library.

PWS 3.3.45.1.3 Q: Is the Federal/Navy Supply System available for our use to augment our options for material and logistic support, or is the Navy supply System mandatory for procurement of parts and materials?

Yes, the Federal/Navy Supply System will be available for Contractor use to meet material and logistic requirements that are incidental to the tasking in the SOW during performance under this contract. The Offeror will utilize the Federal/Navy Supply System before seeking other sources.

Past Performance If a contract has D.Os/T.Os, provide a separate contract reference and separate PP-1 tab for each D.O/T.O The Offeror may use one reference number/PP-1 tab for multiple D.Os/T.Os if they are the same work effort and performed under the same CPAR; however, identify the dollar amount and period of performance for each. Do not provide a contract reference to the basic contract."

Q:Would the government consider the use of single award IDIQs at the mother contract level for past performance that are similar in size and scope?

Per Section L, the Offeror shall provide the information requested at the DO/TO level. If the DO/TO contains references to the basic contract, the offeror should provide this as additional information.

3.1.7.7.1 The Contractor shall provide the COR and Contracting Officer with a signed Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) (Attachment J) for positions supporting SOW Sections 3.3.27 Management Support, 3.3.28 Business Communications and Meeting Support, 3.3.47 Administrative and Clerical Support, and 3.3.48 Material/Supplies Handling & Procurement Support .

Q Their reference to 3.3.27 should be 3.3.26 Their reference to 3.3.28 should be 3.3.27 Their reference to 3.3.48 should be 3.3.44 Their reference to 3.3.48 should be 3.3.45 Material Handling and Procurement Support:

These SOW Section references with be corrected in the Final RFP.

3.3.40.3 The Contractor shall provide support of heavy lift and tooling equipment maintenance requirements to include:3.3.41.3.1 Perform maintenance IAW manufacturers operator manuals to ensure equipment availability to support execution of all missions.

Q: There is no such 3.3.41.3.1

The SOW reference will be updated in the Final RFP.

3.3.44.2.6 Support facility access control by performing visitor identification checks and staffing of facility entry point control areas and complex entry points during the work times described in Section 3.3.4 of the SOW.

Q: 3.3.4 of the SOW is Range Safety which does not fit with this statement

The SOW reference will be updated in the Final RFP.

3.3.48.2.2 Obtain periodic inspections for non-ABS vessels by a qualified inspector (such as a certified Marine Surveyor) and provide a Marine Vessel Inspection Report IAW CDRL A014 to the ATMO COR .

Q: Minor change – CDRL A014 is entitled: Marine Vessel Surveyor Report

The Final RFP will reflect the accurate CDRL title.

SOW 3.4.2.70, 3.4.2.71, 3.4.2.72 , pages 397-398 With regard to the Information Security Analyst labor categories, was it the government’s intent to restrict these positions to such stringent education requirements (i.e. ABET accredited degrees)? The qualifications of these positions may better be captured by the certification requirements delineated in applicable DoD/DoN Cybersecurity Workforce policy (DoD

8570.01-M/8140.01/SECNAV 5239.2).

The Government's intent is not to restrict these positions with stringent education requirements (i.e. ABET accredited degrees). This will be reviewed and taken into consideration.

RFP Section L 5.3 Section 2.1 Direct Rate page 572-574 The table mention General Operations Manager, Deputy but not the General Operations Manager. Will the Government add General Operations Manager?

No. Key Labor Categories are not included in the Direct Rate Table since a resume must be provided for Key personnel so either payroll verification must be submitted for a current employee or a letter of intent outlining agreed to rates/salary provided for Contingent hires.

