RFP_TACCOM_II_QUESTIONS_ANSWERS_A0003.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 91 KB Posted
- Attached to
- TACCOM II Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- 2017036109
About this file
This is a notice from the U.S. Customs and Border Protection providing information to vendors regarding the upcoming Tactical Communications II (TacCom II) re-compete requirement. The notice includes a special notice attachment intended to convey useful details to inform vendor business decisions on whether to submit an offer. Key information includes that the notice previews the upcoming TacCom II request for proposals (RFP), with the RFP to cover tactical radio and communications equipment, services, and solutions across two technical categories. The notice seeks industry feedback to inform the RFP. No response due dates, award dates, or pricing terms are included. The Department of Homeland Security Customs and Border Protection will be the federal agency involved. The notice does not specify incumbent contractors or set-aside designations.
RFP_TACCOM_II_QUESTIONS_ANSWERS_A0003.xlsx
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
TACCOM II has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Section/Attachment | Paragraph | Page Number | Question | Change Made? (Yes/No) | Response Final |
| Relevant Experience Form | Part II Question 6 | 2 | For Past Performance, are delivery orders considered executed at the time of order; that is when both the buyer and provider have signed the order and agreed, in writing to be contractually committed to the action, or when the equipment arrives at the loading dock of the receiving activity? | Yes | "Award date" refers to the date the order is signed, not delivery date. See updates to Relevant Experience Form. |
| Solicitation Section M.6 Scoring Methodology | Number 3 | 179 | The Department of Defense does not give the provider ultimate place of performance using the equipment due to security concerns, and the world-wide mobility of its units, ( ie, delivery to the 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Bragg NC can have any of the provided equipment used worldwide. But that information is often times classified and not made available to the public). For Past Performance, can the provider assume a use of the equipment to be worldwide? | Yes | No. For supplies, the Place of Performance (Delivery Location) is the actual location that the customer received delivery from the contractor. Delivery location does not include distribution of equipment by the customer after receipt. |
| Section L | L.6.2 | 152 | L.6.2 Table specifies file names for Proposal Volume components. Specifically Volume 2 is not more fully described other than "CompanyName.VOL2.SupportingDocuments.pdf". Some of the supporting documents for each of the individual Relevant Experience Projects (of 3 potential) may have substantial proof documentation. It is possible a bidder might require several uploads to transfer all the subsections of Volume 2 (either TC1 or TC2). Would the Government consider providing more direction in naming component files in Volume 2? The components could minimally be distinguished by "CompanyName.VOL2.RelExp1.pdf, CompanyName.VOL2.RelExp2.pdf, and CompanyName.VOL2.RelExp3.pdf," and if more separation is required for uploading purposes, then a bidder could indicate part1, part2, etc. | Yes | Concur. See L.6.2 |
| TACCOM_II_SUBCATEGORY_EQUIPMENT_PRICING_TEMPLATE | Detailed Portable Radio Table | The instructions to complete the "detailed Portable Radio Table" Tab are unclear. |
Are we to propose only 2 items per "type of radio" or our entire catalog/offering of radios and accessory (which could be in excess of 1 Million Part numbers) or
| Are we to only propose the same exact models included in the Subcategory Equipment (Sample Order) proposed on TACCOM_II_SUBCATEGORY_EQUIPMENT_PRICING_ TEMPLATE? | Yes | The Radio Discounting tabs have been removed. The attachment has been renamed to TACCOM II SERVICES PRICING (Formerly Titled: TACCOM II DISCOUNT AND SERVICES PRICING). | ||||
| F.6 Place of Performance | 1 | 31 | Does the Government require labor rate pricing to be the same, regardless of location of service? | Yes | See L.7.3.2; Labor rates submitted by offerors are ceiling rates for CONUS labor that cannot be exceeded at the task order level for CONUS work. The rates offerors propose are fully burdened ceiling rates applicable for all locations. Actual rates will be established at the task order level and can vary by location. | |
