Questions and Government Responses.pdf

Sources Sought Notice – N64267-26-R-6210 Shipyard Infrastructure Optimization Program (SIOP)

Questions Submitted in Response to the Subject Notice, and Government Responses

1. What NAICS code and corresponding size standard does the Government anticipate assigning to the follow-on solicitation?

Government Response: To be determined.

2. Has the Government determined whether the follow-on will be issued as full-and-open, a small business set-aside (and if so, which socioeconomic category — total small business, 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB, WOSB), or sole-sourced under FAR Subpart 19.8 / 13 CFR 124.506?

Government Response: To be determined.

3. If the Government has not yet made a set-aside determination, what factors will drive that decision, and what specifically is the Government looking to learn from sources sought responses to inform it?

Government Response: The source sought notice is market research. The results of this market research, with other factors, will drive the Government’s acquisition strategy.

4. When does the Government anticipate deciding whether to issue a formal RFP for this requirement?

Government Response: To be determined.

5. If the decision is to issue an RFP, what is the anticipated timeframe for release, and what response period will be provided to offerors?

Government Response: To be determined.

6. Will the Government issue a draft RFP or hold an industry day prior to the formal solicitation, and if so, on what timeline?

Government Response: To be determined.

7. Is the Government considering a multiple-award IDIQ vehicle (with task-order competition among holders) versus a single-award contract?

Government Response: To be determined.

8. What is the anticipated contract type (FFP, CPFF, T&M, hybrid) and pricing structure under the follow-on?

Government Response: To be determined.

9. Does the scope of work reflected in the attached draft Statement of Work and Level-of-Effort matrix add to, subtract from, or substantially mirror the scope and staffing of the current incumbent contract (N64267-22-C-0011)

Government Response: The draft Statement of Work and level of effort matrix attached to this notice are substantially similar to the current, incumbent effort. The contemplated effort is a follow-on, however, required taskings are still in development.

10. If the scope is changing, can the Government identify which functional areas are being added, expanded, reduced, or removed?

Government Response: See Government response to question 9.

11. What is the anticipated contract type (FFP, CPFF, T&M, hybrid) and pricing structure under the follow-on?

Government Response: To be determined.

12. Will the Government provide an estimated total contract ceiling value or historical obligation/funding data on N64267-22-C-0011 to inform vendor capacity planning?

Government Response: No.

13. The LOE matrix (Attachment 1) shows 31.0 FTEs; is this representative of the current incumbent staffing on N64267-22-C-0011, or a planning estimate that may change at solicitation?

Government Response: See Government response to question 9.

14. Are CLINs anticipated for travel, ODCs, surge labor, and material at cost, and is a not-to-exceed travel ceiling envisioned?

Government Response: To be determined.

15. To what extent does the Government anticipate contractor-initiated analysis and recommendations versus contractor execution of Government-directed tasks? The SOW includes tasks such as Section 5.7.7 (develop long range plans exercising a high degree of originality and judgment) alongside more administrative support functions -- clarification on the expected contractor posture would assist respondents in demonstrating relevant experience.

Government Response: Required tasks will be as reflected in the statement of work.

16. Will the Government consider favorably the inclusion of senior subject matter advisors beyond the defined LOE labor categories -- for example, individuals with former shipyard command or senior PEO experience -- and if so, should respondents address such advisors in their capability statements?

Government Response: Interested entities should submit capability statements that reflect their approach to meeting the draft requirements and their capability to do so.

17. What is the anticipated award date and base period start date for the follow-on contract?

Government Response: To be determined.

18. Is the Government considering a bridge contract or extension on N64267-22-C-0011 to align with the follow-on award timeline, and if so, will that bridge be openly competed?

Government Response: This question is outside the scope of this source sought notice.

19. Will the RFP provide for a formal transition / phase-in period between contract award and full performance, and if so, what duration does the Government anticipate (e.g., 30, 60, 90, or 120 days)? Will the transition period be funded as a separate CLIN, and will the incumbent be required to support knowledge transfer to a successor contractor?

Government Response: Follow-on efforts typically include transition periods. The details of a transition period for this effort is to be determined.

20. What recency window will the Government apply to past performance (typically three or five years)?

Government Response: Proposal evaluation criteria will be as stated in the solicitation.

21. Will past performance from teaming partners and major subcontractors be evaluated alongside the prime's, and at what weight?

