Sec_J_Attch_J-5_RFP_QA-01.pdf

USS Maine FY17 ERO, N4523A-16-R-0021

RFP Question_Answers-01, 22 July 2016 # RFP Document

Reference

Detailed (Paragraph)

Reference

Comment Recommended Revision Government Response

1 RFP Section C-1.3.b Section C-1.3.b of the RFP states, "Contractor personnel shall be available for informational meetings with Government technical personnel or the USS

MAINE PSNS&IMF Project Team to discuss the direction, progress, results, and/or issues that occur during the performance of this contract. "

Provide an estimate of the number, duration, and required number of attendees for these meetings to provide Offerors a reasonable basis of estimate.

The actual number and frequency of meetings will be determined at the post-award conference but may change throughout the course of the period of performance due to condition changes, performance issues or material condition problems, among other variables. The Government expects that offerors will utilize historical information from previous availabilities with similar complexity and size and bid accordingly

2 RFP Section C-1.5.b.8 Section C-1.5.b.8 of the RFP requires the Contractor to, "Attend daily and weekly Project Progress, Production /Planning, and Plan of the Day meetings as required by the Contracting Officer. " Section C-1.5.b.10 further requires the Contractor to, "Coordinate submission of other reports as specified by the

Contracting Officer. "

1) Provide an estimate of the number, duration, and required number of attendees for these meetings; and

2) Clarify if the reports considered "...as specified by the Contracting Officer" referenced in Section C-1-5.b.10 refer to only those listed in Attachment J-2.

(a) The actual number and frequency of meetings will be determined at the post-award conference but may change throughout the course of the period of performance due to condition changes, performance issues or material condition problems, among other variables. The Government expects that offerors will utilize historical information from previous availabilities with similar complexity and size and bid accordingly.

(b) The Government expects that the offerors review the RFP to identify any and all required reports called out by the requirement and bid accordingly.

3 RFP Section C-1.6.c RFP Section C-1.6.c states, "During the period of ship availability, each contractor employee is anticipated to work 8-hour work shifts totaling a 40-hour week, within the hours allotted to complete the contract work." In the entire remainder of the RFP or SOW, there is no discussion of overtime being allowed in the best interest of the Government to meet schedule requirements.

Clarify if a Contractor will be constrained to straight time only ("15 calendar"), and, if not, modify RFP Section C-1.6.b.1 and other locations as applicable to include allowances for Contractor use of overtime to meet schedule requirements

Contractor is not constrained to straight time only. Amendment will clairfy OT in Sec J attach J-4.

4 RFP Section C-2.3 RFP Section C-2.3 appears to have been extracted from a contract which deals exclusively with preservation services and thus is both overly-restrictive to personnel NOT involved in preservation (e.g.; "All personnel shall be trained and/or knowledgeable in all aspects of corrosion identification, corrosion control, SSPC surface preparation standards, use of various hand and power tools, and coating application methodologies."), and lacks requirements for personnel involved in other aspects of the SOW, such as welding or NDT.

Expand this section to specify the applicable qualification requirements for personnel involved in specific aspects of the contract, not just preservation.

Language will be updated in amendment.

5 RFP Section C-2.4 RFP Section C-2.4 states, "The Government will determine if the work is required and potentially affordable ....the Government and Contractor may meet to discuss...and evaluate costs prior to submittal of the CFR.[emphasis added]" However, the list of CFR contents in this RFP section does not require a ROM to be included in the package.

Clarify if a ROM for contractor correction of the as-found condition is desired with every CFR, or if not, how affordability and costs will be evaluated and by whom.

The CFR process does not require a ROM for every CFR. The Governemnt

Request for Contract Change (RCC) process will be used to evaluate costs related to CFRs.

6 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0003 RFP local Clause RMC C-2-0003 states, "Paragraph 2 of each work items will list drawings/plans, and references without prefix, zeros, or suffix letters which identify revisions or amendments. The contractor shall be responsible for accomplishing the requirements of the most current revision issued and incorporated into the solicitation and resultant contract." However, this conflicts with RFP Section C-2.2.a, which states, "Whenever specifications, standards, drawings, publications or other documents are cited without issue number, revision, date or amendment number identified, the revision, date or amendment in effect as of the date of the contract shall apply." These two sections are in conflict, and, furthermore, documents "...in effect as of the date of the contract..." may not be the same document version in effect at the time of proposal submission that formed the Offeror's basis of estimate.

Delete Clause RMC C-2-0003 to alleviate the conflict, and further modify RFP

Section C-2.2.a to read "Whenever specifications, standards, drawings, publications or other documents are cited without issue number, revision, date or amendment number identified, the revision, date or amendment in effect as of the date of proposal submission shall apply."

Clause will be deleted by amendment. Sec C-2.2a will remain unchanged.

7 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0009 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0009.(1) states, "Needed repairs and corrective action to be considered under this provision will be submitted to the Government in the form of an Inspection Deficiency Report (IDR)...."

Clarify how the IDR differs from the Condition Found Report (CFR) required by

Section C-2.4, which appears to serve the same purpose.

Clause will be deleted by amendment.

8 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0011 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0011 states, "If delays greater than those indicated are encountered, the contractor shall immediately notify the Contracting

Officer...."

Confirm that, for the purpose of this clause, "...those indicated..." refers to Clause

RMC C-2-0052 (Delay/Disruption), which states: "Disruption due to minor delays in obtaining access to spaces and operation of equipment are to be expected. A minor delay is defined as two (2) hours or less."