Section L, Part B, 2.3 Technology/Systems/Process Approach; Section M, M-1, II, A

Referenced section states specific topics to be addressed in the Mission Support volume which do not include a technical approach to each of the Detailed Support Requirements stated in section 3.3 of the Statement of Work. The corresponding language in Section M states that the Government will “evaluate the proposal to determine the Offeror's understanding of, approach to and ability to meet the solicitation requirements” and will “assess the Offeror’s Mission Support Proposal with respect to its compliance with the solicitation requirements…” Section M then goes on to state that the evaluation “will also include an assessment of” and then lists the four major topics stated in Section L for the Mission Support volume. Will the Government please clarify whether the Government requires that Offerors provide a technical approach to each of the Detailed Support Requirements stated in section 3.3 of the Statement of Work.

The offeror should address the proposal information in Section L, Volume 2 and utilize the Cross Reference Matrix provided in the Final RFP.

Section L Volume 4 Past Performance pag3 566 The RFP says in Annex B (Final Versions of Previous Statement of Work (SOW)/Performance Work Statement (PWS)/Other Supporting Documentation for Past Performance and Corporate Experience), the Offeror shall provide two electronic copies of the complete final versions of the SOW/PWS or other supporting solicitation/contract documentation from each contract or delivery/task order reference identified in Attachment L-1 Table ES-2 (Relevant Contract Summary). Table G-2 requests the files as .PDF and .docx. These document may reside in a variety of formats. Is it possible to provide PDF versions of these documents and not MS Word versions? This would save the cost of converting some files to the word .docx format.

The offeror shall provide the reference documents in both .pdf and .docx.

Section L Part B Volume 1, Table ES-2 Since the format for this table has not been provided, will this table require responses to all SOW elements or just the 6 elements shown in Section L Volume 3 Paragraph 3.1 Evaluation Elements?

Table ES-2 can be found in Attachment L-1, which is available on fedbizopps.

Attachment_CA‐1_Prime_Cost_Spreadsheet In Attachment_CA-1_Prime_Cost_Spreadsheet, item #1 under Fuller burdened CPFF Labor Rates Worksheet, instructions state, "In Column A, enter the Proposed Labor Category, as recorded in the Prime or Subcontractor's accounting system, that correlates to each of the Government solicitation Labor Category on that row." Entering this information will overwrite the Government Labor categories currently in Column A.

Would the Government please confirm that offerors are to enter this information as instructed, and overwrite the Government's spreadsheet contents for Column A, or should offerors add an additional column in which to insert Offeror Labor Categories?

The CA-1 attachment instructions will be updated for the Final RFP and offerors will not be required to enter their own labor categories. Only the Government provided labor categories will be required.

Section C – Statement of Work, Paragraph 3.3.7.4.5 Section C – Statement of Work, Paragraph 3.3.7.4.5 requests that offerors "Support the preparation of quarterly and annual quarterly reports comparing current operational tempo and trends to previous tempos and trends."

Would the Government please include copies of current and past quarterly and annual reports in the Bidders Technical Library?

The detailed reports are not currently cleared for Public Release. Copies of the reports will be available upon award. High-level information on a yearly basis is provided in the Technical Library.

Section C – Statement of Work, Paragraph 3.5 Deliverables, CDRL A004

CDRL A004 states on page 442: "should identify the key stakeholder and highlight their roles and responsibilities, summarize the tasks and associated deliverables, and monthly status reporting (cost, schedule, and performance)."

Would the Government please clarify that this requirement is part of Post Transition activities or should it be part of CDRL A003 Monthly Status Report?

This text under CDRL A004 in SOW Section 3.5 DELIVERABLES will be removed in the Final RFP. However, CDRL A004 is a deliverable of Post Transition Meeting (SOW 3.1.3.5).

Section I The first sentence of Section I – Contract Requirements, Clause 52.222-2 on page 528 states: "(a) The use of overtime is authorized under this contract if the overtime premium cost does not exceed $0.00 or the overtime premium is paid for work --". Section L, Part B, Volume 5 – Cost, Section 1.1 – Format for Level of Effort states on page 570: “The Attachment includes both Regular hours for all labor categories and Overtime Hours for some of the labor categories.”

Would the Government please clarify if Overtime is authorized and the amount/ceiling allowed?

