Copy_of_QA's_after_RFP_release_(21_Dec_2015).xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 67 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Cargo and Tanker Vessels
- Solicitation number
- W56HZV15R0069
View the file
Other files
Show 40 more
Latest 50 of 56 listed here. See the rest on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Q&A's
| Questions & Answers for the Landing Craft Utility 2000 (LCU 2000) Solicitation W56HZV-15-R-0069 | ||
| Questions | Government Response | |
| 1 | Has the government considered a single location in the United States as the primary setting for the SLEP? For instance, a U.S. shipyard? Is it acceptable to transit all of the LCU???s to one location? | Please see Exhibit B, Work Task 1 "Towing Services". |
| 2 | Can you tell me what version is the correct version of "Attachment 0001" "LCU 2000 SLEP Repower Requirements"? I have a version dated "30 Nov 2014 & "31 July 2015" (I didn't see this July 31st 2015 version with the last update on FedBizOps. Please advise which is correct. | Attachment 0001, dated 31 July 2015 is the most up-to-date version, which is located on FEDBIZOPPS. Please search W56HZV15R0069 at https://www.fbo.gov/. Click on "Cargo Tanker Vessels". The solicitation and all other associated documentation is located under "All Files". All previous versions should not be referenced or used for proposal submission. |
| 3 | Has there been any changes or updates to the CUI package that we downloaded in July? | The CUI package has not been changed or updated. |
| 4 | The latest version of the Master Agreement for Repair and Alteration of Vessels (MA) Eligibility Requirements requires a “Corrosion Prevention and Control Plan” in accordance with MIL-STD-1568C for designated spaces related to OCCM requirements. According to the document’s foreword, this reference applies to the “conceptual, validation, development and production phases of aerospace weapons systems.” It appears not to apply to the life cycle maintenance actions related to machinery compartments on marine vessels. Is this the correct reference? If so, please clarify the intent on applying this to LCU OCCM requirements. If not, will this item 3(j) in the Eligibility Requirements be deleted? | Amendment 0001 to solicitation W56HZV15R0069 revises Attachment 0027 MA Eligibility Requirements, Section C.1.2.6, and CDRL A004. |
| 5 | Can you clarify our correct interpretation of CLIN 1001 and 2001 is as follows; |
1001 First ordering year Minimum order of one ship set of engines Maximum order of two ship sets of engines 2001 Second ordering year Minimum order of zero ship sets of engines Maximum order of two ship sets of engines
| As stated in CLIN 1001, narrative B001 the minimum quantity is SLEP repower modifications for one vessel and the maximum quantity is SLEP Repower Modifications and Option ECPs for two vessels. As stated in CLIN 2001, narrative B001 the minimum quantity is SLEP Repower modifications and Option ECPs for zero vessels and the maximum quantity is SLEP Repower Modifications and Option ECPs for two vessels. | ||
| 6 | As a small business and in the interest of fair and reasonable competition, we respectfully request the Government consider changing the past performance relevancy criteria in L.4.3.1.1 to ongoing or completed in the past 5 years? | Section L.4.3.1.1 will not be revised. |
| 7 | Regarding L.4.4.4, Contractor Team Arrangements is the narrative required only for our Small Business Subcontractors or can it include our Large Business Subcontractors as well? | Section L.4.4.4 only includes contractor team arrangements for small business subcontractors. |
| 8 | Could Government please advise if there is a cutoff date for Bidders Questions? Also, could you please inform Industry of the expectation regarding when questions will be answered? | There is no deadline for Bidders questions; however, any questions received after COB 30 October 2015 may not be answered. Responses to questions will be posted as soon as possible. |
| 9 | Referring to Attachment 0023 the Past Performance Relevancy Matrix, Section L.4.3.1.1, and Section M.4.3.1, it appears from these three references that the evaluation criteria is limited to the offerors past performance in providing technical data packages, configuration management and management of logistical data. However, the pricing model per Attachment 0021 is all about shipbuilding, OCCM, Repower, etc. Will the Government consider expanding Attachment 0023 to include shipbuilding and OCCM Experience? Also, we want to request to expand not only the matrix but also the evaluation criteria to include shipbuilding past performance. | Sections L.4.3.1.1 and M.4.3.1 will not be revised. |
| 10 | Under evaluation criteria M.4.2.6.3- ECP Adjustment Formula it stipulates ECP's to be completed on four vessels for less than $45 million and it also references the need to price four Load Line's under A050, but all price CLIN's reference a max quantity of 2 vessels. Please advise how many vessels are in fact going to be a part of this procurement? | There is a maximum of 2 vessels for ordering year one and a maximum of two vessels for ordering year two, which equates to a maximum of four vessels for the entire contract. |
| 11 | C.12.5 references the need for Training Aid Models. This requirement stipulates a need for five museum quality scale training models. However, there does not appear to be a provision in the pricing model for this requirement. Please advise where Contractor is to price this requirement? | The training aid models are in support of training (CLIN 1009) and will not be separately priced. |
| 12 | SECTION C - DESCRIPTION/SPECIFICATIONS/WORK STATEMENT C.7 Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) C.9. Provisioning, C.10. Packaging, Handling, Storage, and Transportation (PHS&T) and C.11. Source Data for Forecasting Diminishing Manufacturing Sources and Materiel Shortages (DMSMS) map to the following NSP CDRLs: |
A022 Logistics Product Data A023 Maintenance Allocation Chart (MAC) A024 Level of Repair Analysis (LORA) A030 Supply A031 Technical Report-Study/Services A032 Provisioning Performance Schedule A033 Provisioning Parts List A034 Engineering Data For Provisioning (EDFP) A035 Logistics Product Data A036 Source Data These items were covered under a priced CLIN in the DRAFT RFP but no longer map directly to a priced CLIN. Note that CLIN 1010, Logistics Fielding only addresses C.13.
