18R0015__Amended_Solicitation_2.doc

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION A - SOLICITATION/CONTRACT FORM

The following have been modified:

N68936-18-R-0015 Amendment 2

Offeror Questions and Government Responses Question 1:

Given the date of the deadline for questions and the desire to submit a fully responsive, compliant proposal, contractor requests the government grant a two week extension to allow adequate time to respond.

Government Response:

The deadline to submit proposals has been extended to 14 June 2018 at 3:00 PM Pacific Time.

Question 2:

Attachment L-2, Instructions Worksheet title is "Instructions to Prime Contractors for completing Attachment L-5 Annual Fully Burdened Labor RFP # N68936-14-R-0108." Confirmation: Please confirm that Attachment L-2 applies to # N68936-18-R0015 and not "Attachment L-5 Annual Fully Burdened Labor RFP # N68936-14-R-0108."

Government Response:

The Government has updated Attachment L-2 to correct the clerical error. The updated attachment is provided with this amendment.

Question 3:

Section 1.4 Small Business (SB) Utilization Strategy. Question: Is there a page limit for communicating the Offeror's Small Business Utilization Strategy? Does this page limit affect other subsections that comprise Volume 1: Technical?

Government Response:

Yes, the page limit is 5 pages. The Table in L-1 Content of Proposals (Services) 26 March 2018 Part A Section 3.0 has been updated to show Technical subfactor 1.4 Small Business Utilization Strategy, with a five page limit. Furthermore, the total technical volume page limit has been increased to 60 total pages to accommodate the Small Business Utilization Strategy and the Transition Plan. (See also, Government Response to question 4) Question 4:

The Transition Plan is not included the page limit table (Section 3, page 68). Question: Since Sections 1.1 through 1.3 take up all 45 pages of Volume 1, the contractor assumes there is no page limit associated with the Transition Plan. Is this assumption correct?

Government Response:

There is a 10 page limit associated with the transition plan. The Table in clause L-1 Content of Proposals (Services) 26 March 2018 Part A Section 3.0 has been updated to reflect this, and the total page limit increased for the Technical Volume. (See also, Government Response to question 3) Question 5:

Section 3.0 indicates that Volume 2 should not exceed 25 pages. Question: (a) If forms for principal subcontractors or JVs are added, can the page limit be increased by 5 pages per form? (a) Are consent letters excluded from the page limit?

Government Response:

No, the page limit will not be increased. No, consent letters are included in the limit.

Question 6:

The instructions ask for "Signed SF33 for basic solicitation and acknowledgment of each amendment, including completion of any RFP clause or provision that requires a fill-in or response" in Volume 3. The instructions for Annex 1 also ask for "Offeror shall provide all Fill-Ins required by the solicitation." Question: Can the Government clarify where signed contractual material belongs?

Government Response:

Offerors should submit the signed proposal and amendments, including required offeror fill-ins of the RFP clauses with their completed proposal.

Question 7:

The instructions for Volume 2 Past Performance state: "The primary source of past performance information will be PPIRS. If a Contractor Performance Assessment Report (CPAR) exists for multiple years for the same contract/order ... [it] will be used for evaluation. In the event a CPAR does not exist for a past performance reference, the Offeror shall submit a Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire (CPAQ)..." Question: If a CPAR exists for a contract, but it is not in PPIRS, can the contractor submit a copy of the CPAR in their proposal?

Government Response:

Yes.

Question 8:

On page 33, the Government incorporates the Paperless Contracting (NAVAIR) (JUN 2009) clause, which states “terms “written”, ”mailed”, or “physically delivered” appear in other provisions of this contract, these terms are hereby defined to explicitly include electronic commerce, email, or paperless delivery methods.” Page 69 and 70, state offeror shall submit proposals via United States Postal Service or through commercial carrier. Question: Does the paperless clause apply to the proposal? If so, can the proposal be submitted electronically rather than via hard copy and CD-ROM?

Government Response:

No. As stated in L-1 Content of Proposals (Services) 26 March 2018, Part A Section 3.0 table, the Government’s requirements for printed and CD copies of proposals are clearly outlined.

Question 9:

Page 47 and 60, The NAICS Code listed in small business requirements is 541512 Computer Systems Design Services. Question: Would the Government consider adding the following NAICS Code 541712 or 541715 (Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences (except Nanotechnology and Biotechnology)?

Government Response:

No.