| C.1.2 - Scope and C.2.1.2 | 1 | 9 | Does the government require that all labor categories within a technical area be proposed? | No | Offerors should propose Labor Categories that support the scope of services it intends to deliver across the lifecycle of the IDIQ; Labor Categories proposed are not limited to the IDIQ subcategory under which an offeror proposes. See C.28 LABOR CATEGORIES; L.7.3.2 TECHNICAL CATEGORY 2 (SERVICES) INSTRUCTIONS; G. 9.2 Solicitation Procedures (j) | |
| F.6 Place of Performance | 1 | 31 | Does the Government require the Company to offer service, either directly or through subcontractors, in all service areas of CONUS and OCONUS? | No | Capability to provide services in all CONUS and OCONUS locations is not a minimum criteria for award. However, each offeror should recognize that limitations in its ability to support geographic regions (CONUS and OCONUS) may impact its ability to support specified service locations for TacCom II orders. | |
| TACCOM_II_LABOR_CATEGORIES | Tab for TacCom II Labor Categories | ID 4 “System Technologist/Technicians” |
ID 24 “Tower Inspector”
ID 25 “Supervisor (On-Site)”
ID 30 “Warehouse / Logistics Manager”
| ID 36 ‘Systems Technologist - Interoperable Systems” | The labor category definition for System Technologist/Technicians, Tower Inspector, Supervisor (On-Site), Warehouse / Logistics Manager, and Systems Technologist - Interoperable Systems include education and experience requirements that do not align with the scale provided on the Education and Experience Equivalents tab. For example, the labor category definition for a Systems Technologist/Technician (Level I/II) is an Associate's Degree and minimum of 10 years’ experience; whereas the Equivalents tab defines a Level II as having an Associate's Degree and 2 years of experience. We recommend removing education and experience from the labor category definitions to eliminate these inconsistencies. If the government chooses to keep these within the definitions, please confirm which takes precedent - the scale on the equivalents tab or the labor category definition. If the labor category definition takes precedence, will the government provide a corresponding equivalent for the education and experience within the definition. | |||||
| Yes | The labor category descriptions take precedence over the education/experience table where there is a direct conflict. Where Education and Experience are not stated in the Labor Category Description, refer to the table. See Clarification in Section C.28 and Attachment: TacCom II Labor Categories. | |||||
| RFP | L.5.1 GENERAL | 148 | "Test Equipment " is missing as a category in the Exhibit 1 Technical Subcategories. This conflicts with the Self Scoring Worksheet as a viable subcategory eligible for an award. Please clarify whether Test Equipment is a viable category. | Yes. | Test Equipment is not a subcategory. The RFP and Self-Scoring spreadsheet has been updated. | |
| M―Evaluation Factors for Award | M.6―Scoring Methodology | 180 | 3. Places of Performance. How many points should Offerors score themselves for providing equipment to the Federal Government internationally (e.g., the military overseas; State Department Embassies)? | Yes | Offerors should score themselves based on the revised definitions and map added to Section L.7.2.4. There are no point values specified for international work. | |
| Self Scoring Worksheet; RFP C.1.2 | TC1 Equipment tab | Item 3. Place of Performance | Please confirm that delivery/service to non-contiguous U.S. and OCONUS locations are counted as a "Nationally provided service/delivery" in the Self-Scoring Worksheet. (C.1.2 Scope states that "TACCOM equipment solutions capability will support DHS CONUS, OCONUS and US territories.") | Yes | Offerors should score themselves based on the revised definitions and map added to Section L.7.2.4. There are no point values specified for international work. | |
| TACCOM_II_Labor Categories | 5 | RF Engineer Description | "Experience in monitoring leased circuits and POTS lines and checking parameters. Experience in documenting condition of circuits and POTS lines. Experience in re-establishing circuit and POTS line connectivity. Experience in preparing reports to document circuit and POTS line status and equipment connectivity." This requirement is more relevant to an LMR or field technician. We request that this paragraph be deleted from this job description. | No | Labor categories are defined in a broad fashion to limit the overall number of categories. Specific labor categories and skillsets required may be tailored at the Task Order level. Contractors may propose lower rates at the task order level based on task order requirements. Proposed IDIQ ceiling rates must accommodate the work the offeror intends to support at the order level. | |