Under what priced CLIN does the government expect the above items to be priced under?
| If a specific section of the SOW is not identified within the CLIN narrative (CLINs and ELINs) that item is not separately priced and should be allocated to the type of work the CDRL is in support of. | ||
| 13 | When I go to FBO and search W56HZV-15-R-0069, all that is there are all the documents issued back in July 2015. Is there a special permission needed to see the final RFP? | The final solicitation has been posted to FEDBIZOPPS. Please search W56HZV15R0069 at https://www.fbo.gov/. Click on "Cargo Tanker Vessels". The solicitation and all other associated documentation is located under "All Files". All previous versions should not be referenced or used for proposal submission. |
| 14 | I am contacting you in reference to the subject line MA Application |
Package. Specifically on paragraph 3 (j) states;
"Corrosion Prevention and Control Plan. Submit a Corrosion Prevention and Control Plan to describe the contractor's approach to implement the corrosion program in accordance with 5.1.1 of MIL-STD-1568C.
This corrosion prevention and control plan shall address only those materials and processes identified within Exhibit B (OCCM Requirement) of RFP W56HZV-15-R-0069, specifically Engine Room/Bow Thruster Compartment; Steering Gear Compartment; Sludge/Dirty Oil/AFFF/Sewage tanks;
Protection, Performance, Test and Inspection Process. I have talked to several shipyards who currently have a standing MA and found these standards are not applicable. MIL-STD-1568C is for "Materials and Processes for Corrosion Prevention and Control in Aerospace Weapon Systems". Can you provide some clarification.
| See response to question #4. | ||
| 15 | RFP Section A.4 Vessel Survey Opportunity restricts making requests for vessel surveys to prime offerors. Further, the section restricts the size of the offeror's ship check team to three representatives including subcontractors. The complexity of the repowering and ECPs have led to formation of teams consisting of shipyards, engineering firms, logistics firms, etc., all of whom need to inspect the vessels in order to properly determine the scope of changes required so that reasonably accurate firm fixed price bids can be developed. Shipyard production staff and cost estimators, naval architects, structural engineers, marine engineers, and electrical engineers will all be required to sufficiently define the extent and cost of changing equipment and systems. The Government is requested to reconsider the limit on the number of representatives. Alternatively, subcontractors should be allowed to request vessel survey opportunities separate from prime offerors, or the Government should allow each prime offeror up to three days each for ship checks in order to rotate a sufficient number of representatives through the vessels. | Section A.4 will not be revised due to the limited availability of different vessels and Government resources required for the vessel survey. |
| 16 | Can you please direct bidders to where they can find the full text of the TACOM clauses that are referenced in the solicitation? | All TACOM local clauses are in full text within the solicitation. All other clauses (FAR, DFARS, AFARS) can be viewed from the following website: http://farsite.hill.af.mil/. TACOM local clause 52.219-4005 has been added to Section L in full text. |
| 17 | Would you be able to provide us a list of the Design/Contractors that are working this project and that would come to us for RFP???s? Or, if there is another process, please let me know. This would allow us to better prepare our quotes for them and ultimately, the Army. | The Government cannot release a list of possible "Design contractors" that are working this project; however, a list of possible subcontractors has been posted to FEDBIZOPPS. Please search W56HZV15R0069 at https://www.fbo.gov/. Click on "Cargo Tanker Vessels". |
| 18 | RFP paragraph A.4 states that prime offeror will be allowed no more than three representatives to attend (to include subcontractor representatives) the vessel survey. Because of the scope of the SLEP/Repower/OCCM and the requirement to provide documentation for all four variants of the LCU 2000 we request that the Government increase the allowed number of survey participants per Prime Team to six. | The offeror will only be allowed three representatives for the vessel survey in accordance with section A.4. |
| 19 | CLIN 2013 calls for a second engine set for the Maritime Intermodal Training Department. RFP paragraph C.22.1 specifies “The contractor shall deliver one new engine set for MITD.” Request the government clarify the requirement for engine sets that the contractor is to provide to the MITD. | Only one engine set will be procured for the Maritime Intermodal Training Department (MITD). It has not been determined if the engine set will be procured under ordering year one or ordering year two. |
| 20 | Are the days listed in paragraph F-15 “work days” or “calendar days”? | The days listed in paragraph F-15 are calendar days. |
| 21 | RFP paragraph C.8.4.3 includes requirements for the development of change packages to the technical manuals for the Main Propulsion Engine, Main Reduction Gear, Ship Service Generator, Emergency Generator Set, and Bow Thruster Engine. It is our understanding that those components are being replaced in their entirety and require new technical manuals to be developed per RFP paragraph C.8.2.1.1. Request the government clarify the requirements of paragraph C.8.4.3. | The contractor is required to develop new technical manuals (C.8.2.1) and change packages (C.8.4). There will be a requirement to develop new manuals for the vessels that have undergone the SLEP Repower and Modifications effort. The existing technical manuals will stay, these technical manuals will need minor updates and will be used to support the vessels that HAVEN'T undergone the SLEP Repower and Modifications effort. |
