Attachment P9.pdf

Attachment P9

COMET Solicitation N00421-20-R-0003 AMENDMENT 0002 – Q&As

12 September 2020 – 23 September 2020

Question 1): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Page 117 of 133, Section 3.5.2 CPFF Labor Hours states, " At this time, there is no on-site requirement for Norfolk, VA; however, Norfolk on-site labor rates are required by this solicitation in the event that it becomes a requirement in the future". At P3 - Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates rev1, has included a tab to complete. However, the Instructions Tab states," The Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rate would be the sum of both the prime and all subcontractors labor costs, as described above, for that labor category divided by the total number of labor hours for that labor category". Since there are no labor hours provided in Section 3.5.2.1 tables to be distributed to the Prime and/or Subcontractor, compliance with this instruction is not possible. Could the Government please clarify how are Offerors to complete this requirement?

Answer 1): This instruction does not apply to Norfolk on-site labor rates. Attachment P3 has been revised for clarification.

Question 2): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.4.1.6..2, pages 40 though 52 of 133 and Page 118 through 124 of 133; Section 3.5.2.1 CPFF Labor Hours tables; and, At P3 - Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates rev1. Section 3.5.2.1 provides distinct hours for labor categories that have KEY position designations that are described in Section 3.4.1.6..2 . Att P3 tabs do not recognize or support this distinction. Att P6 does recognize these position in its dropdown menu options. Could the Government please clarify how Offerors are to address KEY position designations and hours in Att P3 in order to conform to the Government's requirements?

Answer 2): The labor rates in Attachment P3 are Composite Fully Burdened Rates for each labor category, regardless of clearance or if Key. Attachment P3 has been revised for clarification.

Question 3): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.4.1.6..2, pages 40 though 52 of 133; Section 3.5.2.1, Page 118 through 124 of 133; and, Att P3 - Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates rev1. The following clarifications are requested which resulted from cross-walking the contract labor categories in RFP and tables to the with the Government Labor Category listed in Column A of Att P3 tabs:

- CPFF Term-GOVT Onsite - PAX, Cell A5 states, " (Logistics Information Technology) Journeyman, 15-1221"; Section 3.5.2.1 correlating table states, " (Logistics Information Technology) Senior, 15-1221". The Government has not provided a Journeyman skill level for Logistics Information Technology, only Senior.

- CPFF Term-GOVT Offsite - PAX, Cell A5 states, " (Logistics Information Technology) Journeyman, 15-1221"; Section 3.5.2.1 correlating table states, " (Logistics Information Technology) Senior, 15-1221". The Government has not provided a Journeyman skill level for Logistics Information Technology, only Senior.

- CPFF Term-GOVT Offsite - Norfolk, Cells A5 states, " (Logistics Information Technology), Journeyman, 15-1221"; Section 3.5.2.3 correlating table states, "(Navy Maintenance Systems), Journeyman, 15-1221". The Government has not provided a Journeyman skill level for Logistics Information Technology, only Senior.

-CPFF Term-GOVT Offsite - Norfolk has two (2) labor categories from the Computer and Information Research Scientist field; the correlating table in Section 3.5.2.3 has three (3).

Answer 3): Attachment P3 has been revised as follows: 1) Revised Computer and Information Research

Scientist (Logistics Information Technology), Journeyman to Senior for both CPFF Term - GOVT Onsite AND Offsite - St. Inigoes and Norfolk. (NOTE: Section L, Part B, paragraph 3.5.2.3 has not been revised as there should be Computer and Information Research Scientist (Navy Maintenance Systems), Journeyman, Key and non-Key, and Computer and Information Research

Scientist (Logistics Information Technology), Senior. Attachment P3 only has two entries as it does not distinguish between the Key and non-Key labor category.