Yes, "..those indicated…" in RMC C-2-0011 refers to RMC C-2-0052.

9 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0011 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0011 states, "Assuming the contractor has met the specification requirements, the contractor should, for pricing purposes, plan on stated delay[s] occurring." A two hour delay for just one of the 17 job sites depicted in the schedule could involve up to 40 man-hours (assuming a 15 calendar). Several of these delays, or delays affecting multiple job sites (i.e.;

drydock evacuation), will quickly have a very material cost impact.

Specify the number of expected two-hour delays which an Offeror can use to form a valid basis of estimate in complying with the requirement to include them in the price.

Government is unable to quantify the # of two-hour delays over the course of the 12.5 month POP.

10 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0013 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0013 states, "The Contractor is responsible for providing an experienced Safety Inspector/Fire Marshal who will accomplish daily inspections of the Contractor's entire work area on the ship, together with the

Contracting Office’s Safety Representative. This Inspector or Fire Marshal shall not be one of the Contractor's supervisors or superintendents normally assigned to the ship."

Request the Government clarify if a full-time dedicated Contractor project Safety

Inspector/Fire Marshall is required to be staffed, or if the daily inspection can be conducted by an otherwise-assigned individual except as noted.

NAVSEA Standard Items govern this requirement. Clause only stipulates that

Inspector/Marshall shall not be a contractor supervisor or superintendent normally assigned to the ship.

11 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0023 RFP Clause RMC C-2-0023 states, "After receipt of award and prior to starting work aboard the vessel, the contractor must submit a list of employees who will work aboard ship to the Commanding Officer of the ship VIA the Project

Manager. The list should be on company letterhead, include each employee's name, social security number, and security clearance when required, and bear the signature of a company official."

This clause appears intended for work performed on ships physically located outside the PSNS Controlled Industrial Area (CIA). For ships inside the CIA, access to the ship is not controlled by the ship Commanding Officer via crew members topside, but rather, is controlled at the CIA entry points by PSNS. Furthermore, RFP Section C-2.5 (Navy Installations, Badging, and Access Requirements) directs

Offerors to Work Item 042-01-001, which contains detailed instructions for obtaining base and CIA Access.

Request the Government delete RFP Clause RMC C-2-0023 as not applicable to this availability, and also because it unnecessarily propagates Personally-

Identifiable Information (PII).

Clause will be deleted by amendment.

12 RFP Section F CLIN 0001 POP is "03-JAN-2017 to 30-NOV-2017." However, the first production activity listed in the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-

Specification 042-01-001 is shown to start 9 January 2017. Starting the POP six calendar days (including a weekend) before the first production activity does not allow any time for planning the work and almost guarantees a faulty start.

Request the Government back-up the POP start date, as well as the award date, by at least two months to allow adequate time for project stand-up and detailed work planning (TWDs, etc.).

Amendment will change POP to 1 Dec 2016 - 15 Dec 2017

13 RFP Section F CLIN 0001 POP is "03-JAN-2017 to 30-NOV-2017." However, the last production activity listed in the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-

Specification 042-01-001 ends on or about 28 November 2017. Ending the contractual POP so close to the end of the last production activity does not allow enough time for work site close-out, equipment removal, final certifications and signatures, final reporting/project meetings, general project stand-down after completion of production work, and so on. Please be advised that it the contractual POP ends 30 November, that is exactly when

PSNS-issued contractor employee security badges will expire, preventing any access to the base and CIA.

Request the Government extend the POP end date, by at least several weeks to allow adequate time for project close-out after completion of the last event.

Amendment will change POP to 1 Dec 2016 - 15 Dec 2017

14 RFP Section L.4.0 RFP Section L.4.0 states, "The narrative text material in the all volumes shall be typed or printed in a font with the type no smaller than size 10 using not less than standard single line spacing."

Request the Government clarify if the "10" is 10 point or 10 pitch. This refers to the word processing software (e.g. Microsoft Word) font size

"10".

15 RFP Section L.5.0.f RFP Section L.5.0.f requires submission of a Small Business Subcontracting

Plan. However, there is no mention of evaluating the plan in Section M.

Request the Government clarify if Offerors' Small Business Subcontracting Plans will be evaluated, and if so, how.

Will correct in amendment. Large businesses only are required to submit Small

Business Subcontracting Plans in accordance with Sec L. 4.0 para. f and HQ L-2-

0009.

16 RFP Section L.5.0.d RFP Section L.5.0.d states that "Offerors shall submit the Past Performance information in the format specified. Offerors should note the requirement to distribute questionnaires and notify the Contracting Office of Past

Performance references prior to the closing date of this solicitation." Other portions of Section L which describe the actual requirements for the Past

Performance volume do not include a requirement to distribute questionnaires or notify KOs.

Request the Government delete this sentence, or clarify the requirement to which it refers.

Will correct in amendment.

17 RFP Section L.6.0 RFP Section L.6.0 states in part, "No award will be made to any offeror who does not possess and provide proof of the following: 1. Either a NAVSEA

Notice 5000 certification, or Society for Protective Coatings (SSPC) QP-1, or

Master Ship Repair Agreement (MSRA), or provide evidence of meeting the requirements of paragraph 3 and 4 of Enclosure 1 of NAVSEA Instruction

4280.2C (for MSRA)."