| 22 | CLIN 1012 is titled “FIRST ORDERING YEAR – TRAVEL; There is no CLIN for travel to be incurred during the second ordering year. Please provide CLIN for pricing travel during the second ordering year. | CLIN 1012 only pertains travel associated with Section C.18.4.2. See CLIN 1012 Narrative C001. All other travel requirements are Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and are identified in applicable CLINs in section B. |
| 23 | Please clarify if the four (4) Past Performances are for the prime bidder only, or can bidders include Past Performance contracts from team mate(s), provided we do not exceed 4 total? | Section L.4.3.1 states the following: "For the Past Performance Factor, provide information for a total of up to four recent and relevant contracts performed by the offeror." |
| 24 | Regarding Attachment 24, Past Performance Questionnaire, we have a similar concern as that we expressed in our questions #002. That is, it appears that the Past Performance evaluation questions are oriented primarily towards the contractor's performance related to technical data packages, configuration management and management of logistical data. However, all of our contract references include mostly shipbuilding, OCCM, Repower, etc. types of work. Will the Government consider expanding Attachment 0024 to include shipbuilding and OCCM Experience so that the evaluators for our contract citations can provide their assessment of our performance in those areas as well? And again, we want to request to expand the overall evaluation criteria in Section M for the Past Performance Volume to include shipbuilding oriented work similar to what is identified in the Pricing Worksheet. | The Past Performance Volume of Sections L & M will not be revised. |
| 25 | Per RFP L.4.2.1: Consistent with the prices or costs and fees identified in the Cost/Price Factor of the solicitation, the offeror's Cost/Price Factor Volume shall include substantiating information: either pricing, sales, or cost information as described below, supporting the reasonableness of the proposed prices (Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLINs), and reasonableness and realism of costs and fees (Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) CLINs) in sufficient detail for the Government to evaluate the Cost/Price Factor Volume per the applicable criteria in Section M.4.2. In order for sub-contractors to provide substantiating information at the appropriate level of detail, which may be proprietary, will the government facilitate and accept sealed bid information from Sub-contractors? | If a subcontractor declines to provide complete price proposals to the Offeror or higher-tier subcontractor, then those subcontract proposals may be submitted by the subcontractor directly to the PCO using the same submission instructions noted above. Such submissions must arrive at or prior to the due date for proposals as noted on the front page of the solicitation. |
| 26 | We do not see a Section L requirement or a Section M evaluation factor for a technical or performance approach or solution, and we do not see clear provision in Section L for us to submit a technical or performance approach or solution. However, there are several instances (shown below) in Sections L and M that refer to the offeror's "proposed technical approach", "proposed performance approach" or "proposed solution". |
L.4.1.1 Technical Maturity Self-Assessment. The offeror shall self-assess the extent of maturity of its proposed technical approach against each level and characteristic of maturity described in the Technical Maturity Rubric, Attachment 0020. The offeror shall indicate whether its proposed technical approach meets the requirement for each level and characteristic. The offeror shall indicate by file name which data (submitted in response to L.4.1.2) substantiates its self-assessment for each level and characteristic.
L.4.3.2 Performance Approach: To support the Past Performance Factor Volume assessment of the relevance of prior contracts to the LCU 2000 SLEP contract, offerors shall describe the similarities between their proposed performance approach and the contracts they are presenting.
M.4.1.1 The Government will assess the risk that, based on the extent and credibility of the Technical Maturity data provided, the offeror's understanding of the requirement, the soundness of the offeror's technical approach, and performance risk. This assessment will be based on the proposal information submitted in response to Section L.4.1.1 and L.4.1.2. As information submitted in response to L.4.1.1 will require substantiating data to establish credibility, the Government's assessment will rely more heavily on the substantiating data submitted in response to L.4.1.2 than on the self-assessment submitted in response to L.4.1.1.
M.4.3.1 The Past Performance Factor evaluation will assess the expectation that the offeror will successfully meet the LCU 2000 SLEP contract requirements based on the offerors record of past performance on recent and relevant contracts as it relates to the offerors proposed solution. This assessment will result in a Confidence Rating which will be based upon the extent to which recent prior past performance is relevant to the contract requirements for the efforts listed in L.4.3.1.1.
Does the Government request a technical approach be included to which we self-assess the technical maturity and provide substantiating data, or does the essence of the data we provide to substantiate our technical maturity constitute our technical approach?
Can you please clarify your intention with the inclusion of the phrases "proposed technical approach, "proposed performance approach" and "proposed solution" as highlighted above, and clarify how we respond to the existing requirements of Section L (Technical Maturity and Past Performance) in that context?
