AWSM Q and A rev 03.pdf

Round 3 Questions Answers April 7, 2020

Our company wants to bid on solicitation W56HZV-20-R-L807 but it appears that our drydock will not be certified until after proposal submission. Will our proposal be determined unresponsive if we do not have the drydock certification by 13 April?

An offeror would not be determined unresponsive if they do not have a drydock certification or an approved MVA by 13 April, 2020. However an offeror is required to submit the MVA package within the time period set forth per L.4.7 or the proposal may be rejected per M.2.1. A Request for Information was posted on Beta.SAM.gov outlining the requirements. "Current Dry-Dock Certifications" are a requirement of the MVA Package. Per L.4.7 MVA Packages shall be submitted 15 days prior to the closing date of the solicitation to allow for proper assessment of the offerors application and execution of the MVA.

2 When are Solicitations due out?

Zone 1 (W56HZV-20-R-L807), Zone 2 (W56HZV-20-R-L806) and Zone 3 (W56HZV-20-R-L805) solicitations were posted to beta.SAM.gov on 12 March 2020.

I am willing to meet or hold a telecon to discuss my organizations capabilities further.

We are currently not engaging in one-on-one sessions. Zone 1 (W56HZV- 20-R-L807), Zone 2 (W56HZV-20-R-L806) and Zone 3 (W56HZV-20-R- L805) solicitations were posted to beta.SAM.gov on 12 March 2020.

Is it possible that contractor bid only on the vessels that they can dry-dock ?

Yes at the task order level contractors will have the ability to decide what they want to bid on.

We are concerned that mail delivery system delay might be occurring due to the Covid-19 outbreak, can we submit documents electronically? Not at this time.

Given the severity of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and resultant school and business closures, would the Government consider a two-week extension to the due date?

The RFP due date has been changed to 11 May 2020 at 1:00 p.m. local Warren, Michigan time. This change will be reflected in Amendment 0001 as well.

AWSM Questions & Answers

W56HZV-20-R-L807/W56HZV-20-R-L806/W56HZV-20-R-L805

Round Two Questions

With regards to RFP W56HZV-20-R-L805, Section “C”, Subsections C.1.0.3, item (l) “Towing the Vessel” and C.1.0.3.5 “Towing”; these specific SOW requirements do not appear to apply to Zone 3 “Pier Side”, and therefore should be removed. Please confirm.

Towing may be required at the Task Order level in Zone 3, this specific requirement remains unchanged.

With regards RFP W56HZV-20-R-L805, Section F “Vessel Pickup/Delivery”; Subsections F.8 and F.8.2 “Government Delivery and Redelivery of Vessel”; these provisions do not appear to apply to Zone 3 “Pier Side”, and therefore should be removed. Please confirm.

Vessel Pickup/Delivery may be required at the Task Order level in Zone 3, these provisions remain unchanged.

With regards to RFP W56HZV-20-R-L805, Section J, Attachment 0003 “Pricing Attachment”, Tab 4 “Zone 3 Labor Buildup”, identifies “Dockmaster” as a required Labor Category. This Labor Category does not appear to apply to Zone 3 “Pier Side” and therefore should be removed. Please confirm.

Zone 3 may require a Dockmaster at the Task Order. This labor remains unchanged.

Section M.4.3.1 in solicitation W56HZV-20-R-L805 statess that goals are expressed as a percentage of ‘Total Contract Amount’, which is defined for this Small Business Participation Factor as total proposed amount for all of the Basic CLINs and all of the Option CLINs. The Government's small business participation goals for this solicitation are:_72_ % Small Business (SB). Can the government confirm that the goal for small businesses is 72% of the total contract value and not 72% of total subcontracting?

The Government confirms that the goal for small businesses is 72% of the total contract value.

Attachment 0002 - Past Performance Questionnaire does not contain any areas/lines for inserting contract specific information so that the Contracting Agency knows what specific contract to address. Is it the Army's intention that the contractor should ad this information somewhere on the form before sending to the Contracting Agency?

Please advise Attachment 0002 has been revised.

Section A, Paragraph (h) states "Questions pertaining to this solicitation should be directed to the Contract Specialist identified on the cover page of this solicitation." There is no Contract Specialist identified on the cover page of this solicitation. Should we assume Nicole Gram will be the P.O.C. for question submittals base on the information provided in the SAM Procurement Notice? Should Jennifer Harris be copied as well on all correspondence?