NAVSEAINST 4280.2C was canceled and superseded by CNRMCINST 4280.1, which states on in paragraph 4.g, "Neither the MSRA nor the ABR is to be used to evaluate the qualification requirements for submarine repair work."

Request the Government remove reference to NAVSEAINST 4280.2C, as well as remove reference to use of MSRA qualification requirements in the evaluation of competency for submarine work."

Will correct in amendment.

18 RFP Section L.6.1 RFP Section L.6.1, Sub-Factor 1.3.d, Schedule Performance, requires Offerors to "Provide a list of Other Direct Labor (ODL) personnel expected to be used in the accomplishment of this requirement." Attachment J-4 requires the pricing to be segregated by Work Item/E-Specification.

Request the Government clarify if ODL individuals should be priced as part of every Work Item (pro-rated) or aggregated into the applicable zero-series Work

Items and/or Work Item 992-10-001.

Priced in Work Item 992-10-001

19 RFP Section L.6.3 Section 2.0, Summary of Cost Data, paragraph b

RFP Section L.6.3, Section 2.0, Summary of Cost Data, paragraph b makes reference to Attachment J-5, but no Attachment J-5 is shown in Section J of the RFP.

Request the Government clarify the reference to Section J. Will correct in amendment.

20 RFP Section L.6.3 Section 2.0, Summary of Cost Data, paragraph b

RFP Section L.6.3, Section 2.0, Summary of Cost Data, paragraph b states, "The offeror shall provide a completed copy of the five-way breakdown spreadsheet found in attachment J-5 [sic] of Section J." Attachment J-4 contains separate columns/sections for prime costs versus sub-contractor costs.

Request the Government clarify if they desire prime burdens on sub-contractor cost to be added to sub-contractor costs in the sub-contractor section, or shown separately in the prime columns on the same row.

Prime burdens on the sub-contractor costs shall be shown within the prime columns, not the sub-contractor columns.

21 RFP Section L.6.3 Section 2.0, Summary of Cost Data, paragraph b

RFP Section L.6.3, Section 2.0, Summary of Cost Data, paragraph b states, "The offeror shall complete tab two (2), by proposing growth and consumable rates that will be used for future contract changes during the life of the contract." In the Attachment J-4 template, this second tab is labeled "SSBN 741

Labor&Matl Burden Rate" [emphasis added] and contains a note stating "The

Contractor's proposed labor and material growth rates inserted on the worksheet will be incorporated into the contract and will be the fully burdened fixed labor and material fully burdened rates for contract changes regardless of how many hours and how much material are procured." Cell A6 in this tab is also labeled "Consumable Growth Rate."

Due to the inconsistent labeling, it is not clear if the Government desires a true burden rate (that factor which will be applied to raw costs to arrive at the per unit final price), or fixed labor rates (total of raw costs and all burdens/fees) and fixed ODC "rates" (what units of issue?). Also, there is inconsistency regarding how the ODC value is labeled..."consumable" in some locations and "material" in others, which are different elements of Other

Direct Cost.

Request the Government:

(a) Clarify if burden or "wrap" rates, or total per-unit rates, are desired in the second tab.

(b) If fixed labor rates per hour are desired, fully explain how these rates will be used in calculating the price for growth modifications in contract with such a diverse scope. Specifically, it is not clear how a single labor rate could apply to a sub-contractor preservation Helper as opposed to a prime structural repair

Welder/NDT Technician, and then also to ODL individuals such as a Waterfront

Engineer.

(c) If fixed ODC (material, consumable, or otherwise) "rates" are desired, fully explain how these "rates" will be used in calculating the price for growth modifications. Specifically, it is not clear how a single "rate" can be provided without specifying a fixed unit of issue on which to apply the rate. And similar to labor above, it is not clear how a single "rate" could apply to all sub-elements of

ODCs, such as travel (week of per diem), material (gallons of paint), consumables

(respirators), POs for minor services (Marine Chemist), etc.

(d) If fixed labor rates per hour are desired, that the Government consider multiple labor rates for various grouping of work type, such as "structural growth work," "preservation growth work," "additional engineering effort," etc.

Will be changed in amendment.

(a) See changes to note on tab two (2) of the spreadsheet.

(b) Contractors shall propose a fully burdened labor rate at the trade level for all trades that will be used to adjudicate Request for Contract Changes (RCC) during contract administration. The identified rates will not be negotiable after time of award. Rates will be used for both prime & subcontractors.

(c) See changes made to tab one (1) and tab two (2) of attachment J-4 that delineate a new column for Other Direct Costs (ODC) and a distinction made between material and consumable.

(d) No, see changes to note on tab two (2) of the spreadsheet.

22 RFP Section L.6.3 Section 2.0, Summary of Cost Data, paragraph c

RFP Section L.6.3, Section 2.0, Summary of Cost Data, paragraph c requires

Offerors to provide a "[d]etailed Basis of Estimates (BOE) identifies all underlying assumptions with respect to the technical aspects of the work to be performed, the functional breakout of the efforts within the Offeror’s organization and to include any subcontracted efforts. The BOE’s shall include copies of pricing guides, reports from any referenced historical information and any other information the Offeror believe will assist the Government in its review to adequately delineate the efforts required. There is little indication in

RFP Section M how this data will be used and if it will be evaluated in determining the awardee.

Request the Government clarify the intent of this data and whether or not it will be used in any evaluation factor.

Will correct in amendment, see changes to Section L & M regarding Basis of

Estimates (BOE).