| For technical maturity (according to M.4.1.1), the Government assessment of the offeror's technical approach "will be based on the proposal information submitted in response to Section L.4.1.1 and L.4.1.2." Your self-assessment and substantiating data will provide the necessary information for the Government to assess your technical approach. For past performance, your narrative explanation of the similarities between your proposed performance approach and the contracts you are presenting (as required by L.4.3.2) will provide the necessary details on your approach for the Government to determine relevancy. Any information on your proposed technical approach, proposed performance approach or proposed solution that needs to be provided demonstrate that you meet a level or characteristic of maturity or that a particular contract is relevant should be provided in either the Technical Maturity substantiating data or performance approach narrative respectively. | ||
| 27 | Will the vessel/vessels selected for phase one SLEP have the C4I bridge equipment removed by others prior to their release to the contractors facility? | The military equipment will be removed and stored prior to the vessel being turned over to the contractor. The commercial equipment will be the responsibility of the contractor to remove, store and safeguard for the duration of the SLEP/OCCM. |
| 28 | For clarification, is it the government's intent that each prime contractor will have an assigned time period for dedicated survey of the craft? | Yes, based on the number of interested bidders, each contractor will be assigned a specific time block on each of the different configuration vessels that are available over the three day period. A detailed schedule will be sent out no later than 1500 Thursday, 8 October 2015. |
| 29 | Reserved | |
| 30 | Will the government be providing source data for the existing LCU 2000 technical manuals listed in Section C? |
| All available source data will be provided at the Start of Work Meeting (SOWM). Existing Technical Manuals were provided as GFI. | ||
| 31 | In order for all contractors to submit pricing based on the same period of performance would the Government please provide a contract performance start date for pricing purposes? | It is anticipated that contract award will be made 3rd quarter FY16. However, this is subject to change. |
| 32 | In Section F, pg. 112, the delivery date for CLIN 1009 (Training) is identified as “14 days prior to 1st vessel completed.” What constitutes completion of the 1st vessel? | Government acceptance constitutes completion of the 1st vessel. |
| 33 | In Section F, pg. 112, the delivery date for CLIN 1010 (Logistics Fielding) is identified as “14 days prior to each vessel hand-off.” What constitutes vessel hand-off? | Vessel hand-off is when the Government acceptance takes place. |
| 34 | These two questions are similar and are submitted together. Section B identifies the minimum guaranteed CLINS as 1001, 1002, 1011 and 1012. Since the Technical Data Package (CLIN 3001/CDRL A006) is required to be partially delivered 90 days after contract award and prior to start of the Repower effort, please clarify whether or not CLIN3001/CDRL A006 will also be part of the minimum guaranteed CLINs? Similarly, since the Logistics requirements (e.g., Technical Manuals, Training, Provisioning, etc.) are required to support vessel operations and testing after completion of the Repower, ECP and OCCM industrials efforts, please clarify when the Government intends to order the Logistics related CLINs and CDRLs. | The minimum guarantee for ordering years one and two are as stated in section B CLIN 1001 narrative A001. ELINS identified under CLIN 3001 (A006), (A037), (A038) and CLIN 1009 will be added to the contract minimum. Technical Manuals and provisioning are NOT part of the contract minimum. |
| 35 | In Section H, pg. 121, it is stated that the Technical Manual CDRLs (A025, A026, and A027) may be exercised from contract award through 440 days after contract award. Since the technical manuals are required to support training, vessel operations and testing after completion of the Repower, ECP and OCCM industrial efforts, and draft Technical Manuals are due 180 days after MAC approval, please clarify when the Government intends to order the Technical Manual CDRLs. | Section 12.2 (TSP) and 14.3.1 (test support) call for the use of COTS manuals to develop the training, vessel operations and testing in lieu of having Preliminary Technical Manuals (PTMs) delivered. |
| 36 | Reserved | ||
| 37 | Section C, pg. 64, paragraph C.2.4.5 (TDP Schedule Delivery), states the contractor shall begin delivery of the TDP no later than 90 days after contract award. Based on this schedule, is it accurate to state that the TDP CDRL A006 will be awarded upon contract award? If not, when does the Government intend to award CDRL A006? | TDP CDRL A006 will be ordered upon contract award. | |
| 38 | Page 4, paragraph A.2 of the RFP states the contract will be a two year IDIQ contract and Section B, page 10 states that each of the 2 years is approximately 365 days. While Section F provides the period of performance in terms of days after award for the Repower and OCCM CLINs, the RFP does not specifically identify the period of performance for each CLIN and priced CDRL in terms of start date and end date. For pricing purposes, please clarify the period of performance for each CLIN relative to planned contract award date. | The period of performance for each CLIN is identified in clause 52-242.4457 and the period of performance begins once the Government order is received. Also please reference CDRLs for delivery dates. | |
| 39 | Paragraph C.1.2.5 in Section C, page 61, requires the submittal of data plate information for all parts installed in support of the Repower and ECP efforts, however the RFP is not clear as to whether the contractor is required to fabricate and install the data plates. Please confirm whether the Government requires, or does not require, the contractor to fabricate and install the data plates. | C.1.2.5 requires recording data from manufacturer-installed data plates on equipment installed on the vessel. The contractor is not required to purchase, fabricate, or install additional data plates as part of this task. | |
| 40 | Attachment 28 (Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires) is titled Attachment 0026. Please provide a file with an updated file name. | See Amendment 0001 to solicitation W56HZV-15-R-0069 | |
| 41 | In Section L 4.2.3, should the word “or” be “for” so that the 3rd sentence reads as follows: Microsoft Excel spreadsheet FOR all CLINs in Section B? | Section L.4.3 has been updated to state:"for all CLINs in Section B" | |
| 42 | Section L 4.2.8. For Over and Above CLINs, it is stated the provided plug numbers should be used for a not to exceed value of $488,000 per vessel and is inclusive all overhead and G&A. Section B requires a breakdown for hours, estimated labor, fixed fee and estimated materials. Is the $488,000 also inclusive of fee? Please confirm that the offeror is not required to complete the Section B breakdown given the Government has defined a value for the CLIN. | The $488k is inclusive of overhead, G&A and fee. The RFP will be amended to clarify this and Attachment 0021 will reflect the unit cost amount so that the Offeror does not need to input any values for these CLINs. | |