Question 10:

Page 60, The Government includes FAR Clause 52.222-60, Paycheck Transparency (Executive Order 13673) OCT 2016, however, Executive Order 13683 stated Executive order 13673 has no force or effect. The current FAR lists 52.222-60 as Reserved. Question: Would the Government consider removing FAR Clause 52.222-60?

Government Response:

The Government has removed the clause.

Question 11:

There appears to be a discrepancy in the due date for submitting questions to the government.

Page 2 of the RFP states “*Questions pertaining to the RFP shall be submitted no later than 3:00 PM Pacific Time 10 business days after the solicitation is posted. Questions shall be submitted by email to lauryn.hiser@navy.mil <mailto:lauryn.hiser@navy.mil> with the RFP number as the subject line.”

Page 67 of the RFP states “Questions: Offerors may submit questions requesting clarification of solicitation requirements by emailing the contract specialist at lauryn.hiser@navy.mil <mailto:lauryn.hiser@navy.mil> . It is required that all questions be received within 10 calendar days of the date this solicitation is issued.”

Question: Would the government please provide clarification that the questions are due 10 business days after the solicitation is posted?

Government Response:

The RFP was corrected in Amendment 1 to “10 business days” in Section L, and the period for questions was clarified in Section A to state the period for questions ends on 25 May 2018.

Question 12:

Upon review of the above referenced RFP, we have noted that a discrepancy regarding the deadline for submitting questions.

Page 2 of the RFP indicates that questions are due “10 business days” after the solicitation is posted (which was May 10, 2018) and Section L-1 on Page 67 indicates that questions are due “10 calendar days” after the solicitation is issued.

Government Response:

Please see the Government Response to Question 11.

Question 13:

My company would like to request this contract be set aside for Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business.

Government Response:

This requirement is for a full and open competition.

Question 14:

Is the draft transition plan included within the page count for Volume 1: Technical, section 1.1 Technical Capabilities and Approach; or is it to be in the appendices, with no associated page limit?

Government Response:

Please see the response to question 4.

Question 15:

Please clarify the last day to submit questions pertaining to the RFP, perhaps specifying a date?

Government Response:

Please see the response to question 11.

Question 16:

Volume 2, Past Performance information shall be submitted 14 days prior to the submission date specified in Block 9 of the SF 33 of the RFP. Please clarify that this requirement is 14 calendar days prior to the 11 June 2018 proposal due date. Noting that this date (Monday, 28 May 2018) is a Government holiday, does that make the effective Past Performance due date Friday, 25 May 2018, or does it extend to Tuesday, 29 May 2018, due to the holiday? We assume the Government will not be available to receive the documentation on that specific date nor will the offeror be able to arrange for delivery on that date.

Government Response:

The due date will be Monday, June 4, 2018 3:00 PM Pacific Time, to account for the federal holiday and extension of the RFP as noted in the Government Response to question 1.

Question 17:

Provide a written narrative of the Offeror’s understanding and proposed capability to perform the requirements of the following Statement of Work (SOW) paragraphs: 3.2.3, 3.3, 3.5, and 3.6. Please confirm that these are the only SOW sections to be addressed the Volume 1, Section 1.1, Technical Capabilities and Approach portion of the proposal response.

Government Response:

Yes.

Question 18:

Does the SB Utilization Strategy count against Tech Volume page counts? Or, does it become an appendix, with no page count limitation? This is not explicitly listed in page count table.

Government Response:

Please see the response to question 3.

Question 19:

Does the Government want just 1 (one) CD overall? Or, are we to split off all price / cost volume information onto a separate CD, which means 2 (two) CDs will be provided in the response package? Or, are we required to provide 4 separate CDs, one for each listed volume?

Government Response:

In accordance with Section L, separate CDs should be furnished for each volume for which they are required.

Question 20:

An alphabetical listing of all US BLS SOC codes can be found here: https://www.bls.gov/soc/2010/soc_alph.htm.

The reference URL doesn't work any longer. Are we using 2010 SOC codes or 2018 SOC codes?

2018: https://www.bls.gov/soc/2018/home.htm

2010: https://www.bls.gov/soc/2010/home.htm

Government Response:

Please use the 2018 version.

Question 21:

Table 3.5.2 row 6 identifies Computer Scientist Journeyman and Table 7.6 row 6 identifies Computer Scientist Junior. What is the correct skill level?