23 RFP Section M.1.0 RFP Section M.1.0 states in part, "The Government may determine that a proposal is unacceptable if the costs proposed are materially unbalanced between line items or subline items. Unbalanced pricing exists when, despite an acceptable total cost, the cost of one or more contract line items is significantly overstated or understated by the application of cost or price analysis techniques." While there is only one priced contract line item in

Section B, Attachment J-4 requires the pricing to be segregated into 114 separate work items.

Request the Government confirm that the unbalanced pricing requirement does not apply to this contract with only one priced line item, and further recommend deleting this verbiage from Section M.

Will correct in amendment. Section M, 4.0 Evaluation Criteria, Factor 3.0 Price

Proposal will be updated.

24 RFP Section M RFP Section 3.0 refers back to Section L.4.x throughout. The context of these references indicates the correct reference should be Sections L.6.x.

Request the Government clarify the references to Section L throughout Section M. Will be corrected in amendment.

25 RFP Section M.3.0 Factor 2.0

(Past Performance

Confidence Assessment)

RFP Section M.3.0, Factor 2.0 (Past Performance Confidence Assessment) states in part, "The past performance evaluation considers each offeror’s demonstrated recent and relevant record of performance in supplying products and services that meet the contract’s requirements....There are two aspects to the past performance evaluation: [Recency and Relevance]." Table

4 (Performance Confidence Assessments) contains adjectival grades, the description of which all begin "Based on the offeror's recent/relevant performance records...."

Request the Government confirm that the only two criteria for determining confidence are recency and relevance. If not, request the Government delineate the other factors and how they will be used to arrive at the adjectival grades for

"Performance Confidence."

Recency and relevance are the two "aspects" of past performance. In accordance with FAR 15.305(a)(2), the currency and relevance of the information, source of the information, context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance shall be considered. Will be addressed in amendment.

26 RFP Section M.3.0 Factor 2.0

(Past Performance

Confidence Assessment)

RFP Section M.3.0, Factor 2.0 (Past Performance Confidence Assessment) states in part, "For purposes of this evaluation, recency is defined as within five (5) years from date of solicitation."

Request the Government confirm that "Recency" is a digital score (yes/no;

pass/fail) based on within five years or not, and not a sliding scale wherein more recent experience counts more heavily.

IAW Sec L 6.2a and Sec M Factor 2.0 Past Performance Confidence Assessment, recency is defined as within five (5) years from date of solicitation. The evaluation criteria are accurately defined in Section L & M of the RFP.

27 RFP Section M.3.0 Factor 2.0

(Past Performance

Confidence Assessment)

RFP Section M.3.0, Factor 2.0 (Past Performance Confidence Assessment) states in part, "An offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror will be determined to have unknown past performance and will be assigned a performance confidence rating of “neutral.” Table 4 in that same section shows "Unknown Confidence (Neutral)" as the lowest rating in the table, below "No Confidence." This would be appropriate as it does not give an unfair advantage to Offerors that deliberately choose to not provide past performance in which they struggled, or Offerors who have little to no relevant experience.

Request the Government confirm that a rating of "Unknown Confidence (Neutral)" is below "No Confidence" and not somewhere at the midpoint between

"Satisfactory Confidence" and "Limited Confidence."

Table 4 will be updated by amendment.

28 RFP Section M.3.0 Factor 3.0

(Cost/Price Proposal)

RFP Section M.3.0, Factor 3.0 (Cost/Price Proposal) states in part, "The proposed growth rate and consumable rate in Tab two (2) will be evaluated using techniques contained in FAR 15.404, ....” FAR 15.404 only provides a list of methods from which to pick.

Request the Government also specify how it will be evaluated. Will be corrected in amendment. Note changes made to Section L and M regarding factor 3.0 Cost/Price Proposal.

29 E-Specification 042-01-001, paragraph

3.3.2

E-Specification 042-01-001, paragraph 3.3.2, requires a daily report containing

"...a matrix showing the tradesmen qualifications...." It is expected that such a matrix, which would be extensive for a project of this magnitude, would change little if at all on a daily basis.

Request the Government consider reducing this requirement to "initially and upon addition or new employees to the project" as a cost-savings measure.

Will correct in amendment.

30 E-Specification 042-01-001, paragraph

3.3.4.2

E-Specification 042-01-001, paragraph 3.3.4.2, requires an Offeror to "Conduct continuous reviews and validations of the production schedule."

Because "continuous" is indefinite and cannot be effectively estimated, request the Government definitze the frequency requirement to something like daily, twice daily, etc.

Will correct in amendment.

31 E-Specification 042-01-001, paragraph

3.3.4.4

E-Specification 042-01-001, paragraph 3.3.4.4, requires an Offeror to "Submit one legible copy, in approved transferrable media, a production schedule and weekly progress report to the SUPERVISOR."

Request the Government change the submission requirement from "approved transferrable media" to "approved transferrable media or authorized electronic method" to allow submission from a remote location and/or to obviate the complex requirements/prohibitions associated with portable media on both

Contractor and Government systems. This will also save the Government the recurring cost of the portable media (CDs).

The Government interprets the stated requirement of "approved transferrable media" to include email.

32 E-Specification 042-01-001, paragraph

3.3.5

E-Specification 042-01-001, paragraph 3.3.5, states, "Contractor work schedule and work breakdown structure shall coincide with PSNS & IMF work specified in Attachment E." Attachment E provides a WBS, starts, finishes, and projected durations. However, Sections L & M of the RFP, Sub-factor 1.3.e require each Offeror, as part of the Technical Volume, to "Provide a production schedule that will be utilized by the offeroer [sic] to accomplish the work, including work breakdown structure, starts, finishes, and projected durations."