| TACCOM_II_Labor Categories | 4 | RF Engineer Description | Experience in performing preventative maintenance of command & control/dispatch center equipment. Experience in performing preventative maintenance of command & control/dispatch center equipment and identifying deficiencies/areas that require correction/repair. Experience in preparing reports to document preventative maintenance and repairing and maintaining command & control/dispatch center equipment. Experience in radio network, router, and hub equipment operation and management. Experience in voice-over-packet router nodes and networks. Experience in VoIP equipment in radio networks. "Experience in managing, operating, and maintaining radio NOC." This requirement is more relevant to an LMR or field technician. We request that this paragraph be deleted from this job description. | No | Labor categories are defined in a broad fashion to limit the overall number of categories. Specific labor categories and skillsets required may be tailored at the Task Order level. Contractors may propose lower rates at the task order level based on task order requirements. Proposed IDIQ ceiling rates must accommodate the work the offeror intends to support at the order level. | |
| TACCOM_II_Labor Categories | 1 | Systems Technologist - Interoperable Systems | Labor Category 36, The first paragraph contains education and experience requirements. No other labor description contains similar language. We request that you remove the education and experience identified in paragraph 1 to be consistent with other labor category descriptions | Yes | The labor description takes precedence over the TacCom II Education and Experience table where there is a direct conflict. Where Education and Experience are not stated in the Labor Category Description, refer to the table. See Clarification in Section C.28 and Attachment: TacCom II Labor Categories. | |
| TACCOM_II_Labor Categories | 1 | Systems Technologists/Technicians | Labor Category 4, The first paragraph contains education and experience requirements. No other labor description contains similar language. We request that you remove the education and experience identified in paragraph 1 to be consistent with other labor category descriptions | Yes | The labor description takes precedence over the TacCom II Education and Experience table where there is a direct conflict. Where Education and Experience are not stated in the Labor Category Description, refer to the table. See Clarification in Section C.28 and Attachment: TacCom II Labor Categories. | |
| TACCOM_II_RFP_A0002 | L.7.3.2 TECHNICAL CATEGORY 2 (SERVICES) INSTRUCTIONS | 169 (173rd page) | For pricing purposes what start date should offerors assume? | Yes | January 2018. See RFP L.7.3 | |
| TACCOM_II_RFP_A0002 | L.7.3.2 TECHNICAL CATEGORY 2 (SERVICES) INSTRUCTIONS | 169 | The RFP states, “The Offeror shall propose fully burdened ceiling rates for all applicable labor categories. Resultant contracts will only incorporate labor categories for which an offeror has proposed rates.” We interpret this to mean that if a labor category such as "truck driver" is not applicable to a subcategory such as “Engineering”, then we need not bid that labor category. Is that correct? | Yes | Offerors should propose Labor Categories that support the scope of services it intends to deliver across the lifecycle of the IDIQ; Labor Categories proposed are not limited to the IDIQ subcategory under which an offeror proposes. Only labor categories submitted with the IDIQ proposal may be incorporated into the resultant contract Schedule of Supplies/Services. See C.28 LABOR CATEGORIES; L.7.3.2 TECHNICAL CATEGORY 2 (SERVICES) INSTRUCTIONS; G. 9.2 Solicitation Procedures (j) and associated revisions. | |
