QandA AMD07_Redacted.pdf

Question # RFP Page RFP Section/ Paragraph

CLIN/

Clause/Appendix/Attachm ent/Other Questions/Comments/Recommendations Assignment Government Response

1 SF30 Block 14 The RFP due date is extended to August 11, 2021 at 1PM CST.

Would the Government please consider extending the due date by two weeks to allow us the opportunity to assess the impact of Amendment 6 on our solution? DITCO The Government has issued an extension to the RFQ from August 11 through August 17th.

2 132 L5.1.3 Cost/Price

Information Attachment 1- Section B Pricing

Worksheet Viasat requests clarification on the following: For CLIN 4042A- Primary 7, Caribbean- the quantity listed is 118. Through the rest of the document the quantity for this service is listed as quantity 18- confirm required qty?

CSCO Correct, thank you. The Government has updated CLIN 4042A to quantity 18.

3 132 L5.1.3 Cost/Price

Information Attachment 1- Section B Pricing

Worksheet CLINx101 Site Survey and IDP shows qty 63 in Mod Base Period, 42 in option year 1 base period, and 42 in each subsequent option periods. Believe Opt 2-4 should be qty 0 as Base and Opt 1 add to 105.

CSCO/DITCO

Correct, thank you. The Government has updated CLIN x101 Site Survey and IDP quantities to 0 for Option period 2 through Option period 4.

4 132 L5.1.3 Cost/Price

Information Attachment 1- Section B Pricing

Worksheet

Viasat request clarification on the following: The combined total of installation CLINs 0102A, 0102B and 0102C (Base Tab), 1102A, 1102B and 1102C (Option 1) and 2102A, 2102B and 2012C (Option 2) equals 210 installations. Whereas the total number of possible installations appears to be 105- Please confirm or provide the correct quantity of installations to be priced?

CSCO/DITCO

The Government estimated 210 installations based on one installation for the primary and one installation for the secondary systems.

5 131 L4.2.2 Tech Volume organization Please confirm whether the Project Management Plan, Transition Support Plan, and Risk Management Plan should be separate appendixes or attachments to Volume 2, integrated into the overall Volume indicating page count, or either is appropriate as long as page limit is adhered to. Trying to understand best readability for the Government.

DITCO Unless otherwise specified, either is appropriate as long as the page limit are adhered to.

6 131 Sect L Page Limits Please confirm if providing a page limit exception list at the beginning of each volume is sufficient for total page count exceeding the limit specified in Table L1 - Proposal Organization due to page limit exceptions such as coverage maps and network diagrams embedded throughout the volumes.

DITCO

I am sorry, this question is not exactly clear. If I am understanding correctly, If you are itemizing your page counts, and listing out the ones that are excepted as excepted in the table of contents, then yes the table of contents are excluded from page counts.

7 22 6.3.3.3 Installations PWS States: An EPA will be authorized in the event that the ship requiring installation services differs from the “Appendix A Technical Specifications” provided to offerors. Appendix A only shows terminal specs and notional ship configuration for the Fleet broadband system. What is the intended installation specifications from Appendix A that may differ?

CSCO/MSC

Removed the EPA Language. The new daily installation rate will be used to populate the estimated installation services.

8 132 L5.1.3 Cost/Price

Information Attachment 1- Section B Pricing

Worksheet CLINx303A/B look to only include warranty for the shipboard systems (primary and secondary) and not the Carry-on systems based on qty identified. Please clarify all equipment warranty expectations.

CSCO/MSC The Government has updated the warranty quantities to cover the carry-on systems.

Attachment 1 -

Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Could the Government provide an unlocked/unprotected Pricing Worksheet? This would assist bidders in the analysis process for determing CLIN pricing. Cost/Price No.

Section+M+AMD06 _Tracked+Changes+

07232021

M.2.4. Price Factor (4)

If a CLIN is proposed as $0.00, the Government may order that

CLIN for $0.00, at no cost to the Government. The Government will consider a CLIN with a proposed price of $0.00 as complete. The Government will consider a CLIN that is left blank and does not include a price as incomplete. In addition, Offeror generated abbreviations such as “NSP”, “N/A”, and “N/C” (No charge) are not acceptable entries and the price proposal will be considered incomplete.

Incomplete proposals will be ineligible for award.

The current version of the Pricing Worksheet (Attachment 1 - Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06) does not allow a $0.00 cost to be entered. When attempting to enter $0.00, the worksheet reverts to the template $ - in the cell. Therefore, an attempted entry of $0.00 would be considered as left blank, incomplete, and the proposal as ineligible for award.

Could the Government issue a revised/corrected Pricing Worksheet which allows a $0.00 entry?