Overtime will be authorized on an as needed basis. The overtime clause will be updated upon award. The cost and fee for overtime will be included in the various Labor CLINs based on the applicable labor categories and OT hours annotated in the CA-1 Cost Attachment.

FAR Clause 52.222-17 FAR Clause 52.222-17, Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers (May 2014) (page 528-531) generally requires the successor contractor and subcontractors to offer employment to service employees employed by the predecessor contract and subcontractors.

Can the Government identify the subcontractors who are employing "service employees" that are subject to this clause?

If a non-incumbent Offeror is awarded the contract, the names of the incumbent SCA workforce (prime contractor and subcontractors) will be provided to the awardee after award during the Transition Period in accordance with the clause.

In Section L, Part B, Volume 5 – Cost, Paragraph 2.3 Indirect Rates, the first sentence in this paragraph on page 574 states "Offerors shall provide historical rates for associated with proposed indirect rates for the last three years."

Would the Government please clarify what historical rates offerors should provide?

This refers to the last 3 years of historical indirect rates that are consistent with the indirect rates that are being proposed for this effort.

Section L, Part B, Volume 2 – Mission Support, Paragraph 2.3

14. Section L, Part B, Volume 2 – Mission Support, Paragraph 2.3 begins by instructing Offerors to "Describe the Offeror's engineering and management tools or resources, systems engineering processes, and quality improvement processes to innovatively meet existing or emergent requirements in response to future test, training, and Fleet experimentation requirements." The third sentence in this paragraph instructs Offerors to "Specifically address the Offeror's approach to the following areas:" and then lists four specific requirements (MIS, configuration management of documentation, configuration management of material, and RAM).

Would the Government please clarify whether Offerors should address all requirements shown (including those in the first and third sentences) or should offeror responses only focus on the four subparagraphs (2.3a - 2.3d) requirements?

The Offeror shall address the questions in Section L utilizing the Cross Reference Matrix. The first two sentences are asking the Offerors to address the overall approach. In addition, items 2.3a - 2.3d should be addressed.

Section L, Part B, Volume 1 – Executive Summary, Paragraph c

Mission support states in the first sentence on page 559: "The Offeror shall provide a succinct summary of what is proposed for each element, describing the approach and/or proposed solution." Section M-1, II, Specific Information, Section B. Corporate Experience states on page 587: "The breadth and depth of the corporate experience will be assessed for each element to predict how the Offeror may perform on the future effort. The evaluation will include an assessment of the following elements: (1) Range Operations and Maintenance, (2) Deployments, (3) Electronic Warfare, (4) Radar Cross Section Measurement, (5) Aerial Targets, and (6) Vessel Operations." The term "elements" in the above referenced sentences appears to be used in two or more differing contexts.

Would the Government please clarify the meaning of the term "element(s)" in the above sentences, and confirm that the RFP's use of the term "element(s)" is not meant to have a single evaluation definition, such as the examples found in the Other Evaluation Definitions section on pages 591-592 of Section M

The "Elements" in Mission Support the DRAFT RFP Section L and M are:

Management Approach, Transition Phase-In Plan, Technology/Systems/Process Approach and Small Business Management.

The Corporate Experience Elements in the DRAFT RFP are: "(1) Range Operations and Maintenance, (2) Deployments, (3) Electronic Warfare, (4) Radar Cross Section Measurement, (5) Aerial Targets, and (6) Vessel Operations"

Attachment_CA-1_Prime_Cost_Spreadsheet Pricing tabs for Base Year through Option Year 9 provides a row for each labor category per location (in column B). For example, two rows (50 and

51) are provided for Engineer, Systems, Senior – one at Pax River, MD (row 50) and one at Pt. Mugu, CA (row 51). However, on the Fully Burdened CPFF Labor Rates tab, while Engineer, Systems, Senior is used twice (Rows 43 and 44), and there is no indication as to which site the rates provided in Columns C through L apply.

Would the Government consider inserting a column to show the location of the employee working under the labor category in Column A?