Request the Government clarify the apparent inconsistency that a mandatory schedule and WBS provided by the solicitation can also be an evaluated sub-factor of the proposal.

Offeror should provide a schedule via proposal that accurately reflects the ability, resources and work practices that will be in conformance with J-3 attachment E. The offeror's proposed schedule provides the Government with assurance of understanding the scope of work being solicited.

33 E-Specification 042-01-001 E-Specification 042-01-001 Section 3.4.11 states, "Cameras and video equipment are not permitted within the CIA as listed in 2.4 and 2.5." Cameras are allowed within the PSNS&IMF CIA with approved camera passes.

Restricting an Offeror to no cameras of any type will unnecessarily hinder their ability to work within proper channels to obtain photographic data in support of documenting and evaluating shipboard conditions.

Request Section 3.4.11 be changed to read, "Unapproved cameras and video equipment are not permitted within the CIA as listed in 2.4 and 2.5."

Will address in amendment.

34 E-Specification 077-11-001, paragraph

3.3

The list of expected Hazardous Waste to be generated in execution of this contract in E-Specification 077-11-001, paragraph 3.3, contains only two items, which is somewhat low for this type of work.

Request the Government re-evaluate this list and include additional waste typical of this type of work.

In accordance with NAVSEA Standard Item 009-03, paragraph 3.1, offerors are to "Identify materials that may contain toxic or hazardous substances as listed in Subpart Z of 2.1 that are to be used, removed, or disturbed during work operations." Offerors are expected to review the RFP and bid accordingly to include all necessary toxic or hazardous substances required to accomplish the work. There is no correlation between the contents of paragraph 3.3 of E-

Specification 077-11-001 and the necessary items determined by an offeror to accomplish the work identified in the RFP.

35 Various E-

Specification

Starting with 111-11-004 Various E-Specifications, starting with 111-11-004 for example, state in paragraph 4, "Submit one legible copy, in approved transferrable media, of a repair report using Attachment A provided by PSNS to the SUPERVISOR within

72 hours after completion of the repairs" then "Area listed in 1.2 will not be released to the Contractor for final blast and paint until PSNS (Code 250VS) engineering has verified that all reporting information has been provided for all defects previously submitted for contractor repair" and then "PSNS engineering requires 3 working days to complete review."(a) It does not appear that the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-

001 has any accommodation for the up to six-day delay in the various Groups and Tanks work sequence.

(b) Not every E-Specification with the first sub-paragraph ("Area listed in 1.2 will not be released...") also contains the second paragraph specifying the minimum review window ("PSNS engineering requires 3 working days...").

(a) Request the Government add activities in the schedule for every Group and

Tank to account for this six-day delay between completion of structural work and start of preservation activities.

(b) Request the Government clarify if the delay will be three working days for every E-Specification, and if so, include it as applicable in every paragraph 4.

The Government has identified the appropriate requirements on a per work item basis.

36 Various E-

Specification

Starting with 111-11-004 Various E-Specifications, starting with 111-11-004 for example, state in paragraph 4, "PSNS will remove and re-install interference in way of the repairs." Throughout the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-Specification

042-01-001, most groups and tanks start with an activity for interference removal. Some are scheduled for one day and others are zero days.

Additionally, not all are flagged for SY accomplishment (for example, Groups 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 110 BTM).

(a) Request the Government confirm that the first activity for all Groups and Tanks will be a zero-day "start milestone" for all interference removed.

(b) Request the Government confirm that all interference removal schedule activities will be Shipyard responsibility.

(c) As there does not appear to be any activity for interference reinstallation, request the Government confirm that all interference reinstallation will occur after the last activity in the Contractor schedule, which is typically "turnover to

Shipyard."

The statement provided in the various Section 4 paragraphs of the E-

Specifications noted identifies the responsible party for interference removal and re-installation.

37 E-Specification 111-11-013, paragraph

1.2.3

E-Specification 111-11-013, paragraph 1.2.3, states that the "Sonar Sphere

External" will be a location of structural, as well as preservation work (later E-

Specifications).

Request the Government confirm that all hydrophone removal will have been completed as interference before Contractor work begins (or add it to the work package).

All Governement hydrophone removal will have been completed as interference prior to contractor work begins for E-Specification 111-11-013.

38 E-Specification 111-11-013, paragraph

1.2.3

E-Specification 111-11-013, paragraph 1.2.3, states that the "Bulkhead in

Sonar Dome at FR[ame] 4" will be a location of structural, as well as preservation work (later E-Specifications). This scope of work would be limited to the steel bulkhead and not the dome itself. However, the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-001 lists work items apparently associated with the Sonar Dome itself flagged for Contractor accomplishment in the "Sonar Dome Access Trunk" portion ("GRP 109 Sonar

Dome Interior - Inspection" and "GRP 109 Sonar Dome - Repairs").

Request the Government confirm that inspection and repair of the Sonar Dome itself will be the responsibility of the Shipyard.

Inspection and repair of the SONAR Dome itself will be the responsibility of the

Government.

39 Various E-

Specification

Starting with 111-11-015 Various E-Specifications, starting with 111-11-015, for example, define "MSS" as both "Missile Silencing System" and "Magnetic Silencing System."