Government Response:

Computer Scientist Journeyman. Please note the tables have been updated.

Question 22:

Table 3.5.2 row 9 identifies Informational Management and Technology Analyst Journeyman and Table 7.6 row 9 identifies Informational Management and Technology Analyst Senior. In addition the SOC codes are different. What is the correct skill level and SOC code?

Government Response:

Informational Management and Technology Analyst Journeyman - 15-1212. Please note the tables have been updated.

Question 23:

Table 3.5.2 row 10 specifies SOC code 15-1212 and Table 7.6 specifies SOC code 15-1221. Which is correct? What is the correct SOC code?

Government Response:

15-1221. Please note the tables have been updated.

Question 24:

Table 3.5.2 row 11 identifies Test Engineer Journeyman and Table 7.6 identifies Test Engineer Senior. What is the correct skill level?

Government Response:

Test Engineer Journeyman. Please note the tables have been updated.

Question 25:

Table 3.5.2 rows 12 and 13 identify Systems Specialist Senior and Financial Manager Senior that are not represented in Table 7.6 Should there be entries for these positions in table 7.6?

Government Response:

The Systems Specialist Senior position has been consolidated to a single category with 57,600 total hours. There are two Financial Manager positions (Senior and Junior). Please note the tables have been updated.

Question 26:

Table 3.5.2 row 16 identifies Data Management Specialist Journeyman and Table 7.6 row 14 identifies Data Management Specialist Junior. What is the correct skill level?

Government Response:

Management Specialist Journeyman. Please note the tables have been updated.

N68936-18-R-0015 Amendment 3 Questions and Answers

The question and answer period has ended.

*Please note, questions 1-26 and their answers were posted to FBO on 24 May as Amendment 2 to the solicitation.

Question 27:

The government wrote on page 5 of the Amendment that “Volume 2 Past Performance information shall be submitted 14 days prior to the submission date specified in Block 9 of the SF 33 of the RFP.” The SF 33 lists 11JUN2018 as the due date. 14 days prior to 11JUN2018 is 28MAY2018, Memorial Day. Is it the government’s intention to have the offeror submit the 25 page Volume 2 Past Performance this Monday, 28MAY2018, Memorial Day?

Government Response:

Please see the response to question 16 (Amendment 2).

Question 28:

For further clarification to my previous question, the offeror assumes the government meant the that the Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire (CPAQ), if needed, must be sent to the Program Manager at least 14 days prior to the proposal due date. See also RFP Part B, Section 2.1, Page 8. This would allow the Program Manager to complete the CPAQ by the proposal due date. Is this assumption correct?

Government Response:

Volume 2 must be submitted in accordance with the RFP as clarified in Question 16 and Amendment 2.

The RFP states: “The Offeror shall include instructions for the Program Manager to send completed questionnaires within two weeks of its receipt via e-mail to Lauryn Hiser, Contract Specialist, at Email: lauryn.hiser@navy.mil, thereby allowing the customer approximately two weeks to complete their response. All CPAQs should be received by the Government concurrently with the Offeror’s proposal submission.“ The CPAQ information “should be received by the Government concurrently with the Offeror’s proposal” by 14 June 2018 3:00 PM Pacific Time.

Question 29:

Can the Government confirm that access to all computers and lab equipment required to complete the tasks will be granted and that this equipment is not considered GFE as the contractor will only have access to them and no implied responsibility?

Government Response:

Access to computers and lab equipment will be granted. These resources are not considered GFE.

Question 30:

In regards to FAR Clause 52.219-9 will the Government confirm if the Small Business Subcontracting Plan should be submitted within the Price/Cost Proposal Volume as it will contain pricing information?

Government Response:

Yes, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan should be submitted within the Price/Cost Proposal Volume.

Question 31:

With 1.4 Small Business (SB) Utilization Strategy the solicitation requests that offerors shall include goals for all socioeconomic categories to be presented in both dollars and percentages in relation to total contract value.

Referenced within Volume 3 of the Price/Cost Proposal it states “No price or pricing information shall be included in any other technical volume including cover letters.”

Will the Government confirm that within section 1.4 Small Business (SB) Utilization Strategy, we should only include the overall anticipated SB socioeconomic percentage goals based on total contract value and exclude the dollars?

Government Response:

No, the Small Business (SB) Utilization Strategy shall include goals for all socioeconomic categories to be presented in both dollars and percentages in relation to total contract value.