| Section L, Relevent Experience Form | L.7.2.3 3 | Not numbered | Can the Government define what is meant by a "FINAL FPDS-NG record". The Government has also indicated that the most recent report shall be submitted and previous reports should only be submitted if necessary for verification of claied scoring elements. This offeror has searched the FPDS-NG page looking for a FINAL record with no avail. What does the government mean when they indicate the most recent report shall be submitted? Will the Government provide more specific instruction as to what FPDS record they require and how it should be pulled from the database? | No | A Final FPDS record is one that says "Final" in the Award Status field under the Transaction Information section in the upper left of the document. In contrast, a non-final report says "Draft" in the award status field. Reports in draft status have not passed the FPDS system validations and are therefore not valid. If an offeror is submitting a qualifying relevant experience project under this solicitation and it is a Federal Government contract, there should be an FPDS record associated with that contract. The record in FPDS will consist of a FPDS report for the basic or initial contract award, and subsequent records for each contract modification. The most recent report will be the most recent finalized modification, if modifications exist, or just the initial FPDS report. | |
| Section L, Relevant Experience Form | L.7.2.3 2 | Not numbered | For Projects in which either the Schedule of Supplies/Services or the Statement of Work changes the Government is requiring the modification including the SF30. Will the Government confirm they want a copy of every modification of the Schedule of Supplies/Services or Statement of Work or would the last modification effecting either the Statement of Work or the Schedule of Supplies/Services be more efficient? | Yes | See clarifications in L.7.2.3; Modifications impacting aspects of the relevant experience project which are subject to the government's validation in accordance with Section M, shall be submitted. | |
| TACCOM II Scoring Spreadsheet v6 | Not numbered | If a vendor submits a proposal for TC2 – General, which contains T2 Support subcategories of O&M and Engineering, and the vendor is awarded a Prime contract, will said vendor be able to bid for work on both TC2 Support and TC2 General Task Orders? | Yes | Upon award, selected Contractors may bid on any work within their given Technical Category. | ||
| Section L, Self-Scoring Sheet | L.7.2.1 | Not numbered | If the Offeror is combining 2 or ore task orders as a single project and we have PPIRS for both task orders how does the government want the Offeror to combine two PPIRS report scores into the Self-Scoring worksheet? | Yes | If combining multiple orders under a single relevant experience project, use rating data from the highest obligated dollar value order meeting the completion date requirements. Do NOT combine two or more PPIRS for inputting into the Self-Scoring Spreadsheet. See L.7.2.3, 4. | |
| Section L, Relevant Experience Form | L.7.2.3 5 | Not numbered | Offerors may elect to supplement each reference project schedule and work statement with a narrative explaining the relevance of its past experience to the applicable TACCOM II subcategory. There is not specific language as to how this 1 page will be evaluated or contribute to the acceptability of an Offeror's Relevant Experience Project Forms and attachments. Will the government provide guidance in what they are expecting included in this narrative and how it will contribute to the acceptability of this portion of the proposal? | No | Relevance Narratives are optional and not required. Relevance Narratives should be submitted if the relevance of the relevant experience project to the proposed sub-category and associated scoring criteria is not obvious based on the attached SOW and the offeror's SOW markups, and the offeror believes further explanation is necessary. Relevance Narratives must also be submitted if inconsistencies exist between the Relevant Experience Form and supporting documentation (including SF1449 or equivalent, modifications, FPDS, CPARS). | |
| Section L.7.2.3, subpart 4 | Section L.7.2.3, Subpart 4, Page 164 1st paragraph | Not numbered | Please confirm that the latest completed CPARs is acceptable even if that CPARs is over a year old. If a CPARs is over due or pending you are not requiring a current Past Performance Rating Form to be submitted. Please confirm that the same instructions applies to a Project that combines sequential or multiple task orders that only the latest completed task order CPARs is required. | Yes | Submit the qualifying CPARS in "completed" status which also represents the most recently completed period of performance. See clarification in Section L.7.2.3, 4. For projects which combine orders, the instructions are updated to reflect submission of CPARS records/data for the order with the highest obligated value. |
If combining multiple orders under a single relevant experience project, use Period of Performance data from the highest obligated dollar value order meeting the completion date requirements. See L.7.2.2.2.