Below are the Points of Contact for each Zone. Jared Chambers is the Contracting Officer for all three zone. Jared Chambers, Contracting Officer, jared.j.chambers2.civ@mail.mil Zone 1, W56HZV-20-R-L807: Nicole Gram , Contract Specialist, nicole.m.gram.civ@mail.mil Zone 2, W56HZV-20-R-L806: Jennifer Harris, Contract Specialist, jennifer.l.harris194.civ@mail.mil Zone 3, W56HZV-20-R-L805: Christopher Murphy, Contract Specialist, christopher.m.murphy90.civ@mail.mil

The GFPM instructions for Labor Rate Input state "The FBLR is inclusive of all direct labor, subcontract labor, indirect cost, labor uplifts (as applicable), and profit." Concerning subcontract labor -there are many different categories of subcontractors that could be utilized throughout this contract including Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) Technical Representatives often required by the Army to accomplish specific equipment repairs. Many subcontractors (particular OEMs) have labor rates that far exceed the normal small business labor rates. If the prime contractor offers labor rates that "blanket cover" any and all potential high dollar subcontractors it will make the offer unrealistically high and non-competitive. If the prime contractor provides a lower labor rate and has to use a higher dollar subcontractor or OEM on a task order we will lose money. How will the prime contractor get relief from this? Please consider removing subcontract labor from the FBLR and treat subcontractors as material with a ceiling rate mark-up to eliminate potential prime contractor losses.

The proposed FBLR for each labor category in the GFPM is to include the subcontract rate for any subcontractor that the prime may need to perform that specific labor category (if applicable). Any subcontract costs required for the FFP effort of a specific task order that are above and beyond the effort or labor categories listed in the GFPM can be included by the offeror in its proposals for future task order competitions. *NOTE: the pricing attachment only applies to the Time and Matierials contract type that may be used for Over and Above work.

In conjunction with above question (15), another scenario is the use of Tug and Towing Service companies as subcontractors. These companies utilize equipment hours (tug hours) which includes the tug's crew. They do not quote or bill by labor manhours. How will the prime contractor be compensated for these types of subcontractors?

Again, please consider treating all subcontractors as material with a ceiling rate mark-up.

Tug and Tow services will be included at the task order level, if required.

These services will be competed using firm-fixed-price task orders.

*NOTE: the pricing attachment only applies to the Time and Matierials contract type that may be used for Over and Above work.

Please define the term "labor uplifts" as used in the 4th line of the Labor Rate Input instructions, as well as in Section L.3.2.2.2

Labor uplifts include any additional labor costs related to an hour worked for each labor category that are not covered by direct labor, fringe, overhead, or G&A. These costs include, but are not limited to, bonuses, cost of living allowance, danger pay, or hazard differential.

Would the Government consider reformatting the Escalation form to allow the contractor to input fixed dollar amounts for each category and year in lieu of using a percentage per year? This would eliminate the use of cents and rounding off and would enhance a "cleaner" accounting effort at the billing/invoicing level. The Government will not reformat escalation in the GFPM.

How will the contractor be compensated for the use of overtime hours particularly on "Time and Material" task orders?

For T&M work, the contractor will get paid a set hourly rate for each how worked (whether it's overtime or not). The offerors should propose their rates accordingly.

The Hours and Ceiling Rates, Tab 4 of the GFPM, does not have a labor category for Gas Free/Tank Cleaners, or one for Competent Person.

Will the Government add these categories, or should these efforts fall into the General Laborer category? Please advise

Any labor categories required for the FFP effort of a specific task order that are above and beyond the labor categories listed in the GFPM can be included by the offeror in its proposals for future task order competitions.

In paragraph C.8.1 of the solicitation, please define the meaning of the sentence "When directed by the Government, and when funding is made available by the Contract modification, the contractor shall provide these services on an expedited basis." Is the Government inferring that the contractor work overtime to accomplish the additional scope of work, or that the contractor shall commence the additional scope as soon as possible after issuance of a Contract modification?

This paragraph refers to over and above work; work within the general scop of the contract, but not specifically included in the contract scope.

The required compeltion of over and above work will be determined when the over and above work is identified.

Why is the Government invoking the Service Contract Act (SCA) in this contract? This greatly limits the competition and availability of qualified subcontractors.

