Responses to Questions received on Industry Day.docx

Please note that while the below Q&A took place during the pre-solicitation conference, the Government’s official position will be in the final RFP.

Question: When does the government plan to release the final RFP?

Answer: In QTR2 of FY26

Question: Who was the gentleman that just did the intro?

Answer: James Deacon, IPT Lead

Question: RE: TS FCL w/SCI access- Does that mean the small business is expected to have a SCIF? TS FCL as the prime is reasonable, but can the SCI access portion be addressed as part of the team? Or is the requirement a TS FCL with the ability to hold SCI clearances? I'm just trying to understand the requirement and whether its entirely FCL focused or comprehensively security management.

Answer: There is no requirement for the vendor to maintain a SCIF, however since the vendor needs access to SCI, they must have a TS FCL and TS Personnel Clearance PCL. The specific labor categories and their required minimum personnel security clearance level are contained in PWS paragraph 8.2.1.1. This information will also be included in Attachment 6 Staffing Scope Matrix which will be included in the final RFP.

Question: Draft RFP includes a COMSEC storage requirement but PWS references and section M does not. This is a potential major cost driver, can you confirm that COMSEC storage is not required?

Answer: In accordance with the PWS paragraph 2.2, the contractor facility is required to have COMSEC storage within 30 days after task order award. However, this will not be part of the Section M evaluation criteria for Factor B Contractor Facility.

Question: Does the facility need to be owned by the prime or can the requirement be addressed via an exclusive teammate?

Answer: The facility can be owned by a teammate.

Question: Can government provide more detailed PWS?

Answer: A PWS was provided with the draft RFP. and it will be posted in the final RFP.

Question: What is the facility clearance safeguarding requirement?

Answer: The warehouse is unclassified.

Question: Will there be any need for OT or Infrastructure Security within the scope?

Answer: The Government needs more information to answer this question, please provide more information via email to jessica.l.meddick.civ@us.navy.mil or the Seaport portal.

Question: Understand TS FCL required but sounds like the requirement also requires the facility to have a SCIF to store the items. Also, the 6000 SF is exclusive to this opportunity which includes the noted climate controlled storage within that number, correct?

Answer: There is no requirement for the vendor to maintain a SCIF. The 6000 SF unclassified warehouse includes climate-controlled storage.

Question: What is the CMMC requirement?

Answer: The CMMC requirements will be defined and confirmed when the formal RFP is issued.

Question: How can we (OWT Global, LLC) share capabilities as a prospective subcontractor to prospective Primes that meet facility requirements?

Answer: You can propose as a significant subcontractor. As stated in the draft RFP under Factor A Technical Capability, a significant subcontractor is defined as a subcontractor, or any subsidiary or separate legal entity affiliated with the prime contractor that is proposed to perform at least 20% (without rounding) of the total proposed labor hours.

Question: Will the government expand on what they are looking for support, pain points or hot buttons?

Answer: The PWS contains the requirements of this procurement.

Question: What past performance requirements will be levied on offerors?

Answer: The Government is not evaluating past performance; we are evaluating technical capabilities related to corporate experience based on contract references.

Question: Can the Government please post or email out the slides and attendee list from the today's industry day?

Answer: The slides have been posted. There is no attendee list to post as the meeting was held via Teams.

Question: Can you please provide the existing contract and/or task orders that are being included in this RFP?

Answer: In the past, similar requirements were executed through task order: N0017819D8323 N6523622F3009 (Predicate Logic, Inc.).

Question: Would the Government consider a multi-step evaluation process for Facilities and Past Performance?

Answer: No

Question: Who is the current incumbent? As well, what market research have you conducted to show sufficient competition given the requirement for an active COMSEC facility and account?

Answer: This is a new requirement therefore there is no incumbent. However, in the past, similar requirements were executed through task order: N0017819D8323 N6523622F3009 (Predicate Logic, Inc.). Since this task order was awarded to a small business, the market research shows that small businesses are capable of performing this requirement.

Question: Would the Government consider allowing up to 180 days post-award for offerors to establish required facilities to support small business participation?

Answer: No, the Government will not allow this.