Request the Government clarify the definition of the acronym, and, if in fact different, confirm they are being used correctly in each location.

Will correct in amendment.

40 E-Specification 111-11-033, paragraph 3 E-Specification 111-11-033, paragraph 3, the same verbiage appears to have been repeated as sub-paragraph 3.4 and 3.5.

Request the Government confirm or remove the duplication. E-Specification 111-11-003, paragraphs 3.4 and 3.5, have been updated. Will correct with amendment.

41 E-Specification 112-11-001 through -010 E-Specifications 112-11-001 through 112-11-006 require the Contractor to inspect in-place, then repair two each waterborne access baffles in each of six

Main Ballast Tanks (MBTs). E-Specification 112-11-007 requires the Contractor to inspect, then repair 48 Fixed Baffles across six MBTs in between the grates being removed and reinstalled by the Shipyard. E-Specification 112-11-008 requires the Contractor to inspect, then repair four Fixed Baffles from port and starboard Torpedo Ejection Pump Sea Chests in between the grates being removed and reinstalled by the Shipyard. E-specifications 112-11-09 through

112-11-010 require the Contractor to inspect in-place, then repair two each

Fixed Baffles from port and starboard Torpedo Ejection Pump Sea Chests. E-

Specification 112-11-011 requires the Contractor to repair tapped holes in the

Sanitation Overboard Discharge Connection Cover Sea Chest as identified by the Shipyard.

In the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-001, all of the above 11 maintenance actions do not appear to have been completely and consistently included in the schedule. For example, the MBT Fixed Flood

Grates work (112-11-007) is listed in some MBT timelines, but some do not include "inspect" and the assigned duration varies widely from zero to 40 days. The work contained in the other ten 112-series E-Specifications does not appear to be listed in the draft schedule with assigned duration. Finally, there are no activities shown as predecessors and successors to Contractor work for the Shipyard to remove and reinstall the various grates.

Request the Government update the Contractor schedule to include all aspects of the 112-series tasks, assign appropriate duration, and make applicable technical ties.

1) The inspection and repair of the waterborne access baffles are expected to be part of the tank repairs. The duration will not change and another task isn't necessary. (112-11-001 thru -006)

2) MBT sequence adjusted to include 'Blast/Inspect/Repair/Paint removed flood grates and associated hardware' (17DU). Each tank has two tasks. "SY-ALL INSP

CPL/INTF REMOVED" which is completed prior to turning the space over and

"MBTXX TURNOVER TO SY" which all contract work is required to be complete.

This work is sequenced between the two. Note that as long as the flood grate work is completed within those two tasks, the dates are unimportant. (112-11-

007)

3) Work is accomplished by the task "GP 110 S blast/repair/paint removed components" or "GP 110 P blast/repair/paint removed components". Both have 20 durations for all work. (112-11-008)

4) Work is expected to be completed as part of the repair work in the space.

There are no additional durations or tasking necessary. (112-11-009 & -010)

5) Separate tasking was included for SY-inspect (1 DU) and contractor repair

(10) the tapped holes in group 5. Repairs will be accomplished in conjunction with the rest of the repairs in the area. (112-11-011)

6) All grates are removed prior to turning over the areas to the contractor and

PSNS will reinstall after the work completion by the contractor.(042-01-001 question for 112 series work)

42 E-Specification 112-11-007, paragraph 3 E-Specification 112-11-007, paragraph 3.3.1, states that "Upon removal of baffles, template exact size, configuration and location from shipboard conditions to ensure proper mounting surface orientation." Duration for this activity is not provided in the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-

Specification 042-01-001. Also, test fit-ups of the actual baffles would be the only way possible to ensure they will fit correctly when actually needed for final installation upon closing the tank.

Request the Government add activities and duration into the draft schedule to template the baffle plates and also to later perform a test fit-up of the repaired baffle plates prior to final turn-back to the Shipyard.

The Government has identified the appropriate requirements on a per work item basis.

43 E-Specification 151-11-008, paragraph 3 E-Specification 151-11-008, paragraph 3.4, requires the Contractor to "Install cable guard foundation with PSNS assistance...." Paragraph 3.5 also requires the Contractor to install a transducer, again with PSNS assistance. Neither of these activities appears to be shown in the schedule provided as Attachment

E to E-Specification 042-01-001, nor do they include a parallel activity for PSNS to assist.

Request the Government add activities and duration into the draft schedule for these two functions from E-Specification 151-11-008.

This work is expected to be completed as part of the repair work in the sail. The

SY will assist as requested/coordinated IAW SOW.

44 E-Specification 151-11-009 E-Specification 151-11-009, paragraph 2.2, requires the Contractor to

"Accomplish the requirements of [Ohio Class Liaison Action Record (LAR), TRK-

0015-A-07 WQC-6 Matching Network Installation]."

Request the Government provide a copy of LAR TRK-0015-A-07 to allow accurate estimating of the effort.

Document will be avaiable on FedBizOpps.

45 E-Specification 191-11-001, paragraph 3 E-Specification 191-11-001, paragraph 3.3, states "Sealed lead bins in [sic] identified in 1.3 at location 1.2 shall be converted to free flood lead bins in accordance with...." Lead Bin conversion does not appear to be shown in the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-001 for MBT 1A.

Request:

(a) The Government add activities and duration into the draft schedule for MBT 1A

Sealed Lead Bin Conversion; and

(b) Validate the draft schedule adequately reflects Lead Bin Conversion in all remaining Main Ballast Tanks where applicable from the SOW.