A location column is not needed as the instructions indicate an individual designator in Column B shall be given. The instructions also state that the individual designator shall be given for each individual to distinguish them from one another and shall be assigned to each FTE. There will be some labor categories that contain more than one FTE and thus rows must be added by the Offeror. The instructions will be clarified in the Final RFP.

Section L, Part B, Volume 2 – Mission Support, Paragraph 2.3.d

Item d states: “Provide the Offeror’s approach to track, record, and access Reliability, Availability, and Maintainability (RAM) (e.g., MTBF, System Failure Rate)”.

Would the Government please clarify if offerors are to provide an approach to track, record, and access the data for RAM, MTFB, and System Failure Rates?

This is an innovative area requesting an approach to collect, track, record, and access RAM, MTBF and System Failure Rates in the Mission Support Volume of their proposal.

Section L, Part A General Instructions, Section 2.1.7 File Naming Conventions, Table G-2 and Section 3 Proposal Content and Volumes, Table G-3

There are a couple of discrepancies in the tables. (a) Table G-2 references a Table T-1 in Annex A. However, Table G-3 references a Table SB-1 in Annex A. Please clarify. (b) Table G-3 references an Annex D JV Teaming Agreement. However, Table G-2 only references Annexes A through C. Please clarify.

This will be corrected in the Final RFP.

Section L, Part A General Instructions, Section 2.1.7 File Naming Conventions, Table G-2; Section 3 Proposal Content and Volumes, Tables G-3 and G-4; and Section 4.1 Proposal Submission

Three tables are listed for inclusion in Annex A: Table G-2 lists Table T-1 (Small Business Goals), Table G-3 lists Table SB-1 (Small Business Requirement), and Section 4.1 lists Table MS-2 Small Business Requirement). Will the Government clarify whether there is one or more tables to be submitted in Annex A and provide the format for the table(s)?

SB-1, MS-2, and T-1 are the same table and will be corrected to SB-1 in the Final RFP.

Section L, Part B Specific Instructions, Volumes 1, 3, and 4, and Section M

Section L 3.0, 4.2, and 4.3a. mention that CAGE Code information related to Table ES-2 (Relevant Contract Summary) will be used in the relevancy determination for Corporate Experience and Past Performance. However, Section M does not provide further information on how the content of Volume 1 - Executive Summary will be evaluated. Will the Government provide information on how the other information in Volume 1 will be evaluated?

The Section L, Volume 1 Executive Summary contains tables that are utilized across multiple volumes. The Section L, Volume 1 Executive Summary is not an independent evaluation factor.

Section C, Paragraphs 3.4 Labor Categories & Qualifications, 3.4.1 Summary of Labor Categories, and

3.4.2 Labor Category Descriptions and Qualifications and

Attachment CA-1 Prime Cost Spreadsheet

There appear to be multiple inconsistencies in the numbers of personnel listed in Paragraphs 3.4, 3.4.1, and 3.4.2 with those listed in Attachment CA-1. For example, Attachment CA-1 lists 1 FTE on line 5 for the category "Captain, Master," while Paragraph 3.4.2.1 lists the number of Security Clearances required as "(2) Secret." Similarly, Attachment CA-1 lists 32 FTEs on line 91 for the category "Field Engineer, Missile Defense Agency," while Paragraph 3.4.2.63 lists "(12) Secret" as the Security Clearances required for that labor category. Will the Government align the number of personnel in Attachment CA-1 with the position descriptions, work locations, FTE counts, and clearance levels for personnel in Section C, Paragraphs 3.4, 3.4.1, and 3.4.2?

The Final RFP will address inconsistencies between CA-1 and SOW Section 3.4.

However, the number of security clearances is not intended to indicate the total number of FTEs for a given labor category. The number in parenthesis indicates the number of FTEs that are required to have the specified clearance.

For example, in Attachment CA-1, the labor category of Captain Master increases to two (2) FTEs in Option Year 6.