| 43 | L.2.1.1 states that Volumes 1-5 require a quantity of 1 each. However, in Section L.2.2.1, the requirement is for “three identical sets of CD-ROMs or DVDs for each volume”. Please confirm the correct number of CD/DVDs required for each volume. | The solicitation requires three separate CD/DVDs for each volume. Each CD/DVD shall contain the complete volume. | |
| 44 | Per L.2.2.1, does the Government require the actual CD/DVD cover to be signed by a representative of the company authorized to submit proposals? | Yes, the Government requires one CD/DVD cover of each volume to be labeled as the primary copy and signed by a representative of the company authorized to submit proposals. | |
| 45 | Per L.2.2.1.1, does the Government require each paragraph in Volumes 1-5 to contain a reference number or is this limited to Volume 1 – Technical Maturity Factor? | Each paragraph in all volumes shall contain a reference number. This is not limited to Volume 1. L.2.2.1.1 states "Each page of the proposal shall be numbered, and each paragraph of the proposal shall have a reference number." | |
| 46 | Section C.2.1. of the RFP states, “The contractor shall obtain and provide ABS approval of all drawings for machinery replacement and modifications including completion of any surveys and tests required for certification, such as a deadweight survey.” Is it the intent of the US Army to class the LCU 2000 vessels with ABS? If so, what class and notations does the US Army intend to pursue? | All equipment selected for LCU SLEP should meet ABS classing requirements (A1 class). The vessels were built and the original stability letter/load line letter were to ABS class A1. LCUs will require ABS approval for all hull penetration and stability changes, at a minimum, to secure a new 5 year load line letter upon completion of SLEP and release to service. | |
| 47 | Section 1.0 of Attachment 0001 to the RFP states, “Selection, integration, and design of engines, generators, and associated systems shall be based on a “best value” approach, accounting for performance, efficiency, reliability, availability, maintainability, cost, and any other factors affecting performance or life-cycle cost.” Does the U.S. Army have an annual operational profile for the LCU 2000 for the purposes of determining annual fuel consumption? | An operational profile adequate to estimate fuel economy will not be provided. | |
| 48 | Section 2.2.11 of Attachment 0001 to the RFP states, “Mean time between Operation Mission Failure (MTBOMF) for “vessel propulsion and steering” evaluated as a whole shall be no less than 1000 hours (threshold).” | ||
| Will the U.S. Army provide steering gear reliability data to allow evaluation of MTBOMF for “vessel propulsion and steering” as a whole? Will the U.S. Army define Operational Mission Failure for determining MTBOMF? | Steering gear reliability data will not be provided. |
"Operational Mission Failure": A malfunction or failure that prevents or could prevent the system from performing one or more mission essential functions.
| 49 | What is the expected Contract Award Date to be used for development of nominal schedules and pricing purposes? | See response to question 31. |
| 50 | Solicitation Section B lists FOB Destination vice Origin for CLINs with stated Delivery requirements. However, Section F references F-20 and F-21 and Section M paragraph M-3, Evaluation of Transportation Costs for Options (FOB Origin) discuss provisions for delivery at Origin. | Please see Section B. The FOB point for CLINs 1015 and 2013 is origin. |
| 51 | The potential total number of vessels to be priced is unclear. CLIN |
A050 infers there are 4 vessels but in other areas of Section B, the base year refers to Vessel 1 and 2 and the Option year also refers to Vessel 1 and 2. Please clarify if the government intends to order as a minimum one (1) LCU Repower Modification under CLIN 1001 with an option for a maximum of two (2) vessels. If so, does the government require the contractor to price another 2 vessels under CLIN 2001 for a potential total of 4 vessels?
| The maximum order quantity is four vessels. Ordering year one is for a maximum of 2 vessels. Ordering year one refers to the vessels as vessel 1 and 2 for that ordering year. Ordering year two is for a maximum of 2 vessels. Ordering year two refers to the vessels as vessel 1 and 2 for that ordering year. Section B CLIN 1001 narrative B001 states: "Minimum order quantity is SLEP Repower Modifications: 1". The "1" designates "1 vessel". CLIN 1001 states: "Maximum quantity SLEP Repower Modifications and Option ECPs: 2. The "2" designates "2" vessels. | |
| 52 | Solicitation Section B CLIN 1001 states: "The ECPs will be priced separately in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section H.1.2 and L.4.2.2.2. There does not appear to be a Section L.4.2.2.2. Should the reference be L.4.2.16? |
| The reference has been updated in Amendment 0002 to solicitation W56HZV15R0069 to from Section L.4.2.2.2. to L.4.2.16 in CLINs1001 and 2001 Narrative B001 and Section H.1.2. | |
| 53 | Solicitation Section B CLIN A025 states: "The failure of the offeror to insert a unit price applicable to the option quantity shall mean that the offeror will supply all or any part of the option, if exercised by the Government." Seven (7) newly developed technical manuals are to be provided under this CLIN. These manuals may not be the same unit price. Should separate unit prices for each technical manual be provided under this CLIN instead of one total package price? |
| As stated in Section B ELIN A025 the unit of issue is one lot and shall be priced accordingly. | |
| 54 | Solicitation Section C.12.5, Training Aid Models, requires design, fabrication, and delivery of five scale models. Under which CLIN should the models be priced? What is the required delivery date? |
| Section C.12.5 is under C.12, which is identified under CLIN 1009. See Section F clause 52.242-4457 for delivery requirements. Section C.12.5.5 for ship to address. | |
| 55 | Solicitation Section L.2.2.1.1 states that "each paragraph of the proposal shall have a reference number." Is it the Government's intention to require the numbering of every sub-paragraph, which could extend the reference to as many as eight digits? Is it acceptable to number paragraphs to the level of major headings or to a limited level of indentation (such as |
the fourth level)?
| Each page needs to be numbered and each paragraph needs to be numbered. This can be done any way the bidder wants. All the paragraphs in the entire volume can be numbered from one on or each page can start the numbering over (ie page 5 paragraph 1) or paragraphs can be assigned by section or any way the bidder wants to number the paragraphs, as long as they are numbered. | |
| 56 | Solicitation Attachment 0001, paragraph 2.1.1 states: "The vessel shall be capable of maintaining normal engine and reduction gear operating temperature when beached for 3 hours (threshold) / indefinitely (objective). This requirement applies to all vessel engines, including generators." |
a. What power level are the MDEs at for evaluating this requirement?
b. What loading are the SSDGs at for this evaluation?
c. Is this requirement subject to the same environmental requirements outlines in Attachment 0001 paragraph 2.1.6 or is the starting temperature of the water in ballast tanks at some lower temperature for this evaluation?
