QA N66001-17-R-0011_.pdf

Questions and Responses on Solicitation N66001-17-R-0011, IO/METOC

Question Number

RFP Section RFP Page Number

Question Government Response

1 Attachment

- Please confirm whether if the Governments expectation is that the Senior Scientist position description, if not then which position, should be utilized for Human Factors and Human- Systems Integration work or if Human Factors Engineer categories will be added to Attachment 3

Additional labor categories will not be added. The labor categories and descriptions included in the RFP and Attachment 3 are sufficient for proposal purposes.

2 Section L Pg. 100 The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is mentioned twice in Section L. Once in Volume II, Section L, paragraph 2.7

(g) and again in Section L, Volume III, paragraph 3.2. Can the Government please clarify where to include it in the proposal (Volume II or Volume III)

The Small Business Subcontracting Plan, to be submitted by other than small businesses, shall be included in Vol II per Section L, 2.7(g)(2).

Small Business Participation is a separate factor; see L- 317, Volume III, paragraph 3.2.

3 - Pg. 1 Request proposal extension of two weeks

RFP response deadline extended to 26 May 2017.

4 - - Can the government provide any clarification on the number of anticipated awards?

We cannot; the number of awards will be based upon the quantity and evaluation of proposals received.

5 Section L 103 Should the contractor submit the most recent CPARS in Volume II, Section D as part of the past performance submission? Or is just a statement that the information is available in PPIRS sufficient?

See L-317, Volume III,

3.4 (e), “The offeror shall facilitate the submission of a Past Performance Questionnaire for each reference or submit a statement that past performance information for an individual contract resides in the Past Performance Information Retrieval System

(PPIRS).”

6 Section L 110 Can the Government change the instructions and allow subcontractors to submit past performance information in Volume II, Section D for any efforts identified in Section C, Organizational Experience?

Such past performance information may be submitted. However, in accordance with RFP L- 317, Volume III, 3.4(a), "if Block 1 of the Reference Information Sheet includes a proposed team member (i.e., proposed prime or subcontractor), this reference will be considered when evaluating organizational experience, but will not be considered when evaluating past performance.”

Instructions in L-317, Volume III, 3.4 are sufficient and will not be revised.

7 Attachment

- The rate sheet template column A “A - Government Labor Category” has drop down list of LCATs that does not correspond to Section “L” of the RFP.

Please clarify Which labor categories the offeror has to provide loaded rates for: Section L listed labor categories or labor categories listed in the Rate Sheet?

Per instructions in Attachment 2, “In Column A, the offeror shall list all labor categories proposed using the Government's labor category titles identified in Section L of the solicitation.” The labor categories included in the rate sheet have been updated.

8 3.3 Section C

Organizational Experience of Section L in the RFP, it states that industry should explain its experience in four areas including Technical Support (SOW para 3.1.2).

Please confirm that this is section

3.1.2 Technical Support in its entirety:

“3.1.2 TECHNICAL SUPPORT

The Contractor shall map System Requirements identified in each task

Confirmed.

order to existing or new software configuration items that have been developed by the Government and those that require new development by the Contractor.”

9 Attachment

- Attachment 2 does not include separate columns for Overhead loads or fee. Please confirm the government does not require discrete columns for all indirect rates and fee used to arrive at the fully burdened rate?

Confirmed. Instructions included in the Rate Sheet are sufficient.

10 Section C

1.1 (5)

8 The Statement of Work published in Section C – Descriptions and Specifications states that the Navy’s IO and METOC programs will definitely be delivered to all afloat platforms that are being deployed with Consolidated Afloat Networks and Enterprise Services (CANES). It highlights that in addition to CANES-equipped ships, IO and METOC systems must be engineered to operate on a wide variety of other platforms.

Could the government provide a list of those platforms and the priority of fielding to these non-CANES equipped platforms and any requirements for the vendor executing this contract to develop potential execution plans to meet this requirement?

The requested information cannot be defined at this time.

The final sentence of SOW paragraph 1.1 is revised to read, “In addition to CANES-equipped ships, IO and METOC systems must be engineered to operate on a wide variety of other platforms including but not limited to mobile laptop platforms with limited bandwidth and storage for Navy and Marine Corps teams.”

11 Section L.2.3

96 Please confirm if prime offeror alone is required to submit an estimated level of effort by Prime/Subcontractor as described in Section L.2.3

In accordance with L- 317, Volume II and 2.3(a)(3), “Subcontractor labor hours at all tiers should be shown in the same manner as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) above.”