Section C, Paragraphs 3.4 Labor Categories & Qualifications, 3.4.1 Summary of Labor Categories, and

3.4.2 Labor Category Descriptions and Qualifications and

Attachment CA-1 Prime Cost Spreadsheet

Section 3.4.1 of the PWS and Attachment CA-1 each list a "Facilities Maintenance Technician I" labor category, but Section 3.4.2 of the PWS does not list that labor category. It appears the description in Section

3.4.2.52 is the Facilities Maintenance Technician I rather than the current title of Laborer. Will the Government confirm that 3.4.2.52 is the Facilities Maintenance Technician I?

The Facilities Maintenance Technician I position will be removed from SOW Section 3.4.9. of the Final RFP.

Section L 2. Proposal Format and Submission Will the Government please confirm that the headers and footers are excluded from the margin and font requirements?

The headers and footers are excluded.

Section L 2. Proposal Format and Submission Will the Government please consider reducing the minimum font size for tables, charts, figures, and graphics to 8- point font?

The Government will consider all recommendations. Please refer to the Final RFP for all updates.

Section L 2. Proposal Format and Submission Will the Government please consider reducing the size of the text for proposals to no smaller than 10-point Times New Roman to demonstrate the maximum company capabilities?

The Government will consider all recommendations. Please refer to the Final RFP for all updates.

Section L. Table G-2 Offeror Electronic File Naming Convention

Please confirm that the Mission Support Cross Reference Matrix is excluded from page count.

Yes. That is correct.

Section L Part B Specific Instructions 1. Volume 1 - Executive Summary

Will the Government please confirm that d. Contract Administration is excluded from the 15-page limit in Volume 1?

Yes. That is correct.

Attachment_CA-1_Prime_Cost_Spreadsheet_2.20 Can you please clarify the approach required for distribution of cost from the columns J, L, N, & P to the section B CLIN schedule?

The Government will allocate CLIN ceiling at the time of award based upon projected funding and appropriation types for that contract year. The CLIN ceilings will be based on the proposed costs (including fee) in the CA-1 Attachment.

DRFP L 6, Technical Library: When will all documents directly relevant to the contract solicitation be available and by what delivery method?

The Technical Library CD for this solicitation has been mailed to Offeror's upon request and copies were also distributed during the Range Pre-Solicitation Conference held on March 27th and 28th. Offeror's who have not requested and received the Technical Library on CD may request it by contacting: Lauren Farmer, Contract Specialist at lauren.farmer@navy.mil or (301) 757-9788.

Section L Attachments with the exception of CA-2 have been provided in the

DRAFT RFP.

DSOW 3.1.4.4.1, Scheduled Test and Training Event OT: Will the Overtime Templates required by the solicitation be provided as part of the RFP documentation?

The Overtime Templates will be provided after contract award during the Transition period.

DSOW 3.2.8.1, Physical Security: Will all site-specific security procedures (in addition to the DRFP-listed OPNAVINST 5530.14E Navy Physical Security and Law Enforcement Program), be provided as part of the RFP documentation?

All site specific security procedures will be provided after Contract Award during the Transition period.

OPNAVINST 5530.14E Navy Physical Security and Law Enforcement Program can found online.

Reference Section L, Part A, 1. General, 4th paragraph This section states, “Critical functions include but are not limited to:

Electronic Warfare, Radar Cross Section Measurement; Aerial Targets;

Vessel Operations.”

Reference Section M, III Definitions, B. Other Evaluation Definitions, Principal Entities Definition. This section states, “Critical functions include:

Electronic Warfare, Radar Cross Section Measurement, Aerial Targets, and Vessel Operations.”

Question - Are these areas listed above the only critical functions or are there others?

The words "but are not limited to" will be deleted from the referenced paragraph in Section L of the Final RFP.

Reference Section L, Part B, Volume 4 – Past Performance, This section states, “Offerors are advised that if it does not submit the Release of Adverse Past Performance Authorization Letters with written consent, then the Government will address any past performance issues directly with the principal entity (including JV Team Members), and the Offeror will forfeit the opportunity to participate in any related discussions.”