The Service Contract Act applies to every contract entered into by the United States, unless an exemption applies. The services required under the AWSM requirement do not meet any of the exceptions.

Does Clause 52.219-7 (c) apply to this contract? If so, how and why?

There are going to be Government directed replacement parts that are only manufactured or produced by large businesses. Please advise.

Clause 52.219-7 has been removed from the Zone 1 soliciation, W56HZV- 20-R-L807.

Why is the Government (Army) not allowing profit on materials for the Prime Contractor? As a small business, material handling is not covered 100% in our audited labor rates. We do not want to be considered a pass through material handling company. Other federal contracting agencies (Navy, Coast Guard, etc.) allow profit on materials. Please reconsider this requirement.

The pricing attachment will establish ceiling rates for Time & Materials efforts for over and above work. Per FAR 16.601, profit is not allowed on material for T&M effforts. However, at the task order level a majority of the work with be competed using FFP Task Orders. FFP allows for the use of profit on materials and ODC's.

In Clause 52.248-1 (f) of the solicitation, please define the terms "Instant Contract Rate" and "Concurrent and Future Contract Rate" and how they apply to this repair type contract Clause 52.248-1 has been deleted.

Clause 252.216-7006 (c) (2) of the solicitation states "If mailed or transmitted by facsimile, a delivery order or task order is considered "issued" when the Government deposits the order in the mail or transmits by facsimile. Mailing includes transmitted by U.S. mail or private delivery services." Because there is always a distinct possibility the U.S. mail or private delivery services can be delayed for various reasons including but not limited to bad weather, accidents etc., will the Government provide electronic notice that the delivery order or task order has been sent and when and how it was sent? Please advise

This clause is standard in solicitations and contracts when definite-quantity contract, a requirements contract, or an indefinite-quantity contract is contemplated. ACC-DTA will issue orders electronically per 252.216-7006(c)(1).

Please explain how Clause 252.245-7004 (b) (all inclusive) of the solicitation applies to this contract.

As prescribed in DFARS 245.107(6) the clause 252.245-7004 shall be used in all solicitations and contracts containing the clause 52.245-1 Government property. If Government Property applies to a particular task order, this clause will apply.

Attachment 0008 - Acronym List is identified in the List of Attachments in Section J but was not provided on the procurement site. Please provide this document. Attachment 0008 has been deleted from Section J (Zones 1 & 3).

Paragraph M.4.3.1 reads "The Government will evaluate the extent of the Offeror's approach to achieving the Government's objective of providing opportunities in meeting the small business participation goals identified in this section". The goals are then listed by percentages for Small Business through Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Businesses. This contractor is a small business and we normally do business with small businesses. This contractor does not select subcontractors by their socioeconomic classifications, but by their experience, qualifications, insurance requirements, and their ability to pass our Quality Assurance audit. Is the government going to penalize a prime contractor for not meeting the government's small business participation goals?

Small Business Participation is an evaluation factor in this solicitation and will be considered in this tradeoff. The importance of this factor in comparison with the other evaluation factors is outlined in Section M.4.

All of the socioeconomic categories are important and a proposal that provides more participation in these categories will be seen as more advantageous than one that provides less participation in these categories, for this factor.

Our company wants to bid on solicitation W56HZV-20-R-L807 but it appears that our drydock will not be certified until after proposal submission. Will our proposal be determined unresponsive if we do not have the drydock certification by 13 April?

An offeror would not be determined unresponsive if they do not have a drydock certification or an approved MVA by 13 April, 2020. However an offeror is required to submit the MVA package within the time period set forth per L.4.7 or the proposal may be rejected per M.2.1. A Request for Information was posted on Beta.SAM.gov outlining the requirements. "Current Dry-Dock Certifications" are a requirement of the MVA Package. Per L.4.7 MVA Packages shall be submitted on or before the closing date of the solicitation to allow for proper assessment of the offerors application and execution of the MVA.

On Attachment 0001 – Army Vessel Fleet, vessels: LSV-2, LSV-3 & LSV- 4 are not listed. Please confirm that we are not required to provide pricing for these vessels.

Logistics Support Vessels (LSV) 1 (Benson Class)include LSV's 1-6. Vessel specific pricing will be required at the task order level.