Question 32:

We assume that the Prime contractor must provide two different rates for the Financial Manager – Senior and Junior. Please provide functional descriptions for the Financial Manager – Senior and confirm that we can add additional rows in Attachment L-1 to accommodate two different rates for the Financial Manager category.

Government Response:

The descriptions were provided (updated) in Amendment 2. Offerors may use as many rows as necessary on Attachment L-1 to make its proposal complete.

Question 33:

Attachment L-1 Cost Summary Spreadsheet on RFP requires both primes and “principal subcontractors” to list their current approved indirect cost rates. A company’s indirect rates are considered proprietary and sensitive financial information. We assume that a principal subcontractor could request authorization to submit its indirect cost rates directly to NAWCWD, and to have those rates excluded from the prime contract in order to protect them from disclosure. Please confirm that if this is done that the subcontractor should email their NICRA directly to the designated email address.

Government Response:

Yes, subcontractors may send information to the Government Point of Contract, Lauryn Hiser via email lauryn.hiser@navy.mil. The prime offeror shall include a statement providing the Government authorization to directly contact subcontractors regarding pricing information submitted directly to the Government.

Question 34:

This solicitation contains a number of Senior-level resources requiring a Master’s degree and at least 10 years of experience. Please confirm that instances where a proposed fully-burdened labor cost exceeds the NAVAIR Tripwire / $300k annually per employee will not automatically result in a determination of unreasonable pricing.

Government Response:

Exceeding the Tripwire will not automatically result in a determination of unreasonable pricing.

Question 35:

To apply the tripwire in the determination of price reasonableness disadvantages offerors based on their cost accounting approaches. For example, one offeror could be structured in a way that charges all contract-related support direct (to include, contracts administration, subcontracts administration, billing, project control/finance support). This would effectively keep their indirect costs applicable to a contract labor category low, but the overall cost to the program would be higher during delivery once these resources started charging costs to the program direct. Another offeror could be structured in a way that accounts for all contract-related support as indirect (contracts / subcontracts administration, billing, etc.). This would increase the indirect cost applied to the contract labor categories, but ensures that no additional support labor is charged direct. In both cases, the overall contract cost may be equivalent, but one presents the costs as indirect and another presents the costs as direct-charge. Both methods are approved by DCMA and may be compliant with respective cost accounting systems. However, the company that accounts for these costs through indirect rates is penalized in the tripwire assessment.

We recommend that the tripwire not be used as an automatic determination of price unreasonableness, but that a more careful consideration is made of the totality of an offeror’s cost accounting structure, and consideration instead be made on the reasonableness of the components of the fully-burdened rate (direct labor, fringe, fee, etc.). Can the government confirm that they will use this approach?

Government Response:

Please see the response to Question 34.

Question 36:

Will the government consider allowing the Offeror to submit [proposals] electronically?

Government Response:

No. Please see the response to Question 8 in Amendment 2.

Question 37:

The instructions set in the solicitation does not preclude a Prime contractor to propose potential subcontracts under Time & Materials (T&M) or Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) basis, therefore, we assume that these type of subcontracts will be allowed. Can the government please confirm that our assumption is correct?

Government Response:

Yes, T&M and FFP subcontracts are not precluded. However, the Government will assess in its evaluation the level of cost risk posed by subcontract type.

Question 38:

Will the government allow the offeror to replace the Project Manager requirements for a MA/MS with a BS and 15 years of work experience?

Government Response:

The Government’s experience and education requirements are clearly outlined in the Section C Statement of Work (7.5 Experience and Education Level definitions). No deviations from the SOW will be accepted.

Question 39:

NAVAIR clause 5252.211-9503 (Section B, page 4) indicates that there will be a reduction in fixed fee if fewer than 526,080 man-hours are expended. By requiring the Offeror to charge hours in order to collect the Fee, it appears that the Government is, in essence, setting up a Cost-Plus-Percent-of-Cost Contract – that is to say, Offerors have to increase their hours (which are directly associated with costs), to collect their Fee and are not entitled to the Fee unless this effort is spent. Cost-Plus-Percent-of-Cost Contract are not allowed per the FAR. Please confirm that Offerors will be allowed to invoice for remaining Fee at the end of each task order, even if fewer than 526,080 hours are expended.

Government Response:

Fee will be paid out in accordance with the terms and conditions set forth in the RFP.