In Section M, III Definitions, B. Other Evaluation Definitions, Principal Entities Definition, Principal Entity is defined as, (a) the prime Contractor;

(b) JV Team Members; (c) other entities that are proposed to perform at least 20% of the proposed total price for the contract and (d) entities that are proposed to perform a critical function in the performance of the resulting contract.”

Question – If an offeror, as the principal entity submitting this proposal, submits a past performance citation where they were not the prime but a subcontractor, is the offeror required to submit a Release of Adverse Past Performance Authorization Letter?

Per Section L, Volume 4 Past Performance "This authorization letter allows the Government to coordinate past performance issue(s) with the Prime Offeror."

The authorization letter is only for principal entities proposing to support solicitation requirements.

Without an Authorization letter included in the Proposal package:

1) the discussions related to the Subcontractors performance will be held directly with that subcontractor; and

2) the Prime will not be privy to the PP discussions related to the subcontractors performance.

CA-1 Attachment Attachment_CA-1_Prime_Cost_Spreadsheet has several summary tabs that are not calculating correctly. For example, the Option Year 6 value is counted twice in the summary formula for cells J442, J443, J444. Also, cell N442 is calculating ODCs on Travel, and cell N444 is adding G&A on ODCs. Would the Government please provide an updated Attachment CA- 1?

Attachment CA-1 will be updated for the Final RFP.

WD's Will the Government please provide the WD schedules for the Engineering Technicians Levels 1 through 4 (on page 381 of the DRFP) for the Mayport, FL and Wallops, VA work locations?

Per Section J the Offerors can access the WD schedules through the following link: www.wdol.gov.

15-4328 WD for Wallops, VA 15-4540 WD for Mayport, FL

Section L, Part B Specific Instructions, Section 2.3.a requires offerors to describe their approach to implement a Management Information System (MIS) per SOW 3.1.3.

In order to ensure offerors can meet ATR and ATMO needs for this system and do not merely propose an unachievable approach, will the Government include in Section L a requirement for offerors to provide an oral demonstration of their proposed approach and show how and where the offeror has implemented a similar approach and the benefit provided to the Government?

The Government will consider all recommendations. Please refer to the Final RFP for all updates.

Section 2.3 Section M B. III. A. Mission Support Ratings states that an Outstanding rating reflects an exceptional approach and understanding and contains multiple strengths. However, Section M B. II. A. also states that strengths can only be earned in Mission Support 2.3. The ratings therefore appear to emphasize element 2.3 over the other elements and to require multiple strengths there. However, Section L, Part B Specific Instructions, Sections

2.1 Management Approach and 2.2 Transition Phase-In Plan appear to be critical areas for successful contract initiation and performance.

Will the Government consider strengths in Mission Support Sections 2.1 Management Approach and 2.2 Transition Phase-In Plan?

The Government will consider all recommendations. However, the Government does not anticipate a change to this approach. Please refer to the Final RFP for all updates.

Section L 3.1 under Corporate Experience Section L 3.1 under Corporate Experience requires responses to address the six evaluation elements in paragraphs 3.1.1-3.1.6: (1) Range Operations and Maintenance, (2) Deployments, (3) Electronic Warfare, (4) Radar Cross Section Measurement, (5) Aerial Targets, and (6) Vessel Operations. However, the intricacies of operating, fabricating and maintaining the multiple Sea Target configurations (outlined in SOW paragraph 3.3.33) seems to be a critical component of the ATMO support and could be an important element for evaluating the relevant corporate experience of an offeror.

Will the Government consider either adding a 7th element for Sea Targets or combining Sea Targets with paragraph 3.1.6, Vessel Operations?

The Government will consider all recommendations. However, the Government does not anticipate a change to this approach. Please refer to the Final RFP for all updates.

Section L, Part B Specific Instructions, Section 2.1.4 Section L, Part B Specific Instructions, Section 2.1.4 requires offerors to provide an Engineer, Radar Cross Section…