For the purposes of this requirement,
1) Assume MPDEs are at idle in neutral or in gear, whichever is worst-case.
2) Contractor shall determine SSDG loading based on analysis performed for SSDG sizing.
3) Environmental requirements in Attachment 0001 apply.
57 Solicitation Section C.18, Government Testing, refers to contractor support during a period up to 120 days at all Government test sites. As this requirement falls under a Firm Fixed Price CLIN, additional information is required to responsibly and realistically provide a price. Specifically,please provide: a.Planned schedule of testing to include duration of test events and their distribution across the 120-day period.b.Types of tests to be executed. c.Location of Government test sites. C.18.1.will be revised in the next RFP amendment as follows "Government testing of the first vessel, referenced in the below sections, will be conducted. Testing will consist of operational missions designed to validate contractor compliance in accordance with the LCU 2000 SLEP Repower Requirements (Attachment 0001) and SLEP ECPs. Testing will be conducted on the vessel at locations ranging from the North Atlantic, along the eastern seaboard of the Unites States, to as far south as the Caribbean."
CLIN 1012 is a cost no fee Travel CLIN in support of C.18 Government Testing, for evaluation purposes the Government will be updating the RFP to reflect a dollar figure to be used for CLIN 1012.
| 58 | Solicitation Section L-27, Notice Concerning MIL-PRF-2104G Lubricants, refers to ".the warranty set forth in Section 4 of the contract" in the last sentence. Reference to "Section 4" is unclear. Where is this found in the solicitation package? | |
| Section L-27 will be revised in the next amendment. | ||
| 59 | CDRLs A023 Maintenance Allocations Chart (MAC), A024 Level of Repair Analysis (LORA), A033 Provisioning Parts List (PPL), A034 Engineering Data for Provisioning (EDFP) are all due before the approved TDP. Is it the Government's intent to develop final versions of Logistic Product Data from unapproved Technical Data Packages? | No, CDRLs A022 (FMECA), A023 (MAC), and A024 (LORA) will be updated to reflect new timelines. |
| 60 | Solicitation Section C.4.6.1 states the Preliminary Design Review (PDR) is to be scheduled within 45 days after contract award. The exit criteria for the PDR are approval of the engine selection and approval oflong lead time items. CDRL A023 requires a draft MAC and Repair Parts and Special Tools List (RPSTL) NLT 60 days after contract award. Is it the Government's intent to have the Contractor develop a draft MAC and RPSTL within the 15 days between the PDR and the 60 day timeline outlined in CDRL A023? | The Government will update CDRL A023 MAC to reflect a new timeline. |
| 61 | According to AR 700-127 Section 6-6, AR-750-1, and SOW paragraph C.7.2.4, MACs are an output of the LORA and reflect the approved maintenance concept. Results of the LORA will be used to develop the MAC. The timelines as written within CDRL A023 and A024 have the MAC and RPSTL being delivered before the LORA. Is it the Government's intent to have the contractor develop a MAC and RPSTL before the LORA? |
Reference CDRLs will be revised in the next amendment.
62 Solicitation Section C.7.2.4 states, "The MAC shall be the framework for each technical manual and provisioning." An approved MAC will be needed before technical manual and provisioning tasks (such as RPSTLs) are started. Is it the Government's intent for the contractor to deliver the draft MAC and RPSTL concurrently as outlined in CDRL A023?
Reference CDRLs will be revised in the next amendment.
63 Will the Government provide source files (xml, graphics, etc.) for the Legacy Technical Manuals as baseline documents for development of updated documents?
See response to #30.
| 64 | Regarding the requirement for the offeror to have a Master Agreement. Paragraphs A.3, C.1.1.1, and L.4.5.6, require that the offeror have an approved MA. Our question is whether the prime contractor must have the MA, or is it acceptable for one of the subcontractors to have the MA? | The prime contractor is required to have the Master Agreement with the ACC-WRN. |
| 65 | Please provide link to site where bidders can access the TACOM specific clauses that are incorporated by reference in the RFP (e.g. 52.219‐4005 referenced in Section L.4.5.8 on page 174) | TACOM local clause 52.219-4005 has been added to Section L in full text. A link is not avaliable for local clauses. |
| 66 | Given the size of the effort, recommend the Government include the Earned Value Management System (EVMS) DFARS Clause 252.234‐7002 | It is anticipated that the cost portion of this effort will not exceed the threshold; therefore, EVMS is not required. |
| 67 | This CLIN states that if fielding for only one vessel is procured, the "unit price will be calculated as half the total value of this CLIN"; however, bidders may have NRE against the first vessel, which would not be appropriately accounted for the Government simply split the unit price for CLIN 1010 in half. Recommend the Government allow bidders to cost the NRE separately from the vessel price in Pricing Attachment 21 to provide the Government a more accurate of the cost of the first vessel. | The Government acknowleges this recommendation. No change will be made to the CLINs. |
| 68 | Reference to L.4.2.2.2 ‐ several references to this paragraph, but there isn't such a para. in L?? (e.g. H.1.2 on page 120). Please confirm whether there is a missing Section L.4.2.2.2 or if this these references are a typo and should refer to a different Section? | References to section L.4.2.2.2 were incorrect and have been revised to L.4.5.5. See Amendment 0002 to solicitation W56HZV-15-R-0069. |