Question 4): Att P3 - Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates rev1; CPFF Term-GOVT Onsite - Norfolk. The

Government has stated, "Norfolk on-site labor rates are required by this solicitation in the event that it becomes a requirement in the future". Since no hours have been provided could the Government clarify the labor categories listed are the same as those prescribed within CPFF Term- GOVT Offsite - Norfolk.

Answer 4): Attachment P3 instructions were revised stating the labor rates for CPFF Term - On-site Norfolk will not be calculated by hours. The labor categories prescribed within CPFF Term– Off-site Norfolk are the same labor categories that require Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates for CPFF Term – Onsite- Norfolk.

Question 5): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.5.2.2, page 120 of 133 lists two (2) separate General and Operations Manager (Project Manager), Senior, 11-1021 labor categories, one with hours and the other without. CPFF Term-GOVT Offsite - PAX only has one (1) General and Operations Manager (Project Manager), Senior, 11-1021 listed. Could the Government clarify which of the 2 positions listed in Section 3.5.2.2 is designated Key and make the required update, if required, to CPFF Term-GOVT Offsite - PAX, Cell A16?

Answer 5): Section 3.5.2.2 has been updated to designate General and Operations Manager (Program

Manager), Senior (KEY) and General and Operations Manager (Project Manager), Journeyman (KEY) as Key labor categories.

Question 6): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Sections 3.5.2.1, 3.5.2.2, and 3.5.2.3, pages 119, 121, and 124 of 133. Within these sections, the Software Developer (Navy Maintenance Systems), Senior, 15- 1252 and Software Developer (Performance Tools), Senior, 15-1252 positions are inconsistency titled 'Key' in some instances and not key in others. The labor category descriptions in Section 3.4.1.6..2, pages 40 though 52 of 133 do not list 'non-key". Could the Government clarify if it is missing designations for these labor categories as "non-key" or will it update the tables and Att P3 to reflect its intent?

Answer 6): As noted in Sections 3.4.1.6.2.31 and 3.4.1.6.2.32, the Software Developer (Navy Maintenance

Systems), Senior and Software Developer (Performance Tools), Senior are Key positions.

Sections 3.5.2.1, 3.5.2.2, and 3.5.2.3 (tables) have been updated for consistency. The P3 Attachment has not been revised as it does not distinguish between Key and Non-Key positions.

Attachments P6 and P7 have been updated to eliminate non-Key positions for both specialized Software Developer, Senior labor categories in the dropdowns.

Question 7): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.1.2 , page 113 of 133 states, 'Section B prices shall be provided separately in one digital data copy in MS Office 2016 Excel format. Can the Government confirm that these four (4) Burdened Composite Labor Rates tables are the same as the data Offerors are required to submit in Att P3 - Hourly Burdened Composite rates rev1? If so, please confirm that the Government is asking Offerors to submit the same data in two (2) separate files titled Section B and Att P3?

Answer 7): The Section B prices mentioned in Section L, Part B, paragraph 3.1.2 of the Solicitation are not the B-1 Tables listed in Section B on pages 5 – 15. The Section B prices are the Cost Ceilings for the CLIN (e.g. 0001) and SubCLINs. The four (4) Section B, B-1 tables are the same data as the Offeror is required to submit in Attachment P3. The Offeror shall submit the Burdened Composite Labor Rates by completing Attachment P3 only.

Question 8): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Sections B, pages 5 through 18 of 133. Within each of the four

(4) Labor Term titles, it states, "Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates (Regardless of Clearance or if Key)" This statement is not listed in the instructions or tabs of Att P3 -Hourly

Burdened Composite Labor Rates rev1. Can the Government confirm this same language applies to the calculations of hourly burdened composite labor rates in Att P3?

Answer 8): Attachment P3, Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates instructions have been revised to incorporate “regardless of Clearance or if Key” language.

Question 9): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.1.2 , page 113 of 133 states, 'Section B prices shall be provided separately in one digital data copy in MS Office 2016 Excel format. (Only required from Prime Contractor.)'. Will the Government be providing the Excel template? If no, can the Government provide additional guidance on the structure of this submission file separate tabs for [unfinished question].

Answer 9): A separate Excel template will not be provided. The Section B prices shall be in accordance with the CLINs listed on pages 14 - 18.

Question 10): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Sections B, pages 5 through 18 of 133; and Section 3.5.2, pages 118 through 124 of 133. In cross-walking Section B and CPFF Labor Hours, no table of contractor labor categories (and associated hours) are provided for Government On-site - Norfolk, VA. Without labor hours, composite rates cannot be calculated for Table B submission for On-site Norfolk requirements, according to Instructions. Can the Government please clarify how Offerors are to comply with completing this section of Table B?

Answer 10): Because there are no hours listed in Section L for On-Site Norfolk, composite rates for on-site

Norfolk labor categories shall be provided without utilizing the formula noted in the Attachment P3 instructions.

Question 11): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.1.2 , page 113 of 133 states, "This Volume shall also contain a copy of Section B with the Contract Line Item (CLIN) and Sub-CLIN Unit Prices and, for evaluation purposes, the Total Prices filled in using the estimated quantities value in the solicitation and the instructions below." Could the Government confirm that Table B also includes submission of B-2 FEE (page 13 of 133) and B-3 MAN-HOURS starting on page 14 of 133 and that is also to be included as part of Volume 3 narrative information - separate from the digital data copy?

Answer 11): Table B does not include submission of B-2 FEE on page 13 or B-3 MAN-HOURS on page 14.

Pursuant to Section 3.3.2.3 of Section L, the Offeror shall identify the fee per hour for CPFF Labor Term tasking in the worksheet titled “B2 Fee” within Attachment P3, Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates, rev. 2.

Question 12): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.1.2 , page 113 of 133 states, "Section B prices shall be provided separately in one digital data copy in MS Office 2016 Excel format". Could the Government confirm that Section B - Supplies or Services and Prices includes B-1 Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates (excluding fee) and Streamlined Ordering Procedures for Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) (Labor Term CLINs and/or Orders), B-2 FEE (page 13 of 133) and B-3 MAN-HOURS starting on page 14 of 133 and that is also to be included as part of the separate Excel file?

Answer 12): The B-1 Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates and B-2 FEE shall be submitted by completing the required worksheets in Attachment P3. The only section in Section B that requires completion is the total proposed cost by CLINs (pages 14 through 18).

Question 13): Att P3 Hourly Burdened Composite Labor Rates and Att P6 - Cost Summary. Att P3 asks Offerors to propose hourly burdened composite labor rates for identifed government labor categories at four distinct locations - 2 each off-site and 2 each on government site. However, Att P6 asks for composite rate in two (2) locations. This would make 2 different sets of composite rate calculations. The issue of no labor hours are assigned to on government site for Norfolk still exists to conform to the instructions. Could the Government confirm it wants Offerors to undertake a more detailed consolidation of costs by further blending the rates once again by combining Pax and Norfolk into a single rate according to the instructions?

Answer 13): The Offeror shall not undertake a more detailed consolidation of costs by further blending the rates by combining Pax and Norfolk into a single rate. Direct labor rates may vary by location, and overhead rates may also vary by location. As needed, Offerors are requested to make one copy each of Attachments P6 and P7 (for subcontractors) and annotate in file description or file header whether it is for St. Inigoes or for Norfolk. Only one ODC worksheet in Attachment P6 shall be completed. Attachments P6 and P7 instructions, as well as Section L, paragraph 3.3.1 have been revised to include this instruction.

Question 14): Att P6 - Cost Summary (Prime) and Att P7 - Subcontractor Cost Summary, Instructions, Cell B14 and Cell B21 respectfully states, in column F, the Offerors [subcontractor] shall assign each individual person their own line regardless of if they work in Year 1 or not [enter the name of the proposed individual for that position regardless of if they work in Year 1 or not]. Could the Government clarify it is asking Offerors/ Subcontractors to provide actual employee [contingent hire] names for every allocated position regardless of Key or Non-Key designation this early in the process? We recommend the Government only require names for Key individuals as presented in the Volume 1: Technical with all others labeled "TBD".