M.4.3 Volume III Small Business Participation requires each company to submit Attachment 005, the SBP Workbook. While it is clear that every proposal must include this worksheet, the goals for each type of DBE is not clear. There is a requirement for 77% to be SB, 12% to be SDB, 12% to be WOSB, 7% each to HubZone, VOSB, and SDVOSB. If the prime contractor submitting the proposal is a small business, then the 77% of the total proposed amount can be done by them. However, then the goal is to sub out an additional 45% to the other DBE categories listed in M.4.3.1. That math is not possible.

The SB goal is the percentage for all types of small business entities.

Each of the remaining goals (for SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB and SDVOSB) are the goals for each specific type of firm AND they are a SUBSET of the SB goal. Therefore, these goals together will NOT equal 100%. Also, it is possible for a SB to fall under more than one category, so the SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB and SDVOSB goals added together will NOT equal 45%. To illustrate, if you have a subcontractor that is a WOSB and a HUBZone SB, the portion of the work they will perform will count under both the WOSB and HUBZone SB categories and is ultimately rolled up into the 77% SB goal.

According to L.4.1, The Small Business Participation proposal submission instructions apply to every Offeror (U.S. and non-U.S.), regardless of size, socioeconomic status, or locations of working facilities or headquarters. L.4.2 a. describes All Offerors, including Offerors who are themselves small business concerns for the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code assigned to this requirement, are required to complete the Small Business Participation Factor Workbook using the detailed Small Business Participation Factor Workbook Instructions. However, we as an OCONUS contractor we will perform our vessel repair work outside of U.S. Are we considered as the Small Business described in L.4? Please note we have done the vessel repair for US Navy as a prime contractor and used some sub-contractors in South Korea.

The definition of a Small Business Concern (SBC), per 13 CFR 121.105 is an “entity organized for profit, with a place of business located in the United States, and which operates primarily within the United States or which makes a significant contribution to the U.S. economy through payment of taxes or use of American products, materials or labor.” If you meet this definition, you are considered a small business.

Otherwise, you are not considered a small business.

Contractor doesn’t see in the solicitation any restrictions on the end date for questions to be asked and answered. Please advise industry on the deadline for questions

Section A.4 states, "The Government will post all changes, amendments, and updates to the solicitation, as well as answers to questions generated by industry on this site up until the deadline for receipt of proposals. "

For the labor categories listed on Attachment 3, please advise if certain categories are not employed directly by the Contractor if Contractor can use their subcontractor labor rates on these items

Yes offerors can use subcontractor rated for categories idenditifed in attachment 0003, that are not employed directly by the contractor.

Under Section L.3.1.2, it references SOW RQMTS under L.3.1.1(c) on RFP W56HZV-20-R-L807. It states "Attachment 0001- Vessel Systems and Exhibit B- Army Vessel Fleet 16 Oct 2018". Attachment 0001 posted that Contractors have from beta.sam.gov is titled "Exhibit A- Vessel Fleet" and only lists fleet quantities--no systems noted and there is no Exhibit B. Also these documents are NOT listed in Section J List of Attachments . In addition to these missing references, the solicitation notes under A4 Program Executive Summary on beta.sam.gov should have a Performance Work Statement (PWS) but there is also not a PWS posted or listed as an attachment. Please confirm what the Government considers the PWS? Also, please provide to Industry Exhibit B and Attachment 0001- Vessel Systems or please provide clarification on what appears to be missing attachments?

L.3.1.1.(c)(i) has been revised to remove the "Exhibit B" reference.

Attachment 0001 has been revised to remove the "Exhibit A" reference.

The watercrafts identified in Attachment 0001 are the systems. A.4 has been revised to change the reference to Performance Work Statement to Section C, Scope of Work.

Section A notes “Vendors are to submit their proposals via SAM—UNLESS Directed otherwise by Section L”. Please confirm Section L supersedes Section A and Contractor is not required to submit their proposal on SAM. Proposals shall be submitted in accordance with Section L.

For the labor categories listed on Attachment 3, please advise if certain categories are not employed directly by the Contractor if Contractor can use their subcontractor labor rates on these items

Yes offerors can use subcontractor rated for categories idenditifed in attachment 0003, that are not employed directly by the contractor.

Do offerors who already have an approved agreement in one of these three categories still need to submit that entire package 15 days prior to the closing date of the solicitation? If the entire package is not required for current agreement holders, what documentation would be acceptable as proof?