Cost/Price The Government has updated the Attachment 1 - Section B Pricing Worksheet to allow a $0.00 entry.

11 Pricing CLIN 0065B and 0079B On the Modernization Base Period Tab CLINS ‘0065B and ‘0079B both have quantity “0” while the rest of the CLINs in those sections have quantity 1. Did the Government intended to have quantity Zero for these two CLINS?

DITCO/Cost-Price These are correct as stated.

12 General Given the Government's significant changes to the PWS and CLINs, we kindly request a 3-week extension to the proposal due date to allow for time to sufficiently complete the proposal response.

DITCO See question #1 response.

13 Pricing CLIN Option Period 4, Tab CLIN 4042A

On the Option Period 4 Tab CLIN 4042A has a quantity of 118, we believe the Quantity was intended to be 18 as it was in CLIN 3042A. Can the Government please confirm the correct quantity.

CSCO See question #2 response.

14 Pricing CLIN CLIN 3101 and 4101 In Option Periods 3 and 4, CLIN 3101 and 4101 Site Survey & IDP have quantity 42. Will the Governmet please confirm that this is correct? CSCO/DITCO See question #3 response

15 Tab 1 - Instructions #1 - For ease of completion…

Attachment 1 - Section B

Attachment 1 - Section B contains the instructions, "All MRC and NRC amounts must be proposed in whole dollars only. Figures with decimals will not be accepted." This instruction made sense when the kpbs units in the model were bundled in groups (e.g. 64 kbps), as was the case with the original copy of Section B.

However, the Section B included with AMD 06 requires Offerors to base costs on a single kbps. Costs for a single kbps cannot be accurately expressed rounding to the nearest whole dollar. Doing so would artificially inflate costs to the Government by 50-75% over the life of the program. Respectfully request the Government revise this instruction in the cost model. Recommended language below.

"(1) For ease of completion, the cells to be completed have been highlighted in yellow. All MRC and NRC amounts; except CLINs X013-X024 and X052A-X053D;

must be proposed in whole dollars only. Figures with decimals for these CLINs will not be accepted. MRC and NRC amounts for CLINs X013-X024 and X052A- X053D must be proposed rounding to the nearest whole cent."

DITCO/CSCO

No, The unit prices for these CLINS should be priced per ship cost to meet the data rates required (CIR) in the PWS per each ship. The quantities are estimates of ships operating in each region that require the specified level of data rates or specified level of throughputs as specified in the PWS. The Government does not intend to purchase data per Mbps, but requires the need to purchase service levels required per ship. The Government updated Section B units of measure from Mbps and Kbps to 'Each'. Hopefully this clarifies any confusion with regard to the Governmetnts intent. These services should tie back to the regional levels (Mbps and Kbps quantities) requested per ship/carry on in the PWS.

Sustainment + Option Period Tabs

CLINs x0013-x0024 Attachment 1 - Section B CLINs x0013-x0024

Will the Government please clarify the instructions for completing cells x0013-x0024 in the Attachment 1 - Section B for the Sustainment (Base) Period and for all option periods? The confusion stems from the expression for Units in Attachment 1 versus service throughput increments specified in the referenced PWS paragraphs. It is unclear whether the PWS CIR increments are the basis for the Attachment 1 unit magnitudes. For example, CLIN 0013A in Sustainment (Base) Period - it appears Offerors should price: Unit: 1 kbps, QTY: 14, Duration: 24 months. This is a very low unit increment and unreasonable to price rounding to the nearest whole dollar. Is it the Government's intent, instead, that units for CLINS x0013-x0024 are priced for the CIR rates included specified in the provided PWS reference? For CLIN 0013A, this would translate to: Unit: 512 duplex kbps, QTY: 14, Duration: 24 months.

DITCO/CSCO Elaborated above.

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06 CLINS x082, x083, x084, and x085.

Amendment 6 updated the unit for CLINS x082, x083, x084, and x085 from FTE to LOE, with no evaluated quantities. Are Offerors to develop a solution and propose their full LOE for each PWS section for the referenced CLINs?

DITCO/CSCO

CLINS 82-85 are the typical annual operating expenses/contract overhead(pulled through for the period of performance in the schedule B--unit of measure is broken out into the MRC for ease of ordering), for the PWS and contract. The LOE should support the PWS functions.

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06 CLINS x084 and PWS Section 6.3.4.

Amendment 6 updated the unit for CLINS x084 from FTE to LOE and references PWS section 6.3.4. PWS Section 6.3.4 details requirements for warranty and maintenance, not FSR Support. PWS Section 6.3.4 does not offer enough detail regarding FSR support for Offerors to propose a firm fixed price. Will the Government provide an updated PWS reference for FSR Support, or provide more information regarding work scope and level of effort for FSR Support so that Offerors may build a solution and appropriately price the FFP CLIN?

DITCO/CSCO

The Government provided a title in the Section B (FSR Support). FSRS provide the warranty and maintenance functions as requested in the PWS and Appendix E and should be billed under this CLIN.

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06 CLINS x085 and PWS Section 6.3.6.1.

Question: Amendment 6 updated the unit for CLINs x085 from FTE to LOE and references PWS section 6.3.6.1. PWS Section 6.3.6.1 details requirements for Additional Operations Support Requirements, not Operations Support. PWS Section 6.3.6 details requirements for Operations Support. Will the Government provide an updated PWS reference for Operations Support (6.3.6)?

DITCO/CSCO Please provide an LOE for the PWS section to 6.3.6 (Clarified in the Section B Price Sheet)

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06, Instructions tab and CLINs 001A-x012D – Afloat CLINs.

The requested units for the NRC and MRC for CLINs x001A-x012D Afloat Services are unclear. For example, for CLIN 0001A, the unit is listed as Mbps with an evaluated quantity of 6. For ease of ordering at contract execution, will the Govenrment confirm that Offerors should price the NRC and MRC unit price for 1 Mbps x 1 Mbps as identified in PWS 6.2.1.1.2, with a total extended price of 12 Mbps?

DITCO/CSCO Please reference question 15 above.

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06, Instructions tab and CLINs x013A-x024D – Afloat CLINs.

The requested units for the NRC and MRC for CLINs x013A-x024D Afloat Services are unclear. For example, for CLIN 0013A the unit is listed as kbps with an evaluated quantity of 14. For ease of ordering at contract execution, will the Govenrment confirm that Offerors should price the NRC and MRC unit price for 512 kbps x 512 kbps as identified in PWS 6.2.1.1.2, with a total extended price of 14336 kbps?

DITCO/CSCO Please reference question 15 above.

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06, Instructions tab and CLINs 001A-x012D – Carry-On CLINs.

The requested units for the NRC and MRC for CLINs x001A-x012D Carry-On Services are unclear. For example, for CLIN 0002A, the unit is listed as Mbps with an evaluated quantity of 1. For ease of ordering at contract execution, will the Govenrment confirm that Offerors should price the NRC and MRC unit price for 2 Mbps x 1 Mbps as identified in PWS 6.2.1.1.6, with a total extended price of 3 Mbps?

DITCO/CSCO Please reference question 15 above.

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06, Instructions tab and CLINs x013A-x024D – Carry-On CLINs.

The requested units for the NRC and MRC for CLINs x013A-x024D Carry-On Services are unclear. For example, for CLIN 0014A, the unit is listed as kbps with an evaluated quantity of 1. For ease of ordering at contract execution, will the Govenrment confirm that Offerors should price the NRC and MRC unit price for 2 Mbps x 1 Mbps as identified in PWS 6.2.1.1.6, with a total extended price of 3000 kbps?

DITCO/CSCO Please reference question 15 above.

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06, Instructions tab and CLINs x028A-x051C.

The requested units for the NRC and MRC for CLINs x028A-x051C are unclear. For example, for CLIN 0028B the unit is listed as Mbps, with an evaluated quantity of 2. For ease of ordering at contract execution, will the Govenrment confirm that Offerors should price the NRC and MRC unit price for 4 Mbps x 2 Mbps as identified in PWS 6.2.2.3.1, with a total extended price of 12 Mbps?

DITCO/CSCO Please reference question 15 above.

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06, Instructions tab and CLINs x052A-x052D.

The requested units for the NRC and MRC for CLINs x052A-x052D are unclear. For example, for CLIN 0052B the unit is listed as kbps, with an evaluated quantity of 10. For ease of ordering at contract execution, will the Govenrment confirm that Offerors should price the NRC and MRC unit price for 512 kbps x 512 kbps as identified on the instructions tab, with a total extended price of 10240 kbps?

DITCO/CSCO Please reference question 15 above.

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Attachment 1 – Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06, Instructions tab and CLINs x053A-x053D.

The requested units for the NRC and MRC for CLINs x053A-x053D are unclear. For example, for CLIN 0053B the unit is listed as kbps, with an evaluated quantity of 0. For ease of ordering at contract execution, will the Govenrment confirm that Offerors should price the NRC and MRC unit price for 1024 kbps x 1024 kbps as identified on the instructions tab, with a total extended price of 0 kbps?

DITCO/CSCO Please reference question 15 above.