Answer 14): Every allocated labor category (Key and non-Key) should either have a name, or indicate

"contingent hire" or “prospective hire.” All Key labor categories shall have a name or be designated “contingent hire.”

Question 15): Att P7 - Subcontractor Cost Summary, Instructions state, "In the Header of each worksheet, the subcontractor shall insert their proposal number". Could the Government confirm this is the RFP Solicitation Number N0042120R0003 or another number determined by the Subcontractor or Prime?

Answer 15): The proposal number is a unique Contractor-provided number provided by the Prime and unique to this solicitation. It is at the discretion of the Prime and Subcontractor if proposal numbers are used.

Question 16): Att P6 - Cost Summary, ODC tab. Could the Government confirm Offerors are to use the data provided in COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.5.1.1 Travel/Material ODC (CLIN 0008) associated with CPFF Term (LOE) Labor, page 117 of 133 to populate this spreadsheet?

Answer16): Offerors shall use the data provided in Section L, Part B 3.5.1.1, Travel/Material ODC, to populate the ODC tab in Attachment P6.

Question 17): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.3.1, page 114 of 133 states, "Offerors shall ensure the digital copy of Attachment P6 and P7 submitted is unprotected and unlocked, with formulae intact to show mathematical operations. The spreadsheet shall also be formatted on letter size (8.5 X 11) paper and included in the Offeror’s cost narrative Volume 3 Price/Cost proposal submittal.

The Offeror shall use the CPFF Labor Term Summary worksheet and ODC worksheet to break out total proposed costs by CLINs". Could the Government please clarify it is asking the Prime Contractor to submit in its Volume 3 Price/Cost proposal only two (2) worksheets from Att P6 (CPFF LOE Summary and ODC), and that the subcontractor is to submit in its supporting separate Volume 3 Price/Cost proposal only two (2) worksheets from Att P7 (CPFF Labor Term Summary and ODC)?

Answer 17): The Prime contractor shall submit Attachment P6 in its entirety (all worksheets). The

Subcontractor shall submit Attachment P7 in its entirety (all worksheets). The CPFF Labor Term Summary worksheet and ODC worksheet shall be used to complete total proposed cost by CLINs in Section B, pages 14 through 18.

Question 18): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.3.1, page 114 of 133 states, " The spreadsheet shall also be formatted on letter size (8.5 X 11) paper and included in the Offeror’s cost narrative Volume 3 Price/Cost proposal submittal". The government's direction in Section 2.2 page 106 of 133 states, "When using Government supplied templates (e.g. Attachment P3, Attachment P6, Attachment P7), no modification to font or scaling required." Could the Government please clarify these spreadsheets are exempt from margins and font size requirements?

Answer 18): Attachments P3, P6, and P7 are exempt from the font size, style and margin requirements outlined

I Section L, Part A, paragraph 2.2. The formatting (including font size, style and margins) utilized in Attachment P3, P6 and P7 shall not be changed.

Question 19): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.3.1, page 114 of 133 states, "Offerors shall submit their fully completed price/cost proposal utilizing the Cost Summary Spreadsheet (Attachments P6 and P7 for the Prime and Subcontractor respectively). Attachments P6 and P7 shall be provided separately in MS Office 2016 Excel format." No instructions were provided for subcontractors to submit directly to the Government given the proprietary nature of their base salary determinations, fringe, overhead, and g&a rates. Could the Government please clarify how subcontractors are to submit its unsanitized version of Att P7 for compliance as well as its Price Narrative including the last three (3) years of actual indirect rates, escalation rates, and any additional additive rates or factors and its proprietary Total Professional Compensation Plan?