If an ABR/MVA package as already been submitted to ACC-DTA as outlined in RFP section A.4 you are not required to submit another package or documentation. Per Section L.4.7 The offeror shall provide a copy of their valid Master Vessel Agreement (MVA), Agreement for Boat Repair (ABR) or Master Agreement for Repair and Alteration of Vessels (MARAV) package.

Round Three Questions

Paragraph C.1.3 of the Solicitation states "The contractor shall identify, IAW CDRL A009, any omissions from the drawings or specifications or the mis-description of details of work which are manifestly necessary to carry out the intent of the drawings and specifications, or which are customarily performed, shall not relieve the Contractor from performing such omitted or misdescribed details of the work, but shall be performed as if fully and correctly set forth and described in the drawings and specifications." The contractor understands that if omissions and errors are found in the drawings and specifications during the bidding phases of task orders, these omissions and errors can be brought to light and corrected prior to bid submittal. But if unknown omissions and errors are found after award, how can the Government hold the Contractor responsible for the Government's own shortfalls?

This particular scenario will be addressed at the task order level and could potentially fall under Over & Above Work.

Paragraph C.1.8 of the solicitation states "Subcontract Work on Additional and Extra Items: When work is to be subcontracted, the contractor shall include two or more quotes with its CR…". Contractor wants to clarify that this requirement is only for new and additional work items added to the task order after award, and does not include growth work on original work items that any subcontractor is already working on. Please confirm.

In accordance with C.1.8 the contractor is required to include two or more quotes for subcontract work on additional and extra items after task order award. If only one subcontract quote is available, the contractor shall provide rationale as to why there is only one subcontractor that can do the work.

Paragraph F.4.1.2.1 indicates that the government may decide to deliver the vessel at a place other than the contractor's plant. This change is expected to be completed "at no additional cost to the government". Will the government make the decision to use an alternate site for delivery during the task order bidding process, prior to award? No. The Government will make that decision upon award.

Paragraph F.4.1.2.2 indicates the upon redelivery of the vessel from the contractor's plant or from an alternate location, the contractor is responsible for the safekeeping of the vessel "for a period not to exceed seven calendar days, without charge to the government". Is it the government's intention that the contractor is to include seven days of services at an alternate site while awaiting the government crew to pick up the vessel? Yes, this requirement may be included in particular task orders.

Paragraph F.4.1.2.3 indicates that upon redelivery of the vessel from the contractor's plant or from an alternate location, the contractor is responsible for the safekeeping of the vessel "for a period not to exceed seven calendar days, without charge to the government". Will the government make the decision to use an alternate site for redelivery of the vessel during the task order bidding process, prior to award?

The Government will make the decision upon task order award. If the Government intends to pick-up the vessel from the contractors facility and that facility doesn't allow for a large tug to pick-up the vessel then arrangement will be made to meet at an alternative location.

With regards to RFP, Section J, Attachment 0003 “Pricing Attachment”, Tab 4 “Zone 3 Labor Buildup”, identifies “Production Support” as a required Labor Category. Could the Government please provide a definition of this Labor Category?

Production Support is the manpower related to the mobilization, support and demobilization of equipment on a job site. Normally this is for welding and painting operations during vessel repairs. Responsible for delivering equipment to the job site, setting up the equipment for operation, maintaining the equipment during operations and upon completion, disassembling the equipment and removing from the vessel. Typical equipment used is welders, compressors and air lines and sand blasting equipment and painting equipment and scaffolding.

C.9 (c) the solicitation references the Contractor is required to produce shop or process drawings. Please verify these are for Contractors internal use only and Contractor can use discretion as to whether they feel they require shop drawings for the manufacturing process.

In performance of modifications, the contractor may be required to develop drawings for internal use.

The Small Business Participation Workbook instructions require the Prime Contractor to fill in the dollar amount for Prime Contractor, Subcontractor and specific Subcontractor Socioeconomic Categories, Affiliate, and Joint Venture Member efforts. How is the Offeror to determine these dollar amounts without knowing defined work scopes? Every task order for every class of vessel will likely have varying percentages of Prime Contractor and Subcontractor efforts based on the work scope. To try and define and attach a dollar value for any efforts at this point is next to impossible. Please eliminate this requirement at this stage of the contracting process.

Offerors need to come up with estimates for small business percentages and dollars based on internal estimates, possibly informed by past experience.

When will the Government be providing up-to-date as-built, reconfigured, and/or modified drawings and manuals for all classes of vessels included in this contract?

As-built, reconfigured, and/or modified drawings and manuals will be included at the task order level "as applicable and when available"

Clause 252.245-7004 (h) through the end of the clause outlines procedures the contractor must follow to sell excess inventory, government property, contractor scrap and government scrap. The contractor is not in the business of selling government equipment, only scrap that has been determined to be of no value to the government. In what situation would the contractor use this clause to it's fullest extent?

As prescribed in DFARS 245.107(6) the clause 252.245-7004 shall be used in all solicitations and contracts containing the clause 52.245-1 Government property. It is the contractors decision as to how they use this clause to the fullest extent.

According to L.3.1.1 (c) i & ii, ship repair work shall be on vessels comparable in size to the Army Watercraft Systems Landing Craft Utility (LCU) 2000 or the Logistic Support Vessel (LSV). We have experiences of similar size for local commercial vessel repair, is that acceptable? Or would US Navy vessel repairs which the size is much larger than LCU or LSV be a better comparison?

It is up to each offeror to decide which contracts it submits as a part of its proposal. It may submit up to three contracts. When determining relevancy for the contract you provide, the Government will consider vessels of comparable size of army watercraft systsm among other things set forth in L.3.1.1. (c)(i)& (ii)."

C.1.9- Payment and Performance Bonds- Please confirm the bonds (if required) will be reimbursable. Please note bonding is very expensive for Small Business.

It will be determined at the task order level if payment and performance bonds are required. If required, it will part of a competitive task order request (TOR). The requirement will be FFP and therefore no costs will be reimbursed as it is not cost type contract.

On beta.sam.gov, a Q&A was posted on 03/23/2020 but it wasn’t under the postings for the solicitation; it comes up as a separate posting/listing. For instance, the solicitations are listed as “AWSM Zone 1 Solicitation” and the Q&A’s are listed as “AWSM Zone 1 Question and Answers”. The date on the Q/A notes a response time of May 11th, 2020 by 1 p.m. However, the date on the solicitation notes April 13th? Is the Government extending the response to May 11th? Is there any way for the Government to ensure all information is posted under the solicitation as compared to a new posting so that Contractor doesn’t miss critical information and all attachments are in one place under the posted solicitation? Lastly, would the Government consider an to May 11th due to the current pandemic disrupting business operations and the confusion on the missing attachments noted above in Contractors Q1?

Beta.SAM does not allow postings to fall under one "umbrealla" posting.

The Q&A posting will be revised and questions are answered so there will only be one Q&A posting per zone. The solicitations have been amended to extend the closing date to May 11, 2020 at 1:00pm local Warren, MI time.

Since Section B does not have any pricing but instead notes each individual task order placed against contract will establish its own CLIN structure, can Government please confirm if a FOIA request will release the unit price breakdown of future task orders?

FOIA request may release unit prices; however, per A.1, if an Offeror objects to such release in the base contract or contract modifications, the Offeror must notify the contracting officer in writing prior to the closing date identified in this solicitation and include the rationale for the objection consistent with the provisions of FOIA. A release determination will be made based on rationale given.

Is the Unit price breakdown specific to these solicitations, and if so since there is not an input required in Section B, will Government share Attachment 3 if a FOIA Request is received? Is Attachment 3 considered cost and pricing data information?

The Government will not release the information obtained on Attachment 0003 - Pricing Attachment through a FOIA request.

Attachment 0003 is considered cost and pricing data.

Just to make sure I understand correctly, the requirement for W56HZV- 20-R-L807 is 77% SB. Further, of that 77% SB we must meet the goals listed in the solicitation – 12% SDB, 12% WOSB, and 7% Hub, SDVOSB and VOSB? Or, since we are SB as the prime, we have already met the 77% requirement and thus the other DBEs are not required? If the answer is that we must meet the DBE requirements even if we are the SB, that will equate to 45% of this contract being subcontracted to DBEs. I am certainly hoping that as a SB ourselves that meets the requirement of the proposal and if we choose to subcontract to other DBEs then that would just be additional.

As a SB prime, your participation will count as 100% of the SB goal. (If you fall under any other socio-economic category, your participation would also count as 100% of that category.) The remaining goals (SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB and SDVOSB) are the goals for each specific type of firm AND they are a SUBSET of the SB goal. Also, it is possible for a SB to fall under more than one category, so the SDB, WOSB, HUBZone, VOSB and SDVOSB goals added together will NOT equal 45%.