| 69 | The Government provided CLIN 1012 for travel inputs in the First Ordering year, however there is no travel CLIN for the Second Ordering year. Under which CLIN should bidders capture travel expenses for the Second Ordering year? | CLIN 1012 only pertains travel associated with Section C.18.4.2. See CLIN 1012 Narrative C001. All other travel requirements are Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and are identified in applicable CLINs in section B. |
| 70 | Will the Government add CLIN 1010 for Logistics fielding to the minimum. | No, the Government will not add Logistics Fielding to the minimum. |
| 71 | The Government Provided CLINs 1001 and 2001 for the SLEP Repower and all ECPs, and CLINs 1010 and 2009 for Logistics effort. If all Logistics work falls under only the two logistics CLINs how will the contractor differentiate the Logistics for the possibility of option ECPs not being exercised? | It is up to the offeror to determine how to price its proposal while complying with the terms of the solicitation. Cost shall be applied to the applicable CLINs. |
| 72 | No mention of the number of OEM instructors in C.12.1 or C.12.3 | Section C.12.3 Conduct of Training states 12:1 ratio for lecture and 4:1 for hand-on training. |
| 73 | For which specific equipment does the government want training? | Please reference Section C.12. |
| 74 | Section states "Each class conducted shall be supported by the number" of OEM qualified instructors is listed in Sections C.12.3 and C.13.1. However, neither of these sections lists a number of instructors. Please clarify. | see response to #72. |
| 75 | Please clarify if the OEM‐certified instructor requirement applies only to ECPs,repower, or both? Does this requirement apply to Government‐provided ECPs? | OEM qualified Instructors are needed for the ECP and Repower New Equipment Training (NET). |
| 76 | This Section mentions delivery of items for testing to OCONUS locations. This would be considered an export and would require a license, which takes time. Please clarify that the Government will be the exportor (sic) of record for any OCONUS shipments and that bidders are not expected to obtain export licenses. | The potential OCONUS locations that would require shipping during testing should not require an export license under the Export Adminstration Regulations (EAR). If such an issue arises, the Government will provide a ship-to location not requiring a license. |
| 77 | Please confirm that any "non valid" PQDR returns will be settled under the Over and Above CLIN 1013 or similar CLIN. | All PQDRs are valid. |
| 78 | Please clarify the difference between the Procurement and Purchasing positions? | The key role of Purchasing will be removed from Section C.4.2.1.1. |
| 79 | Gov't has referenced a "Performance Work Statement (PWS); however, none is attached. Did the Government mean to refer to the OCCM Exhibit B? If not, what is meant by the reference to PWS? | The Performance Work Statement (PWS) is Section C.1 through C.23. |
| 80 | This provision references a CDRL A055 ‐ but that CDRL is not in the pricing worksheet. Should a line be added to the pricing worksheet for CDRL A055? | CDRL A055 is Not Separately Priced. |
| 81 | 1) Will the bidder be responsible for maintaining the ship throughout the Government verification effort? 2) Does the Government expect the contractor to provide a body at Fort Eustis for the duration of the Government verification? | 1) If the Government has accepted the vessel then the Government will maintain the vessel. |
2) The contractor is to participate in Government verification. The Government will not direct the number of people needed to support Government verification.
| 82 | Does the government expect that the support for Section C.8.8.1 and C.8.8.2 will come from the same person, or multiple personnel? | The support can come from the same individual or another individual. |
| 83 | Please confirm that the Government will provide its existing provisioning database no later than the Start of Work Meeting. | LSA-036 will be delivered at the SOWM |
| 84 | Please confirm the sequence of MAC/FMECA/LORA deliveries? Schedule is in conflict between the SOW and CDRLs. | See response to #61. |
| 85 | This provision references provision D.1.5; however, there is no such paragraph. Should this reference be deleted? | Paragraph D.2.1 will be updated remove the reference to D.1.5 to D.1.4 in the next amendment. |
| 86 | Warranty of Data DFARS Clause requires monitoring of TDP updates and corrections to TMs (changes). Under which CLIN should contractors include the costs of this work? | See response to #71. |
| 87 | This clause requires the contractor to submit MSDS for any hazardous materials used PRIOR to contract award. Should these be provided with the actual proposal submission and, if so, in which Volume? | This clause says "as required prior to award", not "used prior to contract award". This requires that the Material Safety Data Sheet be submitted in order to be eligible for award. Please provide this sheet in Volume V Proposal Terms and Conditions. |
| 88 | This clause references "the warranty set forth in Section 4 of the contract". There is no "Section 4" in the RFP. Please clarify what is meant by this reference. | See response to #58. |
| 89 | The RFP does not state a specific award date or PoP start date. What is the anticipated award/start date for the effort so that bidders can bid the appropriate year rates | See response to question 31. |
| 90 | There are no pricing instructions provided for subcontractors in Section L. What level of pricing detail does the Government want from subcontractors? Does the Government require sealed bids from subcontractors? | As stated in L.4.2.7 (b) and L.4.2.8 the Government requested non-certified cost information as applicable to support proposed costs. The contractor should provide information on subcontractor costs as required to support its proposed price. The Government does not require sealed bids from subcontractors. |
| 91 | There is a paragraph label, but no accompanying text. Please provide the text of this paragraph, or should it be deleted? | L.4.2.6 is a title. The RFP will be amended to reflect the correction. |