Would the Government consider an extension for the proposal submission to August 27, 2021 in order for industry to incorporate changes as a result of the Government's answers to questions given the tight timeline between the questions due date and the proposal submission due date?

DITCO See question #1 response.

Attachment 1 - Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Worksheet(s) Sustainment (Base) Period and Modernized (Base) Period

CLIN 0089, 0101, 0102A-C

CLIN 0089 indicates that travel costs are not to be priced under the Sustainment (Base) Period tab. The Modernization (Base) Period tab includes activities that would require travel - CLIN 0101 (site survey) and CLIN 0102A-C (equipment installation). Are offerors to price travel expenses for CLINS 0101 and 0102 or do these expenses fall under CLIN 0089? Could the Government please clarify that travel costs incurred under CLIN 0101 and 0102 should not be priced and will be considered at the task order level as indicated in CLIN 0089.

DITCO

CLINS 0082-0090 apply to the same period and will be utilized through/for sustainment/modernization.

Travel to support CLINS 0101-0102 will utilize CLIN 0089. Since this is the same base period, there is no added benefit to having additional travel clins listed under the modernization tab. Travel to support these CLINS will be priced at the task order level based on specific location/ports as required.

Attachment 1 - Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Workbook / Unit

The CLIN sheets have a unit of measure of Mbps for the bandwidth services. The Instructions tab items #7 and #8 define the CIR associated with the pricing on CLINs x0001A-x024D [Sustainment] and x028A-x051C [Modernization]. The “unit” defined in “Mbps” imply that each CLIN is to provide a network with an aggregate bandwidth as defined in the “Quantity” field; example, quantity 6 in CLIN 0001A defines a network sized at 6 Mbps (total aggregate), which based on the definition in the instructions will be shared among ships operating at the defined CIRs per ship (1Mbps/1Mbps) during the Sustainment period. Following the same logic, quantity 2 for CLIN 0028A for the same region requires a network of 2 Mbps (total aggregate) during the Modernization which does not allow to provide bandwidth of 4Mbps/2Mbps to each ship.

We assess the Government’s intent is to order quantities of CLINs based on operational remotes (ships and carry-on terminals) in each particular region, not in Mbps. As such, (example) the intent is to order quantity 6 for CLIN 0001A to allow the operation of six (6) ships each with CIR 1Mbps/1Mbps in that particular region during sustainment. Similarly, quantity 2 of CLIN 0028A to operate two (2) modernized ships at CIR 4Mbps/2Mbps.

If this understanding is correct, will the Government modify the CLIN sheet and use “Each” in the unit field for CLINs x0001A-x024D [Sustainment] and x028A-x051C [Modernization]?

CSCO/DITCO Please see question 15 for clarity and updates. These assumptions are correct.

Attachment 1 - Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

Total Cell in all tabs Can the Government make column C in all tabs wider to allow the values in each tab to display correctly the totals? If the total is 10 million dollars or more the cell displays ####### signs

CSCO/DITCO Yes. This has been updated.

Attachment 1 - Section B Pricing Worksheet AMD06

6.3.4 CLIN x084

For FSR Support the unit of measure has been revised from FTE to be LOE. Using LOE as a unit, and the duration is monthly, are offerors to supply a monthly rate to cover the FSR function which the socitation document states: "The contractor shall be capable performing no less than three simultaneous break fix/ installation activities at fleet concentration areas globally. The contractor shall be capable of supporting 30-40 maintenance and/or modernization actions per year." This is difficult to price because each maintenance action is unique and different and the global nature of the request. Would the government consider adjusting this CLIN unit to read FTE and each maintenance action be priced at the task order level.

CSCO/DITCO This CLIN is for MSC's annual warranty expenses and estimated based on the PWS data provided.

Attachment 1 -

CLINs x0102A-C Attachment 16 Appendix F, Section 4

The installation CLINs had the CLIN type updated to read FFP (EPA). Reviewing the FAR clauses cited, the Economic Price Adjustment (EPA) clause FAR 52.216-4. This does not allow for adjustments for changes in labor quantities. Due to the variability in ship size, configuration, the time to install antennas and associated equipment, and other unknown factors, puts considerable cost and performance risk on offerors. The inclusion of the site survey CLIN allows contractors to assess the size of the install and the potential complications; however, the fixed installation rates limit how much a contractor can accomplish within the confines of the fixed rates proposed unless they overprice the CLINs to allow for the installation variables previously mentioned or take on considerable cost risk.

Additionally, the risk of restriction of movement events such as quarantine, standby action due to undelivered equipment, etc. that could add more cost and performance risk.