Government does not intend to change the duration of the work.

46 E-Specification 191-11-001, paragraph 3 E-Specification 191-11-001, paragraph 3.8, describes reinstallation of lead bins following conversion. However, paragraph 3.8.1.1, states, "Submit one legible copy, in approved transferrable media, of a repair report to the SUPERVISOR within 72 hours when weight removed is 2 percent or greater in value identified in 1.3 with detailed explanation of why the discrepancy may exist.

[emphasis added]" Additionally, "1.3" is simply "Quantity (2 ea.), Sealed Lead

Bins" and does not specify or derive a weight value.

Request the Government correct paragraph 3.8.1.1 to state from "...weight removed is 2 percent or greater in value..." to "...weight reinstalled varies two percent or greater from the value...," and also clarify the reference weight to be used for calculating two percent variance, such as a hull-specific ballast report, or the weight of material removed in paragraph 3.4.

Also request the Government make similar corrections in the E-Specifications for the all remaining Main Ballast Tanks.

Will correct in amendment.

47 E-Specification 191-11-007 The title of E-Specification 191-11-007 is "Main Ballast Tank 1B Free Flood

Lead Bins; convert [emphasis added]." However, the specific tasking in paragraph 3.3 is only to open the existing Free Flood Bins for PSNS inspection, and not convert them from Sealed to Free Flood Bins.

Request the Government remove "convert" from the title for this E-Specification for clarity.

This is inconsistency also exists in E-Specification 191-11-008.

Both the 191-11-007 and 191-11-008 E-Specifications will be updated in amendment.

48 E-Specification 191-11-008 The title of E-Specification 191-11-007 is "Main Ballast Tank 1B Free Flood

Lead ...." But immediately below it, the Location of Work specified in paragraph 1.2.1 is "Main Ballast Tank 2A."

Request the Government correct the inconsistency. Will correct in amendment.

49 E-Specification 633-11-001, paragraph 4 E-Specification 633-11-001, paragraph 4.2, states "All anode stud removal and replacement should be accomplished before preservation begins." However, activities, durations and ties/sequencing to support this specific sequencing requirement are not shown in the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-

Specification 042-01-001.

Request the Government add the applicable activities, durations and ties/sequencing for anode stud replacement in the schedule provided as

Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-001.

Will be changed by amendment. Anode stud replacement is included as part of the 'remove' tasking and durations. Corrected the title of those tasks to

"replace". One task to 'shoot anode studs' in GP 5 was removed. The duration is accounted for in the 'remove' task and does not change.

50 E-Specification 633-11-001, paragraph

5.3

E-Specification 633-11-001, paragraph 5.3, provides a quantity of replacement anode studs less than the number of anodes to be replaced.

Request the Government confirm that any requirements in excess of this estimated percentage requiring replacement will also be provided as GFM, or suggest simply raising the quantities in paragraph 5.3 to be 100% and excess material will be returned upon completion of the work.

This question also applies to all other 633-Series E-Specifications.

GFM anode stud material specified in 633-11-001, paragraph 5.3, is sufficient to replace up to 25% of the known anode studs for all locations throughout the

633-11-XXX series E-Specifications. This replacement amount is above and beyond the historical replacement rate encountered in these areas, on this class of ship, identified in the E-Specifications. The Government does no intend to order/supply any additional material as GFM for contractor use.

51 Various E-

Specification

Titles The titles of E-Specifications 633-11-002 through 633-11-013 appear to be missing various words. One example would be 633-11-002, which is entitled

"Main Ballast Tank 2A; Remove" vice "Main Ballast Tank 2A; Remove and

Replace Anodes."

Request the Government review the titles of the listed E-Specifications and clarify as appropriate.

Will correct in amendment.

52 E-Specification 633-11-005, paragraph

5.3

E-Specification 633-11-005, paragraph 5.3, provides a quantity of replacement anodes less than the number of anodes to be inspected.

Request the Government confirm that any requirements in excess of this estimated percentage requiring replacement will also be provided as GFM, or suggest simply raising the quantities in paragraph 5.3 to be 100% for ease of administration/expediency and excess material will be returned upon completion of the work.

This question also applies to all other 633-Series E-Specifications.

GFM replacement anodes specified in 633-11-005, paragraph 5.3, is sufficient to replace up to 50% of the known anode studs for all locations throughout the

633-11-XXX series E-Specifications. This replacement amount is above and beyond the historical replacement rate encountered in these areas, on this class of ship, identified in the E-Specifications. The Government does no intend to order/supply any additional replacement anodes as GFM for contractor use.

53 E-Specification 992-10-001, paragraph

3.4.3

E-Specification 992-10-001, paragraph 3.4.3, states that all staging will be provided by PSNS. There does not appear to be any activities, durations and ties/sequencing to support this time-consuming requirement shown in the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-001.

Request the Government add the applicable activities, durations and ties/sequencing for staging installation, relocation/modification, and final removal by PSNS in the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-001, as well as activities just before turn-over back to PSNS for Contractor touch-up painting in areas previously blocked by staging.

The requirement that all staging shall be provided by PSNS is clearly stated in E-

Specification 992-10-001, paragraph 3.4.3.