Question 40:

The Government describes a transition in plan and a transition out plan requirement. The government also mentions that there is currently an incumbent. Can the government please confirm that the transition in and transition out are not part of the evaluation or that if they are part of the evaluation that the incumbent must price both as well.

Government Response:

The Government does not take a position of speculation on who will propose or what they will propose.

Question 41:

Will the government please clarify if the magnitude and scope requirements for the past performance form is required to be met for each reference submitted or is this a collective dollar amount and scope? Can the government clarify that the Scope / Complexity / Magnitude items notes are solely examples and not the specific criteria that will be used by the Government? For example, noting that “minimum contract value $40M and / or minimum annual contract value $20M” are only example an offer could present to demonstrate magnitude, but is not the specific evaluation criteria the Government will use? In other words, can the Government clarify that it is NOT establishing a magnitude threshold that only past performance that are a minimum of $40M or minimum annual contract value of $20M will be considered relevant?

Government Response:

The magnitude and scope laid out in Section L is the criteria by which the Government will measure past performance.

Question 42:

Will the government confirm that the sub-contractors can submit to the government their SOWs/PWSs directly?

Government Response:

Yes. The Prime’s proposal should clearly identify who will be performing the tasks.

Question 43:

Attachment L-3_Past_Perfromance_Information_Form: When printing the form, the language in the text box gets cutoff by the form instead of printing all of the information within the text box. Can the government provide a word version of the form so that the offeror can use that in their submission to be able to have all of the language within the form be evaluated.

Government Response:

Offerors can convert the form to Word provided all information requested in the PDF version is included.

Question 44:

Attachment L-2 Annual Fully Burdened Labor, Instructions Tab, Row 3 references: Column A for offeror name. Question: Should this reference Column B?

Government Response:

The Attachment L-2 instructions should reference B. Please see updated Attachment L-2.

Question 45:

Attachment L-2 Annual Fully Burdened Labor, Instructions Tab, Row 5 references: Individual Designator* | For each individual Contractor employee proposed, the contractor shall enter the corresponding Position Number as found on Attachment L-4. Question: Please confirm the referenced attachment where we can find the Position Number as described (L-4 is the CPAQ, not a pricing document)?

Government Response:

The Individual Designator column has been removed. Please see the updated L-2 (attached to this amendment).

Question 46:

Attachment L-1, "The Offeror is not required to utilize the Government's labor categories, however, each proposed labor category should appear opposite of the government labor category it is comparable to" Clarification: Since offerors are not required to utilize the Government's labor categories, are offerors to propose their own solution of categories as well as skill levels?

Government Response:

No. The Government has provided the required labor categories, descriptions, and associated hours in the RFP. If the offeror’s internal naming practices do not match the Government’s labor categories, the offeror must provide a cross-walk between its internal naming convention and the Government’s labor categories.

Question 47:

"This requirement shall be performed approximately 20% off-site at the contractor’s facilities. " Question: Will the government indicate which categories and hours make up the 20% at contractor's facilities?

Government Response:

Historically, Program Management and Financial Management functions have been performed at contractor facilities.

Question 48:

"Offerors shall provide the last three (3) years of actual indirect information." Question: Does this requirement apply if rates have been reviewed and approved by DCAA?

Government Response:

Yes.

Question 49:

"If subcontractors are proposed, they shall provide the same information required for the prime contractor, unless otherwise noted below." Question: If subcontractor is proposed as Time and Materials (T&M), will submitting fully loaded rates with supporting narrative be accepted by the government? Will a breakout of direct labor and indirect rates for subcontractor T&M rates be required?

Government Response:

All pricing information is required in order for the Government to complete its evaluation.

Question 50:

"Proposed fully burdened labor costs may be subject to the NAVAIR labor tripwire." Question: Will the government provide the current NAVAIR labor tripwire?

Government Response:

The current tripwire is $300,000.

Question 51:

[Offeror] would appreciate confirmation that the Past Performance submission deadline is 29 May 2018 to account for the Memorial Day Holiday. (Volume 2 Past Performance information shall be submitted 14 days prior to the submission date specified in Block 9 of the SF 33of the RFP.) Additionally, [offeror] hereby requests your consideration of extending the submission deadline to 30 May 2018.

Government Response:

Please see the Government’s response to Questions 1 and 16 in Amendment 2.

(End of Summary of Changes)