(1) Would the government consider adding a CLIN for a daily installation rate that would be activated only when circumstances present themselves and justification is presented to accommodate this risk?

(2) Is it the Government's intent of the language in Attachment 16, Appendix F to the RFP, to allow the contractor to increase its labor hours based on the difference in size an design of ships?

CSCO/DITCO

OK, we removed the EPA, and will use the daily rate for installation services. Hopefully this fills in the remaining points of uncertainty and provides more clarity than the EPA offered. The CLIN for a daily installation rate has been included into the Section B pricing sheet and the price for the daily rate will be used to pull into the installation services price evaluation (quantities) for installation services as estimated in the Section B per weight class. Supplies was removed from the CLIN description, any specific supplies required for install not already provided a CLIN for should be included in the ODC CLIN and will be provided for using site survey data and analysis at the task order level. A plug number has also been provided for the ODCS.

Attachment 1 -

Appendix F, Section 4

The RFP requires offerors to propose, as part of their total evaluated price, fixed prices for installation services for modernization. Providing a fixed price for shipboard SATCOM installations requires offerors to estimate the labor hours and material quantities for installing the equipment on each ship or class of ships.

The amount of time required for installation depends on numerous factors, including, among other things, the number and length of the cable runs, the number of compartments or other obstructions to cable routes, the number of power outlets and breaker locations, the number of decks, the locations of the HVAC systems, systems integration and welding information, and the actual size of the ship. Without this information, developing a reasonable estimate of ship installation costs is impossible. Offerors lack the information necessary to compete intelligently and on a relatively equal basis, submit their proposals based on varying assumptions regarding the nature of the work they are being asked to price. The weight of the equipment to be installed is not an accurate basis to estimate installation services.

What is needed is the class and other physical characteristics of the ship. The RFP as it is written does not supply enough detail to estimate installation services, and any attempt to scope and price the work would be an inaccurate guess. The only offeror that could possibly price their services on any kind of knowledgeable basis would be the incumbent contractor, which knows what installation services are required based on its insider knowledge of the MSC fleet ships. This affords the incumbent contractor an unfair competitive advantage. Amendment 6 would allow offerors to vary adjust their proposed pricing after award, in accordance with FAR 52.214-6, once more detailed information has been provided for a specific ship being recalled for installation. However, this approach does not adequately address the solicitation defects identified in the pre-award protest. Allowing offerors to request an economic price adjustment later does not provide offerors the information necessary to price their proposals now. The concern is not simply whether offerors ultimately will receive fair compensation for their services, but that offerors lack adequate information to price their proposals on a common basis for evaluation purposes. Moreover, to the extent offerors are permitted to reprice their proposals based on additional information later, the prices being proposed now will not accurately reflect the relative cost of the offerors’ proposals to the Government. The inclusion of FAR 52.214-6 does nothing to eliminate the incumbent’s advantage, in pricing its proposal, based on knowledge of the MSC fleet of ships that the Agency has refused to share with other offerors.

We respectfully request that the Agency enable offerors to compete on an intelligent and relatively equal basis by modifying the solicitation in one of the following ways: (1) providing a “plug number” for installation services for modernization, (2) soliciting daily man-rates or T&M pricing for installation services for modernization, (3) soliciting fixed pricing for installation services for modernization based on ship class and disclosing as-built drawings for at least one ship in each class.

CSCO/DITCO

Please see above and below responses. A daily installation level was provided in the Section B pricing template to be used for installation evaluations and provided plug number estimates for levels of install based on weight class.

Attachment 16- Appendix F.

Appendix F, Section 4

Reference Attachment 16, Appendix F. Due to the variability in ship size and configuration, the amount of time and quantity of materials required to install antennas and associated equipment may vary widely. The inclusion of the site survey CLIN allows contractors to assess the size of the installation and potential complications. Although FAR 52.216-4 permits a price adjustment based on changes in labor rate and material costs, it does not appear to contemplate price increases based on changes in estimated quantities, such as those that would become apparent from the as-built drawings and site surveys of different ships.

A. Is it the Agency’s intent that the language in Attachment 16, Appendix F to the RFP allow the contractor to increase its fixed price to account for increases in the estimated number of labor hours and quantities of materials required for installation based on the information contained in the as-built drawings and site survey?

B. If so, what baseline will the Government use in determining the number of additional labor hours or quantities of materials for which the contractor is entitled to payment?

CSCO/DITCO

Please use the new daily installation rate (CLIN X105) for evaluation of installations with the "plug estimate" provided for days for installations based on weight class. CLINS X102A-C have been updated.

The Contractor will use the daily rate to quote out their ship specific installation services at the task order level. Attachment 16 has been updated.