54 E-Specification 992-10-001, paragraph

3.4.6

E-Specification 992-10-001, paragraph 3.4.6, states that PSNS & IMF will provide 3,000 SQ FT storage/lay-down/office area located at Pier 4. However, no mention is made of laydown area within the drydock required for

Contractor Blast and Recovery Equipment, Filtered Ventilation Equipment, and

Dehumidification Equipment (paragraph 3.1). The schedule provided as

Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-001 suggests that the Government expects multiple Contractor teams will be required to work in different areas of the ship simultaneously, requiring a large in-drydock footprint if this concurrency is to be realized.

Request the Government clarify the intended in-drydock laydown area to be provided to the Contractor so that the viability of simultaneous operations can be adequately assessed.

Also request the Government add "laydown area in drydock for equipment" to

RFP Section C-1.6.b.1 (topics to be discussed at the Pre-Commencement

Conference).

Government will provide an area 72' by 15' for equipment to support ventilation, blast and paint operations. Office facility will be on pier at DD4 SE, not in the drydock. Foot print is 12' by 25'. Facilities that are stackable to maintain footprint are preferable. The 3,000 SQ FT is all-inclusive of the pier & drydock areas.

55 E-Specification Attachment D-042-01-

Question: Request the Government update the ship name in the title of

Attachment D.

Will be corrected in amendment.

56 E-Specification Attachment E042-01-001 The E-Specifications are clear that all URO MRC 003 requirements will be performed by the Shipyard. In the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-

Specification 042-01-001, there are a few instances in which URO MRC 003 inspections are called-out in a step assigned to the Contractor. Examples would be "GP 7 NVM HYPH NO 4 REC BLAST/PAINT & MRC-003 INSPECT

RECESS ACCESS CO" and "GP 110 S POST BLAST MRC-003 INSPECTION."

Conversely, there is an instance where a Contractor activity has been assigned to PSNS ("SY-GP 110 S AR REPAIRS FROM MRC-003 INSPECTIONS OF TEP

RECESS").

Request the Government review the Contractor versus Shipyard assignments in the draft schedule and ensure they align to the E-Specifications.

Will be corrected in amendment.

57 Various E-

Specification

Request the Government provide Offerors the following highly-specific reference documents critical to accurate work estimation:

(a) Engineering Notice (EN) DS124771 Rev A, Conversion of Watertight Lead

Bins in MBT 1A & 1B to Free Flood Bins

(b) Engineering Notice (EN) DS125076 Rev A, Conversion of Watertight Lead

Bins in MBT 2A & 2B to Free Flood Bins

Offerors shall contact the contracting office point of contacts for this solicitation to schedule a time to view Engineering Notice (EN) DS124771 Rev A and

DS12076 Rev A at PSNS Building 844. Viewing times shall be Monday through

Thursday, from 0900 - 1100, and set up 24 hours in advance (by close of business Fridays for Monday viewings).

58 E-Specification E-Specification 111-11-

It is our understanding that this solicitation only seeks non-SUBSAFE structural repairs. However, E-Specification 111-11-011, section 1.2.2 lists a location of work as "Fairwater Internal (Includes Pressure Hull inside the Fairwater)."

Request the Government clarify if repairs will be required on the Pressure Hull inside the Fairwater.

Government will identify specific areas of repair as stated in E-Specification 111-

11-011, paragraphs 3.2, 3.2.1, 3.3, 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. Any work identified shall be non-SUBSAFE repairs.

59 E-Specification E-Specification 151-11-

E-Specification 151-11-008, Sections 3.4 and 3.5 require the Contractor to perform installations "...with PSNS assistance...."

Request the Government define the extent of the assistance to support accurate

Offeror estimating, scheduling, and pricing.

The intent of the assistance is to ensure proper alignment of the cable guard and transducer and the time required for notification to the SY Sail Coordinator is already included in the associated cu phases in the provided schedule to the

RFP. Offerors need to bid accordingly.

60 E-Specification Various E-Specifications and Attachment E to E-

Specification 042-01-001

Safety Track Repair E-Specifications 151-11-001 thru 151-11-005 and 151-11-

007 state in Section 4.3 that "PSNS will perform the Strength Pull Test and

Operational Test of the repaired safety track." However in the schedule provided as Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-001, corresponding activities are not annotated for shipyard accomplishment (various groups).

Request the Government clarify the maintenance activity that will perform the

Strength Pull Test and Operational Test of the repaired safety track.

As stated in E-Specifications 151-11-001 through -007, Section 4.3, "PSNS will perform the Strength Pull Test and Operational Test of the repaired safety track."

61 E-Specification Attachment E to E-

Specification 042-01-001

Attachment E to E-Specification 042-01-001 provided a draft production schedule that is labeled as Export Control Data with associated warnings. It is not clear what aspect of the schedule as provided in the attachment is actually

ITAR-controlled.

Request the Government confirm that information provided in Attachment E to E-

Specification 042-01-001 is in fact ITAR-controlled, and if so, identify which specific aspect of the schedule requires the controls.

Attachment E is ITAR-controlled in its entirety.

62 RFP Sec J attchment J-4 Price Breakdown Spreadsheet Attachment J-4 includes Work Spec 112-11-012, Inspect main Ballast Tank 3A and 3B Access Baffles. However this Work Spec was not provided in Statement of Work Attachment J-3.

Please provide a copy of Work Spec 112-11-012. Work item 112-11-0012 is not valid, will be deleted by amendment.

63 RFP Sec J attchment J-4 Statement of Work Attachment J-3 includes Work Specs 191-11-010, MBT 2A

Free Flood Lead Bin Install and Repair and 191-11-011, MBT 2B Free…