12 3.2.1.1 11 There is a requirement listed for the contractor to work with Human Systems Interface teams to . . .optimize user workflow, and reduce user workload and error, yet there is no corresponding labor category for a Human Factors Engineer in RFP

Additional labor categories will not be added. The labor categories and descriptions included in the RFP and Attachment 3 are sufficient for

Attachment 2, rate sheet (sheet 2).

Will the Government consider adding a human factors engineer labor category to ensure that the appropriate technical staff will be proposed?

proposal purposes.

13 Section L 2.3

Estimated Level of Effort: The RFP provides annual number of hours of 2,080 for the exempt employees, however, it does not provide number of working hours (excluding Universal Paid Time Off) per year for an FTE. Will it be acceptable to use the number of working hours per FTE as per the offeror accounting practice e.g. 1,880 or 1,920 hour/year?

Uncompensated Overtime, L-317 Volume II, Section 2.5 states, “Proposals that include hourly rates for exempt employees which are based on more than a 2,080 work-year shall be identified as Uncompensated Overtime”. Paragraph

(g) states, “The breakdown shall include direct labor rates for all direct labor categories based on the division by 2,080 of exempt employees actual annual salary, to represent a standard (as deemed by Fair Labor Standards Act) 40-hour week or 2,080 hour standard year.”

See L-317 Volume II, 2.5, Uncompensated Overtime and Professional Employees for further guidance.

14 2.1 General Instruction

94 Please clarify if offerors are required to submit Total Compensation Plan?

L-317, 2.1 states, “Submission of Volume II in accordance with this provision fulfills the requirement for a total compensation plan discussed in provision 52.222-46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees.

A separate total compensation plan is not required for either the prime contractor or any subcontractors.”

15 2.1 General Instruction, section (d,2)

95 Subcontracts: The RFP states that “If subcontractors are proposed, submit the same detailed level of cost information as for the prime contractor”. Please clarify that this requirement is only for the Cost Proposal and subcontractors are not required to submit “Volume I – Offer”.

Correct. L-317 2.1(d) states “cost information” only.

16 3.1 Volume

III

Written Capability Information”: Our understanding for Volume III page limit is below. Is this correct?

Section A – Software Development Plan – 75 pages

Section B – Small Business Participation (Attachment 4) – No page limit

Section C – Organizational Experience (Attachment 5, 6) – Description for each reference shouldn’t exceed 5 pages. Considering 6 pages for each reference, the maximum page limit is 30 pages for this section.

Section D – Past Performance (Attachment 7) or CPARS – No page limit

Yes; see instructions to offerors included in the RFP Section L which provide sufficient instruction.

17 3.2 Section B

101 Small Business Participation: We are assuming that the Small business need not submit “Small Business Information Sheet”. Please confirm.

All offerors will be evaluated in all capability factors listed in L-317 in accordance with M-307. L-317, Volume III , 3.2 Section B, Small Business Participation states, “Prepare and submit one copy of Attachment 4 ‘Small Business Participation Information Sheet’ to identify all small business concerns proposed for contract performance, whether as prime contractors or as subcontractors.”

18 L-317, Volume III, Section A

101 The N66001-17-R-0011 RFP identifies the DID for the SDP as DI-IPSC-81427A.

However, this document was superseded by DI-IPSC-81427B on 3/13/2017. The new document provides for an agile-based SDP format. Considering that this RFP specifically requests an agile base software development methodology.

We request that the new DID be acceptable for the SDP format.

SDP DID will not be revised for this RFP.

Offerors must follow the submission instructions in this RFP.

19 Section C, para 3.2.1

PWS paragraph 3.2.1

The PWS calls out IEEE 12207.0 and IEEE 12207.1 in para 3.2.1.

Both of these standards have been superseded. They are not in paragraph 2 references.

IEEE 12207.0 superseded by IEEE 12207-2008

IEEE 12207.1 superseded by IEEE 15289:2011 which intern has been superseded by IEEE 15289:2015

Recommend second and third paragraphs of PWS section 3.2.1 be changed.

No revision made.

20 M-307, Step One, paragraph 1.2.1

108 This section currently states: “The results of any standard model-based process maturity appraisals performed within 24 months prior to proposal submission, and the number of proposed staff experienced in using these processes will be part of the evaluation criteria.”

Request changing the “24 months prior to proposal submission” to “36 months prior to proposal submission” as the CMMI certifications are valid for 36 months and are not required to be recertified every 24 months.

No revision made.