Answer 19): As stated in Section L, Part A, section 2.3, a point of contact name and email address will be submitted by the Prime contractor for themselves and for each individual Subcontractor. The Prime and each Subcontractor will be provided a unique “Drop-Off Request Code” which will allow them to submit proposal documents to the Government independently as needed. The Prime and Subcontractor points of contact will receive an email that contains their unique “Drop-Off Request Code” no less than 3 days prior to the proposal due date. This code authorizes access to submit proposal documents securely via DoD SAFE.

Question 20): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.3.6, page 116 of 133 states, " When completing the

Cost Summary Spreadsheet (Attachments P6 and P7), the Offeror shall not utilize any fully burdened hourly rates when pricing the labor of its employees." Offerors are required to submit fully burdened rate minus fee for all categories it lists in these files. Could the Government please clarify its intent or provide additional clarification?

Answer 20): Fully burdened rates minus fee for all labor categories should only be identified in Attachment P3 and B-1 tables.

Question 21): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section B3, ITEM NO 0008 through 0016. The line to place

NSP is missing from these item numbers. Please confirm Offerors are required to complete this Section B3 with the data listed by the Government or from Att P6- Cost Summary, Total Summary and ODC tabs?

Answer 21): Item No 0008 through 0016 are Not Separately Priced (NSP) CLINs that are for identification of

Funding Appropriations only.

Question 22): COMET RFP , Section 1.2.1.1 states "Offerors shall only submit resumes for the key personnel positions listed in Section C, Paragraph 3.4.1.1. Offerors are prohibited from proposing key personnel in out years (years 2-5) that differ from the key personnel proposed in Year 1 of the ordering period." This could potentially increase the risk of performance in case of death , and other unforeseen circumstances. Could the government remove this term from the requirements?

Answer 22): For evaluation purposes only, Offerors are prohibited from proposing key personnel in out years

(Years 2 - 5) that differ from the key personnel proposed in Year 1 of the ordering period.

Question 23): COMET RFP , General Question : Will the govt consider relaxing the Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) certification requirement such that it can be obtained during a fixed period upon contract award as it could restrict competition. ?

Answer 23): No. These are NAVSEA rules. Personnel cannot do specific 3M tasking without the certification.

Level 1 is a short online class.

Question 24): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Page 44 of 133, Section 3.4.1.6.17/18. The Experience requirements for 3.4.1.6.2.18 General and Operations Manager (Project Manager), Journeyman (BLS SOC Code 11-1021) (Non-Key) and 3.4.1.6.2.17 General and Operations Manager (Project Manager), Journeyman (BLS SOC Code 11-1021) (Key) are the same as 3.4.1.6.2.15 General and Operations Manager (Program Manager), Senior (BLS SOC Code 11-1021) listed above - both have a minimum of 10 years. This contradicts the guidance in 3.4.1.4.2 Journeyman. A Journeyman labor category has three (3) to ten (10) years of experience and a BA/BS degree.

Could the Government clarify the years of experience requirements for the Journeyman level of this BLS SOC Code?

Answer 24): Statement of Work Sections 3.4.1.6.2.17 and 3.4.1.6.2.18 have been revised.

Question 25): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Page 47 of 133, Section 3.4.1.6.2.29 Software Developer, Journeyman (BLS SOC Code 15-1252) appears to be integrated with Software Developers and Software Quality Assurance Analysts and Testers (SOC Code 151256) occupation. Could the Government confirm it will allow Offerors to use this BLS SOC Code in lieu of the code provided?

Answer 25): BLS SOC Code 15-1252 is new as part of the 2018 BLS SOC guide. BLS SOC Code 15-1256 is not part of the 2018 BLS SOC guide. As such, Offerors should use BLS SOC Code 15-1252.

Question 26): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Section 3.4.1.4. Software Developer (Navy Maintenance

Systems), Senior, 15-1252 and Software Developer (Performance Tools), Senior, 15-1252 (assuming non-key as per Tab in Att P6 and P7) do not have labor category description or BLS classification as provided in l similar classifications. Could the Government please provide?

Answer 26): Software Developer (Navy Maintenance Systems), Senior (Non-Key) and Software Developer

(Performance Tools), Senior (Non-Key) are not a requirement for this effort and have been removed.

Question 27): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Page 50 of 133, Section 3.4.1.6.2.38, Web and Digital

Interface Designer BLS SOC Code 15-1255 appears to be integrated with Web Developers and Digital Interface Designers (SOC Code 151257). Could the Government confirm it will allow Offerors to use this BLS SOC Code in lieu of the code provided?

Answer 27): BLS SOC Code 15-1255 is new as part of the 2018 BLS SOC guide. BLS SOC Code 15-1257 is not part of the 2018 BLS SOC guide. As such, Offerors should use BLS SOC Code 15-1255.

Question 28): COMET RFP N00421-20-R-0003, Page 51 of 133, Section 3.4.1.7.Non-Professional/Non-Service

Contract Act (SCA) labor qualifications. The Government did not release SCA/WD schedule with its release. As it reads it appears to be non-SCA however, the DO NOT USE OR DELETE tab is Att P6 and P7 designates these positions as SCA and provides a code. The SCA code is not within Section 3.4.1.7 descriptions. Can the Government clarify these positions and if SCA, can you release/provide the appropriate SCA/WD schedule?

Answer 28): This is a non-SCA contract. SCA codes have been eliminated from the dropdown titles in

Attachments P6 and P7 to avoid confusion.

Question 29): Given the complexity and number of sub elements included within each Sample Task would the Government increase the page limit for each Task from 10 to 15 pages? This would provide space to address both the required details of the proposed solution and the assumptions, manpower, risk responses, and deployment considerations needed to successfully accomplish them.

Answer 29): The Government has modified the page limit for each Task from 10 to 15 pages.

Question 30): Based on the answer to Question 17 included in the Modification Number 0001 P8 attachment, is the offeror required to submit a questionnaire (CPAQ) for contract period of performance (POP) that is still in execution and thus do not have a CPAR rating, even if the previous POPs of the same past performance contract have CPARs and are included in Volume 2?

Answer 30): If there is an active contract with previous PoPs that have CPARs available, no additional CPAQ is requested. If there is an active contract for which no CPAR is available (i.e. it is in it's first year of execution and no CPAR has been completed yet), a CPAQ would be accepted to assist the Government in evaluating quality for that Past Performance record.

Question 31): Upon further review, the following formula inconsistencies was discovered in the P6 Cost

Summary attachment that could cause confusion with other offerors:

- For All CPFF LOE Tabs (Year 1-5) o Cell H61 – formula does not include the entire section for site and labor. The formula is only capturing through row 16 (should be through row 54).

- CPFF LOE Summary Tab o Cell K504 – incorrectly linking to CPFF LOE Year 3 (should be CPFF LOE Year 4) o Cell L504 – incorrectly linking to CPFF LOE Year 3 (should be CPFF LOE Year 5)

- TOTAL SUMMARY Tab o Cell C32 is missing Travel total o Cell C33 is missing Material total o Cell C34 is missing the TOTAL ODC formula

Answer 31): Attachments P6 Cost Summary and Attachment P7 Subcontractor Cost Summary have been revised to reflect formula inconsistencies as referenced as well as unnecessary cells for foreign allowance in Attachment P7.

Question 32): Are subcontractors required to complete and provide a response to Section K provision 5252.209-

9511 Organizational Conflicts of Interest Representation (Services)(NAVAIR)(APR 1989)?

Answer 32): Yes, both the prime contractor and all proposed subcontractor teammates are required to check the appropriate box within 5252.209-9511 and submit as part of their proposals.