| 92 | Should the bidders include fee on the $488,000 plug number for the O/A work, or leave that line item as a cost number only? | See response for question #42. |
| 93 | Provision L.4.5.5 states that bidders should "affirm and describe how it is in compliance with clause 52.219‐14" However, in reading that FAR clause, it is only applicable to parts of contracts that "have been set aside for small business concerns." There does not appear to be any section of this RFP that is "set aside for small business concerns." Recommend the Government delete this Section L.4.5.5 | Reference Amendment 0002 - Section L.4.5.5 has been revised to "L.4.5.5 -Reserved" |
| 94 | Provision L.4.5.7 is not clear. Please confirm that this provision is simply saying that bidders should include their completed Attachment 022 (TDP and software rights) in this Volume V. | If all the information required under DFARS 252.227-7017 is the same as Attachment 0022, the contractor will only need to provide Attachment 0022. |
| 95 | The evaluation of transportation costs for F.O.B. Origin CLINs is not clear. Please elaborate. | The transporation costs will be added to the offerors total evaluated price. |
| 96 | In this provision, the Gov't refers to "Default Rights". Did the Gov't mean to use "Limited or Restricted" rights instead? If not, please define "Default Rights", as this term is not used in the DFARS clause. | As stated in M.4.2.5.2, Default Rights are "the minimal level of rights required by DFARS". |
| 97 | RFP Section M.4.2.6 states, "The Government will compare the offeror’s proposed prices for SLEP Repower, OCCM and ECP options (CLINs 1001 1008 and 2001 2008) to the Government's affordability target of $45,450,000…” However the calculation in Attachment 0021 includes CLINs 1002‐1007 and 2002‐2007. Please confirm which CLINs are included in the ECP adjustment. | The RFP has ommitted the dashes. M.4.2.6 the calculation includes CLINs 1001-1008 and 2001-2008 consistent with Attachment 0021 formulas. |
| 98 | This provision does not account for the HUBZone adjustment mentioned in FAR 52.219‐4 (Sec. I). Will that 10% be added after all other adjustments? Will the transportation costs be added before or after the HUBZone adjustment? | Section M.4.2.3 will be updated to include reference to clause 52.219-4 "Notice of Price Evaluation Preference for HubZone Small Business Concerns". |
| 99 | The list of GFI did not include the LCU2000 vessel speed vs power data for the vessel. Please provide. This is critical information for bidders to have in completing the Technical Maturity Rubric in Attachment 20. | The Government is not providing the LCU2000 vessel speed vs power data. |
| 100 | The list of GFI did not include the ROC (Required Operational Capability) for the LCU-2000. Please provide. | The Government is not providing the ROC (Required Operational Capability). |
| 101 | The list of GFI did not include the Safety of Use Messages (SOUM) that reference the LCU2000. Please provide. | The Government is not providing the Safety of Use Messages (SOUM). |
| 102 | How much fuel/lube oil/hydraulic oil will the vessels arrive with? | It is unknown how much fuel/lube oil/hydraulic oil the vessel will arrive with. |
| 103 | This CDRL references DID DI‐ALSS‐81874. This DID has been cancelled in the ASSIST database, with no substitution. However, there is a DID DI‐ILSS‐81289 (Engineering Data for Provisioning) ‐ is the ALSS DID a typo? Is there a newer DID reference? | DID should be DI-SESS-81874 (CDRL A034 will be updated in an upcoming RFP amendment) |
| 104 | Please clarify the LOGSA Version of DTD MIL‐STD‐40051 should be used for this effort. | Please use the Revision of MIL-STD-40051-2B as identified in each CDRL. |
| 105 | There are DIDs referenced that have been updated since the Rev shown in the DD1423 ‐ need to know which version is being required. Also, some are not out on the web. See specifics in the following lines: |
A004 ‐ shows orig, now have RevA, A011 ‐ shows orig, now have RevA, A014 ‐ DID DI‐CMAN‐80858 is listed. This DID is not in the ASSIST database. Did find a RevB of this DID on the Picatinny Arsenal website, A015 ‐ shows orig, now have RevD, A016 ‐ shows orig, now have RevD, A019 ‐ shows RevB, now have RevC, A020 ‐ shows RevB, now have RevC, A021 ‐ shows RevB, now have RevC, A022 ‐ shows orig, now have RevA, A024 ‐ shows orig, now have RevA, A046 ‐ shows orig, now have RevB. A004 - DID has been updated in Amendment 0001 - 10/05 to DI-MISC-80508 Rev B A011, A014, A015, A016, A022, A024, and A046 - (CDRLs have been updated identifing the DID Revision) A019 - DID and Section C.6.1 have been updated.
A020 - Use the DID Revision identified in the CDRL.
A021 -The contractors shall develop the Hazardous Materials Management Report (HMMR) with DID-MISC-81397, Rev B as currently written.
| 106 | RFP Section C.4.6.2. Final Design Review (FDR) shall be conducted within 90 days of the SOWM, which, according to C.4.2. shall take place within 30 days after contract award. C.4.6.2. states that the FDR shall serve as a Critical Design Review (CDR), a Production Readiness Review (PRR), and a System Verification Review (SVR) so it is assumed that no industrial work on the repowering Modifications and Option ECP's can be performed until a successful FDR is accomplished. However, F-15 states SLEP Repower Modifications and Option ECP's (Vessel 1) occur 240 Days After Receipt of Order and that the SLEP Repower Modifications and 12 Option ECP's (Vessel 2) occur 180 Days After Receipt of Order. Does the Government intend to award separate and individual delivery orders for the SLEP Repower Modifications and Option ECP's on each vessel as suggested by the language in the RFP? | The Government intends to award separate orders for each vessel. Section F-15 and CLIN 1001 - 1003 will be updated to reflect an additional 90 days for vessel one delivery date to account for CDR and FDR. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .