AMD 001 Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 26 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 19AQMM26R0034
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document for Amendment 001 of federal solicitation 19AQMM26R0034, which addresses 50 industry inquiries regarding an Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity (IDIQ) contract for Engineering Services for Physical Security Programs (PSP) and Defensive Equipment and Armored Vehicles (DEAV). The solicitation, issued by the Department of State Bureau of Diplomatic Security, seeks multiple contractors to provide engineering and support services across five groups of work with a combined five-year period of performance beginning July 1, 2026. The Q&A clarifies critical submission and contract requirements: offerors must submit a single proposal encompassing all desired groups (not separate proposals per group); multiple NAICS codes are permitted (541330 for engineering services, 541380 for testing services, and 541715 for research and development), each applicable at different contract and task order levels; and firm-fixed-price labor rates established at the IDIQ level will serve as binding ceiling rates for task orders, though contractors may propose lower rates for individual orders. Key pricing requirements include submission of pricing worksheets as part of Volume III, inclusion of Test Technician labor category for Group 3, and incorporation of FSO and Security personnel labor categories for classified work. Material costs and test structure construction costs are not included in IDIQ pricing but will be addressed at the task order level.
The Q&A addresses significant clarifications regarding scope, deliverables, and personnel requirements across the five groups. Group 3 includes ballistic, forced entry, and material characterization testing with the requirement that contractors be on the approved laboratory list for SD-STD-01.01 certification testing at time of proposal submission; Group 5 blast testing does not require both shock tube and open-air blast capabilities simultaneously, allowing contractors to propose based on available capabilities. Key Personnel identification and resumes are not required at the IDIQ proposal stage but will be determined at the task order level; education requirements may be waived on a case-by-case basis for senior personnel with demonstrated industry expertise. Deliverable clarifications include corrections to CDRL numbering and due dates, with the Detailed Test Plan (CDRL A004) due within 30 days of contract award, the Program Management Plan as CDRL A007 due three days before the Kickoff Meeting, and the R&D Project Summary as CDRL A010. The proposal submission deadline was extended to June 22, 2026, at 17:00 ET, and cover pages, tables of contents, and acronym lists do not count against page limits for Volumes I and II.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| AMD 001 SOW_Eng Svcs Final .pdf | ||
| AMD 001 SOW_Eng Svcs Final_Track Changes.docx | DOCX document | |
| AMD 001 Attach B Pricing Worksheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| AMD 001 Attach 1 Instruction.pdf | ||
| AMD 001 Attach 1 Instruction_Track Changes.docx | DOCX document | |
| AMD 001 Attach C - CDRLs_EngSvcs.pdf | ||
| RFP 19AQMM26R0034 AMD 001 Eng Svcs.pdf | ||
| AMD 001 DD254.pdf | ||
| Attach C - CDRLs_EngSvcs.pdf | ||
| ATTACH 1 RFP Instruction.pdf | ||
| 19AQMM26R0034.pdf | ||
| Attach A SOW Eng Svcs Final .pdf | ||
| Attach B Pricing Worksheet_EngSvcs.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 13
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
| Question # | Technical/Price/General | Solicitation Section #, Title & Page # | Question or Recommendation | Government Response |
| 1 | Technical | INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION, Part 1 (h), INSTRUCTIONS FOR VOLUME III – PRICING, Multiple Proposals, pg. 6 | Can an organization propose to a group as a prime contractor in one proposal and be identified as the subcontractor intended as the performer for the same group in a second proposal? | Yes, an organization may propose as a prime contractor in one proposal and be identified as a subcontractor performer in a second proposal for the same group. However, the Government will assess potential organizational conflicts of interest (OCI) issues. |
If a situation arises where the Government requires a company to both design and evaluate/test that same design, the Government will mitigate OCI through oversight and monitoring of the testing. Specifically, the Government will have a representative on-site to physically oversee the testing process and validate results.
| 2 | General | Would the State Department approve of a Canadian citizen in support of this effort if is included in a proposal response. | The Canadian citizen must have proper work authorization to perform services in the USA (such as TN visa status under USMCA/NAFTA, or other appropriate visa status). | |
| 3 | General | Is there any incumbent/recompete or this is a brand-new project? If yes, could you please provide us with their award number or even if the customer bought similar services in the past | No. This is a new project. | |
| 4 | Technical | Attachment 1 RFP Instructions |
Section: Part 1(b)
| Page 2 | Attachment 1 states that each Group will be evaluated separately and that the Government will not accept multiple proposals per Group. For offerors proposing more than one Group, does the Government require a separate Volume I Technical proposal and Volume II Past Performance proposal for each proposed Group? | No. A single proposal must be submitted that encompasses all desired groups. The proposal should clearly identify which specific groups your firm wishes to be considered for. | |||
| 5 | Price | Attachment B Pricing Worksheet | |||
| LCAT Reqs Worksheet | The current Group 3 labor categories do not include a Test Technician labor category. Given that Group 3 includes ballistic, forced entry, and material characterization testing activities, we recommend the Government add Test Technician as an available labor category for Group 3. Based on our experience, a significant portion of ballistic and forced entry test execution is typically performed by qualified Test Technicians under the supervision of Program Managers and Engineers. Adding this labor category would allow offerors to propose a more realistic and cost-effective staffing approach aligned to actual test execution. Will the Government consider revising Attachment B to include Test Technician as an available labor category for all tasks under Group 3? | Yes. Test Technician has been added to the Pricing Worksheet. Refer to Amendment 001. | |||
| 6 | Price | Attachment B Pricing Worksheet | Will the proposed labor rates in Attachment B become binding ceiling rates to be used for the basis of FFP pricing for all future task orders issued under the resulting IDIQ contract, or will IDIQ awardees be permitted to propose different labor rates at the task order level based on the specific scope, period of performance, location, staffing mix, and competitive requirements of each task order? | The firm-fixed-price (FFP) labor rates you propose in Attachment B will serve as binding ceiling rates under the resulting IDIQ contract. |
When bidding on individual task orders, you may propose labor rates below these ceiling rates based on the specific scope, period of performance, location, staffing mix, and competitive requirements of each task order. However, you cannot propose labor rates that exceed the rates you established in your IDIQ contract.
7 Price Instructions Instructions for Volume III - Pricing
| (h) Multiple Proposals, page 6 | An offeror is planning on submitting proposals for several groups. For clarification, it is okay for a single organization to prepare separate proposals for each group, or does there have to be a single proposal that encompasses all the groups we intend to respond to? | A single proposal must be submitted that encompasses all desired groups. The proposal should clearly identify which specific groups your firm wishes to be considered for. | |
| 8 | Price | Instructions |
Instructions for Volume III - Pricing
(c) Pricing, page 5
SF1449
B-010-Type of contract, page 3 52.216-31, page 24 In the Instructions it is stated that we are to provide firm-fixed-price costs for each labor category. However, in the F1449 form, there are references to T&M and LH type contracts. Please confirm the DoS requires firm-fixed-price labor rates in the pricing worksheet. Confirmed. The Department of State requires firm-fixed-price labor rates in the pricing worksheet.
The IDIQ will establish the FFP labor hours for the duration of the IDIQ contract. At the ordering level, depending on the requirement, the Government will seek competition amongst the group as applicable, and the resultant order could be FFP, T&M, or LH.
9 Price SF1449 Block 23 and Block 24
| Cover page, page 1 | On the SF1449 form it states offeror to complete Blocks 23 and 24 for Unit Price and Amount. We assume this information is provided to the DoS on the pricing worksheet, and thus these block are to be left empty. Is that correct? | Correct. Blocks 23 and 24 on the SF-1449 should be left blank. | |
| 10 | Price | Attachment A Statement of Work |
12. Materials 12.a.2, Page 19 This pargraph states that the contractor will include material costs in its proposal prices. However, the pricing worksheet already has the material costs pre-inserted. We do not need to include any other material costs in our proposal, correct? Correct. Do not include material costs in your IDIQ proposal. The Government will identify and address material costs, if any, at the task order level.
For example, if a task order requires testing armor and you must build a fixture to hold the test material, the Government will reimburse you for the cost of building that fixture. The Government will specify such requirements and associated reimbursement provisions when it issues individual task orders.
11 Price Instructions Part 1 Volume III, page 2
Pricing Worksheet
| Instructions Tab | In the Instructions it states the pricing worksheet will be part of Volume III. On the Instructions Tab in the pricing worksheet it states that it shoud be submitted under Volume 2. We assume that the pricing worksheet should be submitted as part of Volume III Pricing. Is that correct? | Correct. The pricing worksheet should be submitted as part of Volume III - Pricing. Amendment 001 will correct the instructions in the pricing worksheet. | |
| 12 | Technical | Instructions |
Instructions for Volume III - Pricing
(h) Multiple Proposals, page 6
Pricing Worksheet
| Instructions Tab | Within each Group, except Group 2, there are several subtasks. Does an offeror have to respond to all the tasks in a group in order to be considered competitive? In other words, is there an evaluation advantage if an offeror teams with subcontractors that have skills for certain tasks that the offeror does not? | Yes. Offerors must respond to all subtasks within each group they propose on and must meet the minimum requirements of the SOW. Teaming with subcontractors to fill capability gaps can strengthen your proposal and demonstrate you can meet all requirements. | |||
| 13 | Technical | RFP Instructions, page, Volume I, Testing Experience and Volume II, pg. 4 | The Testing Experience section of Volume I requests, "Offeror shall provide ongoing or completed contracts within the last five (5) years from the date of this RFP and a description(s) of similar testing conducted for the commercial sector and/or Federal Government, such as the United States Department of State or other United States federal agencies (i.e., Department of Defense)." Volume II requests, "Offerors shall list up to three (3) recent and relevant contracts for the same or similar services, which may include contracts with Federal, State, and local government entities..." These seem duplicative. Should the same contracts be detailed in both sections? | Volume I - Testing Experience: Demonstrates the offeror's experience performing work similar to that identified in the SOW. |
Volume II - Past Performance: Demonstrates how well the offeror has performed on previous contracts.
Example: An offeror might have extensive testing experience (Volume I) but poor past performance ratings (Volume II) due to missed deadlines or quality issues. Conversely, an offeror might have excellent past performance but limited experience with the specific type of testing required.
| 14 | Price | Attach B Pricing Worksheet, columns G, K, O, S (all Groups) | What is the nature of the discount, and how does it relate to proposal evaluation? | All columns requiring a discount have been deleted from Attachment B. Please refer to Amendment 001, which replaces Attachment B. |
| 15 | Technical | SOW Section 8 Page 16 | You state some Task will be performed at the SECRET Level. Can you share what tasks? And will hours be allotted for FSO and other security personnel? | The Government will identify classification requirements at the order level. Refer to the DD-254 attached under Amendment 001. |
FSO and Security labor categories has been added to the revised Pricing Worksheet.
16 Technical SOW 6.32. Page 9 Our lab is currently not approved for Conduct SD-STD-01.01 Forced Entry and Ballistic Resistance (FE/BR) Certification Testing. If we are in the process of getting approved at the time of having the proposal submitted, could we still be considered for this award? We have 6 decades of ballistic testing experience and are very familiar with NIJ, UL, STANAG, and ASTM standards. Our lab already meets all the guidelines for SD-STD-01.01, it will just be a matter of getting approved. Yes. In order to submit a proposal under a TORP, you must be on the list of approved laboratories as required in Subtask #3.2.
Refer to the PWS Subtask #3.2: Conduct Forced Entry and Ballistic Resistance Testing on components, systems, and construction commodities to evaluate protection levels.
17 Technical INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION AND
SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS
19AQMM26R0034
| ATTACHMENT 1 - Page 7, Part II (b) | Are offerers allowed to submit separate proposals for each group/task that is being submitted, or is a single submission required per offerer with all groups/tasks included? | A single proposal must be submitted that encompasses all desired groups. The proposal should clearly identify which specific groups your firm wishes to be considered for. | |
| 18 | Technical | INSTRUCTIONS FOR PREPARATION AND |
SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS
19AQMM26R0034
ATTACHMENT 1 - Page 1, Part 1 (a) This section restricts offerers to those with an NAICS code of 541330 for engineering services and technical consulting. Are companies with an NAICS code of 541380 for testing services able to submit? Yes. NAICS Code 541330 was selected based on the principal purpose of the services to be acquired under this IDIQ. However, we will create a separate CLIN 004 within the IDIQ for work under NAICS Code 541380 - Testing Services.
For IDIQ contracts with multiple task orders, each order may involve work under different NAICS codes, but the contract-level NAICS code governs size status for the base contract award. At the task order level, if the preponderance of the work falls under NAICS Code 541380, that code will apply to the specific order.
19 Technical 19AQMM26R0034 Attachment A Statement of Work Engineering Services for Physical Security Programs (PSP) and Defensive Equipment and Armored Vehicles (DEAV) Section 6.3.1 Page 7 Regarding the RDTE on materials, would the lab be required to procure and test existing solutions prescribed by the State Department, or will these be supplied by the State Department? Regarding RDTE on materials, the contractor will be provided with drawings and would be responsible for purchasing and fabricating the test articles.
In other cases the Contractor may provide Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) for testing but the lab should plan to acquire materials unless specified otherwise at the Task Order level.
20 Technical 19AQMM26R0034 Attachment A Statement of Work
| Engineering Services for Physical Security Programs (PSP) and Defensive Equipment and Armored Vehicles (DEAV) Section 6.3.2. Page 7 | Forced Entry testing is referenced under Group 3 for armor materials and armored vehicles. Is there a test protocol or standard that exists for armor material or armored vehicle forced entry testing? | Many standards exist for armor material. Armored Vehicle Forced Entry Testing will be performed based on specific requriements defined by the Department of State to be determined at the Task Order level. | |
| 21 | Technical | 19AQMM26R0034 Attachment A |
Statement of Work Engineering Services for Physical Security Programs (PSP) and Defensive Equipment and Armored Vehicles (DEAV) Section 6.5.1. Page 11 Under Group 5 for Blast Design and Testing and Consulting, one of the tasks listed is to develop open-air blast AND shock tube test plans. Are both shock tube and open air blast capabilities required for submittal? No, both shock tube and open air blast capabilities are not required for submittal under Group 5. Under the IDIQ, the SOW is written broadly to allow for issuance of FFP, T&M, and LH type task orders based on varying project requirements. The listing of both open-air blast AND shock tube test plans reflects the range of potential testing capabilities that may be needed across different task orders.
At the task order level, a TORP will be issued with a defined SOW for IDIQ holders to submit proposals depending on the group they were awarded. Each specific task order will identify which testing capability (shock tube, open-air blast, or both) is required for that particular project. Contractors awarded under Group 5 will have the opportunity to bid on task orders that align with their specific capabilities and can propose solutions based on the testing methods they have available.
This approach allows the Department to access a range of blast testing capabilities through the IDIQ vehicle while enabling contractors to compete for task orders that match their technical capabilities and facilities.
22 Price 19AQMM26R0034 Attachment A Statement of Work Engineering Services for Physical Security Programs (PSP) and Defensive Equipment and Armored Vehicles (DEAV) Section 6.5.2. Page 12 Group 5 references the construction of test frames to install various sizes and shapes of samples, as well as performing the blast testing. The pricing worksheet does not capture the significant cost involved in designing and constructing test frames, as well as the cost of the materials involved in the actual testing. In addition, the open ended nature of the RFQ makes these values impossible to even estimate without more guidance, is it the intent of the State Department to not capture these costs in the RFQ? The IDIQ Statement of Work (SOW) is written broadly to allow the Government to issue firm-fixed-price (FFP), time-and-materials (T&M), and labor-hour (LH) task orders based on each project's specific requirements.
At the task order level, the Government will issue a Task Order Request for Proposal (TORP) with a defined SOW to IDIQ holders in the applicable award group. The TORP will specify the contract type and provide the detailed information you need to accurately estimate costs for test frame construction, materials, and blast testing.
Do not include test structure or test article construction details in your IDIQ submission—these are task order dependent. Instead, focus your IDIQ submission on demonstrating your access to ranges capable of conducting large-scale testing that requires test structures.
23 Price 19AQMM26R0034 Attachment A Statement of Work
| Engineering Services for Physical Security Programs (PSP) and Defensive Equipment and Armored Vehicles (DEAV) Section 12. Page 19 | Section 12 states that all materials, supplies, and equipment shall be provided by the Contractor, and that all material costs are to be included in the proposal. The undefined nature of the RFQ with relation to the materials to be tested, and the specific testing to be performed makes this impossible. Is this to be addressed as projects are released and bid individually, or is there some other provision that will allow these to be submitted on the RFQ? | Material costs will be addressed at the task order level. When the Department releases individual projects for bid, IDIQ holders will have the opportunity to include specific material costs based on the defined scope, materials to be tested, and testing requirements for each task order. | |||
| 24 | Technical | Attachment 1, RFP Instructions. Part 1 (b), Page 1 | Do cover pages, tables of contents, and acronym lists/glossaries count against the referenced page count limits? If that is the case currently, would the Government consider excluding these items from the page limits, provided they do not include substantive technical, management, or pricing information? These items help organize the response and improve clarity for the Government’s review. | No. Cover pages, tables of contents, and acronym lists/glossaries DO NOT count against the referenced page count limits. Refer to AMD 001 - Attachment 1 RFP Instructions. | |
| 25 | Technical | Solicitation 19AQMM26R0034. Page 7 of 86. Section H-016 Key Personnel. |
Attachment A SOW, Section 11 Key Personnel Page 17 Section H-016 includes fill-ins for Key Personnel to be listed at Task Order Proposal submission. Attachment A, Section 11 states that Key Personnel shall be determined at the task order level.
| Can the Government please clarify whether offerors are required to identify Key Personnel, provide resumes, or include Key Personnel information in any specific proposal volume for the base IDIQ proposal? | Offerors shall not identify Key Personnel, provide resumes, or include Key Personnel information in any proposal volume for the base IDIQ proposal. Refer to SF1449, Clause H-016. Key personnel requirements will be identified at the task order level. | ||
| 26 | Technical | Attachment A SOW, Section 7 Milestones and Deliverables, Page 15 |
Attachment C, CDRL A004, Page 4 Attachment A identifies the Detailed Test Plan as CDRL A004 and states that the draft is due within 30 days of contract (Task Order) award.
Attachment C identifies CDRL A004 as the Test and Evaluation Master Plan and states that it must be submitted 10 business days prior to the Test Readiness Review.
| Can the Government clarify the correct title, scope, and required submission timing for CDRL A004? | The correct due date is within 30 days of Contract Award. Attachment C has been updated to reflect this. | ||
| 27 | Technical | Attachment A SOW, Section 7 Milestones and Deliverables, Page 15; |
Attachment C, CDRL A006, Page 6; Attachment C, CDRL A007, Page 7 Attachment A identifies the Program Management Plan as CDRL A006 and states that it is due 3 days prior to the Kickoff Meeting.
Attachment C identifies CDRL A006 as the Contract Summary Report, and identifies CDRL A007 as the Management Plan, due 3 days prior to the Kickoff Meeting.
| Can the Government clarify whether the Program Management Plan should be submitted as CDRL A006 or CDRL A007? | Program Management Plan is CDRL A007. The SOW has been updated to reflect this. | ||
| 28 | Technical | Attachment A SOW, Section 7 Milestones and Deliverables, Page 16 |
Attachment C, CDRL A009, Page 9 Attachment A identifies the Evaluation and Analysis Report as CDRL A009 for Groups 3 and 5.
Attachment C identifies CDRL A009 as Contractor Failure Incident and Repair Data.
| Can the Government clarify the correct CDRL number and title for the Evaluation and Analysis Report applicable to Group 3? | CDRL for Evaluation and Analysis Report is A010. The SOW has been updated to reflect this. | ||
| 29 | Technical | Attachment A SOW, Section 6.3.1, Pages 8 to 9; Attachment A SOW, Section 7, Page 16 |
Attachment C, CDRL A010, Page 10; Attachment C, CDRL A011, Page 11 Attachment A identifies the Modeling and Simulation Report as CDRL A010 for Groups 3, 4, and 5.
Attachment C identifies CDRL A010 as the R&D Project Summary and CDRL A011 as the DoD Modeling and Simulation Verification and Validation Report.
| Can the Government clarify the correct CDRL number and title for the Modeling and Simulation Verification and Validation Report? | CDRL for Modeling and Simulation Report is A011. The SOW has been updated to reflect this. | ||
| 30 | Technical | Attachment A SOW, Section 6.3.1, Page 8. |
Attachment C, CDRL A010, Page 10 Attachment A, Section 6.3.1 identifies Deliverable #3.1A as an R&D Project Summary under CDRL A009.
Attachment C identifies the R&D Project Summary as CDRL A010.
| Can the Government clarify the correct CDRL number for the R&D Project Summary applicable to Group 3? | CDRL for R&D Project Summary is A010. The SOW has been updated to reflect this. | |||
| 31 | Price | Solicitation 19AQMM26R0034. Page 3 of 86. Section B-004 Minimum and Maximum Contract Amounts | This section states that "The maximum for this indefinite quantity contract (including options) shall be any quantity or combination of supplies and services equal to 40 automotive testings for the entire period of performance, including options, if exercised." |
| Can the Government clarify if this is a mistake, or not? If not, can the Government clarify what "40 automotive testings" is equivalent to? | Refer to revised SF1449, Clause B-004 for the revised MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM CONTRACT AMOUNTS (Indefinite Quantity Contract) and FAR Clause 52.216-19 - Order Limitation. | ||
| 32 | Price | 19AQMM26R0034 | |
| Page 2 of 86 | Can the government confirm that the four (4) ordering periods following the base ordering period are incorrectly listed, and should extended for four (4) consecutives years until 06/30/2031? |
Base Ordering Period: July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2027 Ordering Period 1: July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2027 Ordering Period 2: July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2027 Ordering Period 3: July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2027 Ordering Period 4: July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2027 Correct: Amendment 001 updates the five ordering periods as follows:
Base Ordering Period: July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2027 Option Period 1: July 1, 2027 - June 30, 2028 Option Period 2: July 1, 2028 - June 30, 2029 Option Period 3: July 1, 2029 - June 30, 2030 Option Period 4: July 1, 2030 - June 30, 2031
Note: These dates will be adjusted based on when the IDIQ contracts are awarded.
| 33 | Price | 19AQMM26R0034 | |
| Page 3 of 87 | Section B-010 (Type of Contract) states: |
This is an Indefinite-Delivery, Indefinite-Quantity (ID/IQ) type contract. Delivery Orders placed under this contract may be firm-fixed price with a reimbursable line item for materials and/or travel, Time and Material (T&M), and Labor Hour (LH).
| Given the business models of most testing laboratories in the industry, would the Government consider, in addition to requiring prices for Labor Hours, also requesting that offerors provide fixed prices for individual FE and BR tests that adhere to SD-STD-01-01, NIJ, UL, STANAG, ASTM or other applicable industry standards. | No. The IDIQ is intentionally broad to cover a range of scenarios. The Government will identify specific test requirements in the Statement of Work at the task order level. | ||
| 34 | Technical | `Attachment A SOW |
Section 6.3.1 Page 8 of 19 Should the following clause, currently listed in Group 3, be listed in Group 1 instead?
| Conduct research and analysis of automotive upgrades intended to support the additional weight of civilian armored vehicles with a focus on improved tires, wheels, brakes, suspension, and power output to ensure adequate automotive capabilities and vehicle handling required to perform vehicle escape and evade maneuvers. | No, Group 1 is physical testing of established systems. Group 3 is R&D of potential systems. | ||
| 35 | Technical | Attachment A SOW |
Section 11
| Page 18 of 19 | In the ballistic, blast, forced entry, and related test and evaluation industries, it is common for senior personnel and Subject Matter Experts to possess extensive, highly relevant hands-on experience without a formal college degree. To ensure the Government has access to the most qualified technical personnel, would the Government consider adding language that they will consider waiving education requirements on a case-by-case basis at the Task Order level for senior personnel that have demonstrated expertise in the industry but lack the formal education or degree requirements? | Yes, refer to AMD 001 Attachment B "Pricing Worksheet" for each labor category education and/or experience requirements. | |||
| 36 | Technical | 19AQMM26R0034 | |||
| Page 1 of 87 | Several of the questions submitted in response to the Solicitation may materially affect offerors’ proposal composition, including technical volume structure, pricing strategy, and the scope of required submissions. To allow offerors sufficient time to incorporate the Government’s responses, will the Government consider extending the proposal due date by two weeks? | Yes, proposal submission date has been extended. Refer to AMD 001. | |||
| 37 | Technical | Attachment 1, Volume II: Past Performance, 2 of 12 | Is the maximum page limit of 2 correct for the Past Performance Volume? | Refer to Amendment 001 for revised Attachment 1 - RFP Instruction | |
| 38 | Price | Attach B Pricing Worksheet | Please confirm that test center fees are not being requested at this time. | Offeror shall incorporate all fees into the hourly rates proposed at the IDIQ contract level. When bidding on task orders, price your proposal according to the specific requirements in the TORP. | |
| 39 | Price | Attachment B - Pricing Worksheet - Instructions Tab | Item 7 states that labor hours are per task, not per year. However, the formulas on each task multiple the hours in Column C by the rates in each year or out year column. Therefore it appears that the hours are actually per task, per year such that the total labor hours is 5 times the numbers in Column C. Please Clarify. | The total IDIQ ceiling is based on an estimated number of tasks per year. The pricing worksheet is broken down by year to allow for inflation. | |
| 40 | Technical | Attachment 1 - Instructions for Submittal - Page 6, Instructions for Volume III-Pricing, Paragraph (h) Multiple Proposals | Please clarify expectation for offerers that are planning to propose to mulitple Groups(Tasks). Should all be included in a single Technical Volume with a 25 page limit, or should offerers submit multiple (up to 5) proposals with a single proposal being dedicated to each of the groups? | A single proposal must be submitted that encompasses all desired groups. The proposal should clearly identify which specific groups your firm wishes to be considered for. | |
| 41 | Technical | Attachment 1 - Instructions for Submittal - Page 1, PART 1 (a) NAICS | The SOW on multiple occasions references Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation (RDTE) as the primary focus of the effort aligning better under NAICS 541715. Additionally, the following CDRLS in Attachment C further support the RDTE nature of the effort: A004 - Test and Evaluation Master Plan, A005 - Test Report, and A010 - Research and Development (R&D) Project Summary supports NAICS 541715. Considering this rationale, the SOW indicates that the primary focus of the effort is RDTE to provide experimental results from research and development and the scope is not centrally focused on engineering tasks such as the development of drawings. Also, the restrictive small business size standard under 541330 precludes many small business vendors a successful offeror may utilize to support the SOW tasks from qualifying under Small Business Subcontracting Plan as well as artificially restricting qualified small R&D firms from bidding. For the mentioned reasons, recommend and request NAICS change from 541330 to 541715. | NAICS Code 541330 was selected based on the principal purpose of the services to be acquired under this IDIQ. However, we will create a separate CLIN 005 within the IDIQ for work under NAICS Code 541715 - Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences. |
For IDIQ contracts with multiple task orders, each order may involve work under different NAICS codes, but the contract-level NAICS code governs size status for the base contract award. At the task order level, if the preponderance of the work falls under NAICS Code 541715, that code will apply to the specific order.
| 42 | Both | Attachment 1, Instructions for Volume III - Pricing (h), Page 6 | In the event an Offeror would like to apply for consideration for multiple Groups, should they submit a distinct proposal for each group or should they submit a single proposal with all groups identified therein? | A single proposal must be submitted that encompasses all desired groups. The proposal should clearly identify which specific groups your firm wishes to be considered for. |
| 43 | Both | Attachment 1, Page 1 | It would be helpful to have a little more time to coordinate with potential subcontractors as part of this proposal effort. Is it possible to get a two-week extension to June 22? | The proposal submission date has been extended. Refer to AMD 001. |
| 44 | Technical | Attachment 1, Page 2 | Will cover sheets for Volumes I and II be counted against the maximum page limit? | No. |
| 45 | Technical | Attachment A, Milestones and Deliverables, Page 13-14 | Recommend allowing for flexibility regarding timing interval for status meetings. Optimal frequency of status meetings could be weekly, bi-weekly, monthly, etc. depending on the nature of the project. | Optimal frequency may be different, but for proposals the bidder should assume weekly and monthly meetings are requried. |
| 46 | Price | Attachment B, All Labor Category Spreadsheets | Please provide directions for how the OY1, OY2, etc. Discount fields should be filled out. | All columns requiring a discount have been deleted from Attachment B. Please refer to Amendment 001, which replaces Attachment B. |
| 47 | Price | Instructions |
Part 1 Volume III, page 2
Pricing Worksheet
| Instructions Tab | In the Instructions it states the pricing worksheet will be part of Volume III. On the Instructions Tab in the pricing worksheet it states that it shoud be submitted under Volume 2. We assume that the pricing worksheet should be submitted as part of Volume III Pricing. Is that correct? | Correct. It should be submitted as part of Volume III Pricing. | |
| 48 | Price | Instructions |
Instructions for Volume III - Pricing
| (h) Multiple Proposals, page 6 | The offeror is planning on submitting proposals for multiple groups. | ||||
| For clarification, it is okay for a single organization to prepare separate proposals for each group, or does there have to be a single proposal that encompasses all the groups we intend to respond to? | A single proposal must be submitted that encompasses all desired groups. The proposal should clearly identify which specific groups your firm wishes to be considered for. | ||||
| 49 | Price | Volume III Pricing, 52.219-9 Alt II - Small Business Subcontracting Plan - Alternate II (DEVIATION FEB 2026), Page 26-31 | Was it the intention to include verbiage from both the 52.219-9 (Jan 2025) Small Business Subcontracting Plan(SBSP) clause and the updated RFO 52.219-9 SBSP clause? Kindly requests clarification on which clause is intended to be utilized for this proposal. Examples of discrepancies include, but are not limited to, the 30-day ISR submission requirement versus the 45-day requirement, and the use of eSRS as the submission system versus SAM.gov. | FAR Clause 52.219-9 Alt II - Small Business Subcontracting Plan - Alternate II (DEVIATION FEB 2026) is applicable to this requirement. SF1449 has been updated. |
| 50 | Price | Instructions for Volume III Pricing, (f) Subcontracting Plan, Page 6 | Request clarification regarding DOSAR Clause 652.219-70 - DEPARTMENT OF STATE SUBCONTRACTING GOALS (APR 2004). Is the offeror required to use the current-year agency goals as a minimum? | |
| Yes. | ||||
| 51 | Price | Instructions for Volume III Pricing, (j) Subcontracting Plan, Page 7 | If awarded and SBSP is created, will CO require separate goals for each task order, or will it all be reported at the IDIQ level IAW FAR 19.705-2 (e)? | It will be reported at the IDIQ level. |
| 52 | Technical | SOW 6.3.1 Page 7 and 8 | Mentioned here is the need for "small arms ballistic and blast testing". Being there is a full task for blast testing, I come to assume as part of task 3, you are looking for fragment testing with FSPs. Is this correct? Or are you hoping to include full scale blast testing as part of task 3 in addition to task 5? | Full scale blast testing may be a requirement as part of Task 3. Blast testing as part of Task 3 is directly related to Armored Vehicle testing. Task 5 testing is defined for structures. |
| 53 | Technical | SOW 6.3.1 Page 8 | "Conduct test and evaluation of automotive upgrades at the component and full-system levels. Test vehicles used by the Contractor shall be representative of Department AVs in size and weight." Is DOS wanting full vehcile test as part of Task 3? | Specific tests will be defined at the Task Order level. Testing as part of Task 3 may involve single-component testing up to full vehicle testing. |
Questions & Answers
RFP 19AQMM26R0034
AMENDMENT 001
&1#&"Calibri,Regular"&14&K000000 SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED
Sheet2
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .