MSE Q and As.pdf

Questions and Answers RFP N00421-23-R-0004 - Mission Systems Engineering (MSE)

Attachment Q1

Question Number Document

Section / Paragraph Page Question Response

Q1:

Attachment

T2

Are we permitted to delete the second degree table from the Education section of Attachment T2 if it is not needed?

The Government will not permit Offerors to alter the Attachment T2. As stated in Attachment T2, “Note to Offeror: Tables should remain intact and be completed per the instructions. Unbolded Instructions may be deleted as desired.” Any section that does not apply, insert N/A.

Q2: RFP

L.A.2.2;

L.A.3.3;

L.B.1.0

94 of 126 and 98 of 126

Please confirm that we may delete the headers and footers from the government attachments to provide space for our proposal response information (e.g., RFP-required section and page numbers (per RFP Section L.A.2.2), as well as company name, submission date, solicitation number, and non-disclosure statement).

The Government will not permit Offerors to alter the headers and footers in the Government provided attachments. As stated in the RFP, Paragraph 3.4:

“Each volume shall contain the following information, which shall be considered “front matter” and not counted towards the page limits in the table above.” As detailed in the RFP, Paragraph 3.4, Table 1, each attachment is submitted as part of a Volume, which includes “front matter."

Q3: RFP

Given that the advertised planned release date of this RFP per the NAVAIR industry day held April 18th was advertised as June 15, 2023, and given the fact that the Memorial Day Holiday falls within the proposed response time, would the Government consider a two-week extension of the due date to ensure a thoughtful and complete response from potential bidders?

The RFP will be extended by three (3) days. The new due date for proposals is June 15, 2023. This information will be updated with an Amendment to the RFP early next week.

Q4: RFP L.A.2.2; 94

Will the government approve Arial Narrow 10 point font for tables and graphics, for readability and clarity?

The Government will only permit Times Roman 10 point font for tables and graphics.

Q5: RFP

L, Part B, Vol pg 110 Table Non-Performance

Based TERM Government Off-

Site Hours

There are three "General Clerk I, 43-9061 (SCA) positions listed, items 24 thru 26 in table.

Should these lines read General Clerk I, General Clerk II, and General Clerk III?

Yes. The table has been updated in Section L.

AMD 0001

AMD 0003

Attachment Q1

Q6: RFP

L, Part B, Vol

pg. 112 Table Performance

Based

COMPLETION

Government On-

Site Hours

For Shipping/Receiving Clerk (SCA), should the Work Yr III value be 383 instead of 385, similar to other positions in that year?

The 385 hours are the correct value for Shipping/Receiving Clerk (SCA).

Q7: RFP

L, Part B, Vol

pg. 114 Table Performance

Based

COMPLETION

Contractor Off-

Site Hours

The total hours for Work Yr V is given as 11,631. The total of all hours in that column adds up to 13,099. Please confirm total hours.

The total hours for Work Yr V is 11,631. The hours in that column for Computer Systems Analyst, Journeyman, 15-1211 is 409, not 1,877. The table has been revised in Section L.

Q8: RFP

L, Part B, Vol

pg. 113 Table Performance

Based

COMPLETION

Contractor Off-

Site Hours

Total hours for Computer Systems Analyst, Journeyman, given as 1,877. Total hours for Computer Systems Analyst, Journeyman are incorrect, should be 3,345 (355+352+372+389+1,877)

See Response to Q7. Work Yr V for Computer Systems Analyst, Journeyman, should be 409 and not 1,877. The total hours remain 1,877.

Q9: RFP

L, Part B, Vol

pg. 104, para

3.3.1.2.1

Escalation Guidance: SCA WDs are governed by the Department of Labor and contractors do not have a reliable way of forecasting changes to SCA WDs. To ensure our labor escalation estimates are fair and reasonable, can the Government clarify whether escalation should also be applied to SCA labor categories?

Escalation should be applied in accordance with your company policy and historical escalation. Evaluation for cost realism will be based on historical escalation.

Q10:

Att C1 - Cost

Workbook and Att 08

Wage Determinatio n

N/A Section J -

Attachments

The minimum direct labor rates for SCA covered positions contained in the Minimum Direct Labor Rates sheet of the Att C1 - Cost Workbook do not match the hourly wage rates in Att 08 - Wage Determination provided with the Solicitation. Should offerors adjust the direct labor rates in the Att C1 - Cost Workbook to match the Wage Determination? Please advise.

The minimum direct labor rates for SCA covered positions should reflect the hourly wage rates in Att 08 - Wage Determinations. Offerors should be cognizant of Executive Order 14026 which increases the minimum wage for Federal Contractors in service contracts covered by SCA to $16.20 per hour.

An updated C1 Cost Workbook has been provided.

Attachment Q1

Q11: RFP

Section L, 2.0

Proposal Format

2.2 / pg 94 Attachment T2 - Key Personnel

Per questions, attachments provided by the Government are not to be altered. In Attachment T2 - Key Personnel: Requesting ability to change blue-on-blue text in the "click here to add text" boxes and headers to black for readability.

For Attachment T2, the color of text may be changed for readability purposes.

Section L, Part A, para 2.2 revised.

Q12: RFP Section L, RFP Section 3.5.2.4pg 97

The RFP states that the package shall be stamped or marked “Controlled Unclassified Information” and “Source Selection Information

– See FAR 2.101 and 3.104.” Please confirm that this only applies to offerors submitting via an alternate method (e.g., via carrier or hand-carried). If proposals submitted via PIEE require this marking, please confirm that offerors can alter the headers and footers of the government forms (e.g., P1, T1) to include this marking.

The package shall be stamped or marked "Controlled Unclassified Information" and "Source Selection Information - See FAR 2.101 and 3.104" when "...an alternate method to PIEE is utilized to submit the proposal" and is authorized by the Contracting Officer (Section L, Part A, para 3.5.2).

Q13: RFP

Section L, RFP Section 3.2

The RFP states that offerors should submit proposals in four separate volumes. Please confirm that the required attachments should be merged into one volume (i.e., merge the T1 and T2 files into one compiled document with a title page and TOC) and not submitted as separate attachments that make up the volume (i.e., a separate file for the title page, TOC, T1s, and T2s).”

Offerors may provide the attachments in either of the formats described: 1) merged into one document to create the volume; or 2) provided as separate documents within the volume.

AMD 0005

AMD 0004