Government Response: Proposal evaluation criteria will be as stated in the solicitation.

22. What dollar-value threshold and scope similarity will the Government use to assess the relevance of past performance? Specifically, will work on non-Navy or non-NAVFAC infrastructure programs of comparable scope qualify as relevant?

Government Response: Proposal evaluation criteria will be as stated in the solicitation.

23. Will past performance on PEO IE, NAVFAC, NAVSEA, and other DoD program management offices be weighted more heavily than performance on civilian agency program management work?

Government Response: Proposal evaluation criteria will be as stated in the solicitation.

24. How is the 75% on-site requirement (SOW Section 4.1) measured — by total labor hours across the contract, by individual labor category, by FTE count, or by some other basis?

Government Response: The on-site requirement will be measured by labor hours or FTE count, pending the solicitation.

25. Does the Government require contractors to lease commercial space in close proximity to each shipyard, or are government workspaces available beyond the four Navy Yard seats and the on/near-shipyard accommodations described in SOW Section 4.1?

Government Response: On-site workspaces will be available for contractor personnel in accordance with the requirement.

26. Will the Government provide IT equipment, NMCI accounts, and Flankspeed access to contractor personnel, or must the contractor furnish these?

Government Response: Government furnished equipment will be provided if and as needed by the Government’s requirement.

27. Are the per-shipyard contractor seats (up to 3 per shipyard) firm, or scalable based on workload?

Government Response: See Government response in question 25.

28. The SOW requires CONFIDENTIAL clearance and Tier 3 background investigations for shipyard access. Must all key personnel hold an active CONFIDENTIAL clearance at the time of proposal submission, or is clearance-eligibility sufficient with full clearance required at start of performance?

Government Response: Final Security requirements are to be determined; however, the Government anticipates that Contractor personnel must have Secret Clearance at the start of this requirement.

29. Will the Government sponsor clearances for proposed personnel who are clearance-eligible but not currently cleared, and if so, what is the expected processing timeline?

Government Response: The Government sponsors clearances for Contractor personnel as required. Processing timelines cannot be determined at this time.

30. Is access to Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) the highest data-sensitivity level, or are there portions of the work requiring SECRET or higher?

Government Response: See Government response to question 28.

31. Will the Government give evaluation credit for teaming structures that include 8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB, or WOSB partners as substantive, mission-critical subcontractors (versus pass-through arrangements)?

Government Response: To be determined.

32. Will the RFP require that proposed personnel for the 31 labor categories identified in Attachment 2 be employees on staff with the offeror at the time of proposal submission, or will commitments such as contingent offer letters and letters of intent be acceptable, with personnel onboarded after contract award?

Government Response: Subcontracting arrangements are typically permitted; however, the details of permissible subcontracting arrangements are to be determined.

33. Will the RFP require offerors to submit resumes for all 31 labor categories at proposal submission, or only for a designated subset (e.g., Key Personnel)?

Government Response: Resumes are typically required only for Key personnel, however, requirements in this regard are to be determined.

34. Will the RFP designate specific Key Personnel positions, and if so, which positions, what minimum qualifications will apply, and will substitution restrictions apply post-award?

Government Response: Final staffing requirements are to be determined.

35. SOW Section 5.5.7 requires ACEIT cost-estimating expertise, and Sections 5.5.9 and 5.4.6 require Primavera P6 and MS Project proficiency. Are these required as named-individual qualifications at the time of proposal submission, or as team-level capabilities?

Government Response: The requirements will be as stated in the solicitation.

36. SOW Section 5.10.2 references digital twin creation. Will the Government clarify the maturity status and the platform(s) currently in use across the four shipyards, or is platform selection within scope?

Government Response: For purposes of this source of sought notice, the requirements are as stated in the draft statement of work.

37. The labor categories in Attachment 2 do not include named senior leadership positions (e.g., Program Manager, Deputy PM). Will these be added to the formal RFP labor structure?

Government Response: To be determined.

38. SOW Section 5.11.4 calls for shipyard ADP IMS support proficient in MS Project, while Section 5.5.9 requires program-wide IMS proficient in both MS Project and Primavera P6.

Should bidders assume the program-wide IMS is maintained in P6 with MS Project schedules rolling up to it?

Government Response: For purposes of this source of sought notice, the requirements are as stated in the draft statement of work.