Will AWSM Zone #3 require the contractor to buy equipment reflected in an Engineering Change Proposal (ECP) and/or a Modification Work Order (MWO) when the contractor is required to “install” ECP/MWO equipment?

If required, it will be identified in the task order, along with all data being provided in the provided drawing package.

Is Section F.8 applicable to Zone #3? Since Zone 3 is a “pier side” support requirement, the contractor will execute work at the location of the vessel. Normally, this requirement is only required within contracts that require OCCM work within a shipyard. Please clarify if it is the intent of the Government to have Zone #3 contractors tow vessels to other locations for repair, modifications, etc.

It is possible that a tow may be required, but will be identified in the delivery order, most likely if the vessel is in a location not conducive to pierside work for facility or environmental reasons.

Is the Government able to provide the current and/or projected locations of these items in order to assist in the development of our

FBLR?

Since the Government doesn't know where the boat will be when it breaks down, it is unable provide information on the current or projected locations of these vessels as this category is largely emergency repairs. Whatever rate you propose will be used to develop your T&M ceiling rate, and therefore the proposed Fully Burdened Labor Rate (FBLR) should account for the possibility of both CONUS and OCONUS locations."

Section L.3.1.1 states: For the Past Performance Factor, provide information for a total of up to three recent and relevant contracts performed by the offeror as the prime contractor. Where subcontracts clearly demonstrate the required relevance and capabilities of AWSM, would the Government consider allowing Offerors to use past performance citations from both Subcontract and Prime contract work vice solely “Prime Contract” citations?

"Prime Contract” work is the only work allowed. However, the Government does not have to be the customer on your “Prime Contract”. For example, if Company A has a “Prime Contract” with the Government and you were a subcontractor on that contract, you have a “Prime Contract” with Company A. You could provide that “Prime Contract” with Company A.

Section L.3.1.1 (a) states that offerors cannot use past performance citations from IDIQ contracts. In order to be selected for an IDIQ contract, a contractor must have demonstrated the complete requested capability, whether or not a subsequent Task Order eventually includes all this capability. Can the Government please clarify if the intent was to limit offerors to contract awards that are outside of IDIQs?

The intent was not to limit offerors to contract awards that are outside IDIQs. The intent was to limit offerors to a single Task Order (that has demonstrated performance) for purposes of defining a single contract.

As opposed to allowing an IDIQ contract with a multitude of task orders to be considered a single contract.

Section L.3.1.1 (a) states that past performance citations must be limited to a written instrument defined as a, “single task or delivery order, a single work directive, or a single definite quantity contract provided it demonstrates a distinct effort was actually performed.” As will be the case in AWSM, single task or delivery orders may be narrowly focused on just troubleshooting or just repair of a single subsystem or component. As such, a single task or delivery order may not accurately reflect relevance as defined in Section L.3.1.1(c) and Section L.3.1.2 (k) as it may cover only a small portion of the tasks defined in PWS Sections C.1.0.1 and C.1.0.2.

For example, a task order for engine repair would not include any of the other systems defined in PWS Section C.1.0.2 and may include only a subset of the services defined in PWS Section C.1.0.3. At the same time, there may be multiple task and delivery orders under the same contract that would better show the breadth of work performed by the Offeror.

Therefore, it seems that the single task or delivery order unfairly restricts competition simply due to the nature of the contracting vehicle and not the Offeror’s experience. We understand the Government’s desire to assess only past performance work that has actually been performed and not simply work required under a larger contract that has not been performed. Would the Government consider allowing multiple delivery or task orders performed under a single contract vehicle to be assessed as a whole? This will ensure that work has actually been performed, and will allow the Government to assess relevance across all of the factors defined in Sections L.3.1.1 (c) and L.3.1.2 (k).

No. If an IDIQ were considered a contract, for the purposes of this factor, the offeror with an IDIQ would get credit for countless jobs, whereas the offeror with standard contracts would only get credit for one job.

Would the Government please clarify if subcontractors are required to submit a separate Cost Proposal directly to the Government?

No, they are not required to submit a separate cost proposal directly to the Government. In accordance, with L.3.2.2.2 if subcontractor labor is needed by an offeror for any of the Government provided labor categories, the proposed FBLR in your Attachment 0003 should incorporate the subcontractor rate plus all applicable prime indirect rates including prime profit.

Sheet1