| Section L | L.7.2.1 | Not numbered | The Place of Performance identified in the FPDS system is the Principle place of performance. Where there are multiple service delivery performance locations identified in the PWS. Is the Government requiring that the Offeror provide evidence within the PWS highlighted that are associated with the additional performance locations to the ordering contracting officer for verification prior to submission of the proposal or will locations documented in the PWS as attachment to the Form be sufficient? | No | Locations documented and highlighted in the PWS/SOW is sufficient documentation. | |
| Section L, Relevant Experience Form | L.7.2.1 | Not numbered | The Relevant Experience Form indicates that the information entered in the form must match the FPDS-NG record and all other supporting information. Will the government confirm that if the FPDS-NG report only provides one location (principle place of performance) but the PWS references additional performance locations, the offeror should add those to the list in the Relevant Experience Form? | Yes | See revision to TACCOM II Relevant Experience Form, Item 10. Any delivery/performance locations identified on the PWS/SOO/SOW can be added to the Relevant Experience Form and counted on the Self-Scoring Spreadsheet | |
| Section L.7.2.2 and the TacCom II Scoring Spreadsheet | L.7.2.2 Page 161, 1st paragraph on page; Scoring Spreadsheet, Section 4 Past Performance (CPARS) rating, Rows 12 - 17 | Not numbered | The solicitation indicates that Relevant Task Orders issued under an ID/IQ ordering contract may be combined as a referenced project. Please confirm whether an average of the combined CPARs for two or more of the ratings across the relevant task order should be used in completing the Scoring Spreadsheet for Section 4 Scoring. Please confirm that the latest completed CPARs for the two or more combined task orders are required to be provided as attachments . | Yes | For projects which combine orders, the instructions are updated to reflect submission of CPARS records/data for the order with the highest obligated value. See L.7.2.3, 4. | |
| Section L, Past Performance Rating Form | 7.7.2.4 | Not numbered | This Offeror is using a Project where the end of the Period of Performance is coming to an end in September. Likely that CPARS/PPIRS will not be completed before the Proposal is submitted. Although, we do have a Completed PPIRS for the Base Period, would the Government allow us to submit a completed Past Performance Rating form as opposed to the PPIRS from the Base Period? | Yes | Offerors must submit the most recent completed Past Performance Report from the PPIRs system where the end date of the period of performance being evaluated is on or after July 1, 2014. If none exists use the Past Performance Rating Form. See L.7.2.3, 4. | |
| Section L, Relevant Experience Form | L.7.2 | Not numbered | What things on FPDS must match with CPARS and Contract Documents? I specifically see language that requires the contract numbers, Company Name and DUNS Number, and Obligations must match. Please see Relevant Experience Form Part II, numbers 10, 11, and 12 (if they don’t you must take other steps). There are other things not mentioned like Award Date, Reference IDV, NAICS, and Period Performance to name a few. Do these items, where there is a discrepancy, require us to go to our Contracting Officer? | Yes | In the event of a discrepancy between the CPARS, FPDS, and the award document, request a correction from the Contracting Officer. When a correction cannot be obtained, cite the discrepancy in the Relevance Narrative. See L.7.2.3, 5 RELEVANT EXPERIENCE PROJECT ATTACHMENTS 5. | |
| Section L | L.7.2.1 3 | Not numbered | When information contained in FPDS differs from the contract such as sited performance locations, the government requires that Offerors send the "Relevant Experience Form" to the ordering contracting officer for confirmation and agreement with the contractor identified differences. Please confirm that it is acceptable to use the "Relevant Experience Form" only to communicate the differences between what is shown if FPDS and what is shown in the fully amended current contract baseline; and does not require all of the Attachments to the Relevant Experience Form required by the solicitation. And last, does the Government expect the form alone to be sent to the Contracting Officer or does it have to be the form plus all supporting documents? Is the contractor responsible to submitting the Contracting Officer signed form as part of the proposal, or is the contracting officer required to submit the documentation to the POC for this TACOM II proposal. | Yes | If signature on the Relevant Experience Form is required, attachments do not need to be provided to the CO for signature. Offeror may coordinate cognizant CO signature on the Relevant Experience form as it sees fit to ensure concurrence. However, when submitting its proposal with a signed Relevant Experience Form, all specified relevant experience project attachments are still required. See additional clarifications in L.7.2.2. | |
| NA | NA | NA | Due to the extended submission and award dates, and the current Taccom expiry, will there be a provision put in place to allow current Taccom customers to continue purchasing of the existing list to bridge the gap? | No | No | |
| Section L.7.2.4 Self Scoring Worksheet | 4 | 167 | In the instructions regarding the self-scoring worksheet, the RFP says to select the answer of "Regionally provided service/delivery" if the support extends to three or more states and to select the answer of "Nationally provided service/delivery" if the support is throughout the contiguous United States.” According to the definition above, for experience to be considered "Nationally provided service/delivery”, the experience would have to be in all 48 contiguous states. Is it the Government’s intent that the Contractor has to have performed work in every one of the 48 contiguous states for the “relevant experience” of the past performance to be considered "Nationally provided service/delivery”? | Yes | Offerors should score themselves based on the revised geographic definitions and map added to Section L.7.2.4. | |
| TACCOM II SELF SCORING WORKSHEET | Line 2 | 1 | In the worksheet under Line Item 2, “Obligated Amount” , it is our understanding that for multi-year contracts, the “Obligated Amount”, should include the amount for “Base Year” and all the “Option Year(s)”. Please confirm. | Yes | The Obligated Amount is the actual amount obligated at the time of award as shown on the SF-1449 (or equivalent award document) and should match the cumulative "Action Obligation" field in FPDS-NG for the most recent final record for that contract/order. Option year(s) should only be included if it meets this criteria. | |
| TACCOM II SUBCATEGORY EQUIPMENT PRICING TEMPLATE | Line 1 | 1 | On line 1, column I of the worksheet, the instructions say "If not based on GSA catalog, describe and include price support (sales data) where the same or similar item has previously been sold within last three years." Can the manufacturers sales data be used to provide the price support for this? | Yes | Sales data must be that of the offeror proposing under TacCom II, with certain exceptions. See changes to Section L.7.3.1. | |
| TACCOM_II_Labor Categories | 1 | Electrician | Please delete requirement to climb towers. This requirement is more relevant to the tower worker categories. | No | An offeror may elect not to price LCATS it does not intend to provide over the course of the IDIQ. | |
| L―Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents | L.7.2.3―2. Contract Schedule and Statement of Work | 163 | For an equipment contract, the Schedule of Supplies/Services provides significantly more relevant detail of equipment requirements than does the SOW. Should the Offeror provide both? Is it permissible to highlight the relevant areas of the Schedule of Supplies/Services in lieu of or in addition to highlighting relevant areas of the SOW? | Yes | See clarification in L.6.2 Table. Instructions in L.7.2.3 specify the submission requirement for the relevant experience project Schedule of Supplies/Services. | |
| L―Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors or Respondents | L.2.3―4. CPARS/PPIRS Record or Past Performance Rating Form | 164–165 | If (1) the Government did not fill out CPARS/PPIRS for a Federal project and (2) neither the Warranted CO/COR one can be located (e.g., the Project no longer exists) or the customer does not fill out and return the requested Past Performance Rating Form, how should the Offeror collect the required Past Performance information? As a Contractor, we have no authority to require CPARS/PPIRS nor this Past Performance Rating Form be completed. | No | Without a CPARS/PPIRS or Past Performance Rating Form, the offeror will receive zero points for scoring criteria #4 on the Self-Scoring Worksheet. | |
| B―Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs | B.10 | 7–8 | Is it correct to assume that the Schedule of Supplies/Services is intended for informational purposes only and need not be reproduced and included in the submission of the contract Price Proposal? | No | Correct; upon award the schedule will be formatted to support the Technical Category for which a selected offeror has proposed, and to incorporate applicable ceiling rates/prices. | |
| I―Contract Terms and Conditions | HSAR 3052.209-70(f) Disclosure; | |||||
| HSAR 3052.209-72(c) Disclosure | 96; 136 | Is it permissible to reproduce in the proposal only paragraphs with HSAR clauses in Section I requiring a response (e.g., 3052.209-70(f), 3052.209-72(c)) as long as they are clearly identified, or does the Government prefer to have the text of each HSAR clause in its entirety? | No | Include the full text | ||
| C―Technical Requirements |
| M―Evaluation Factors for Award | C.10―Applicable Standards as Requirements; | |
| M.4―Acceptability Criteria/Factor 3: Technical Acceptability (paragraph 3) | 15; 176 | Section C.10: "All offered equipment and software shall conform to all applicable standards identified in Section J, Attachment Common Requirements List." |
Q1: What does the Government mean by "all applicable standards identified in Section J, Attachment Common Requirements List" (e.g., General section detailed in lines 806–866; entire list of requirements)?
| Does this refer to an order-level rather than a contract-level requirement, given the statement made in Section M.4 that this attachment is provided for informational purposes only and is not a submission requirement of this solicitation? | Yes | The Common Requirements List lists specifications and standards typically required by DHS Components. Actual requirements will be specified at the order level. See clarification in C.10. | ||||
| Relevant Experience Form | Section 5 | 1 | In the NAICS codes requirements in the “Relevant Experience Form,” the NAICS code of the IDIQ we completed work (within Task Orders) may not align with the NAICS code of this procurement. Will the Government consider allowing alternative NAICS codes (e.g., 339999) on the Relevant Experience Form, to ensure that IDIQ contract task order past performance experience can be considered as relevant? | No | There is no requirement that the NAICS code on the Relevant Experience Form match the NAICS code on the TacCom II RFP. | |
| L | 7.2.3, Paragraph 2 | 163 | For a "Collection of delivery/task orders" submitted as a relevant experience project, if a Task Order has its own PWS/SOW, shall bidders include the MA/IDIQ SOW as part of the relevant experience project attachments to accompany the Task Order PWS given that some Task Order PWS/SOWs can be abbreviated as a result of being issued under the MA/IDIQ SOW? | Yes | When submitting a "collection of orders" under a relevant experience project, Offerors may submit the MA/IDIQ/BPA SOW to supplement the submission of order requirements documents. See changes to Section 7.2.3. | |
| L | 7.2.3, Paragraph 1. | 163 | For a "Collection of delivery/task orders" submitted as a relevant experience project, shall bidders include both the Task order as well as the executed MA/IDIQ award document/schedule B to satisfy requirements under "Reference Project Fully Executed Award Document"? | Yes | Offerors are not required to include MA/IDIQ award documentation but may do so to substantiate the relevance of the project and the points earned on the Self-Scoring Worksheet. See row 42. | |
| I | Part 2 | 80, 84, 110 | In March 2017 President Trump signed a Congressional Review Act resolution rolling back the Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces rule (Executive Order 13673). The signing makes permanent a preliminary injunction blocking the Government from enforcing the rule's new reporting requirements on federal contractors and subcontractors. Paragraph (b) 35 in this solicitation contains a caveat addressing this inunction regarding 52.222-59, Compliance with Labor Laws in this specific reference; however, the other clauses related to this Executive Order, 52.222-60 - Paycheck Transparency and within 52.212-3 ("DOL Guidance") no caveat is written and this gives the appearance that these clauses indeed apply. Request written clarification for each reference to E.O 13673 in the solicitation of its applicability. | Yes | Changes have been made to the RFP. | |
| K | 1 | 140 | The first paragraph "Instructions" states "See K.2 below". Upon review, a Section entitled K.2 was not located. Can you please clarify/confirm if K.2 exists and its location? | Yes | Reference to K.2 has been deleted from the RFP. | |
| L | 6.2, 7.2.3 | 153, 162 | The proposal format table in Section 6.2 reflects that novation agreements are Attachment 7 in Volume 2 for each applicable relevant experience project. Section 7.2.3 that speaks to the relevant experience project attachments reflects change-of-name/novation agreements as Attachment 6. Please clarify if bidders should utilize the attachment number in Section 6.2 tables or as detailed in the relevant experience project attachments under 7.2.3. | Yes | See correction to Section 7.2.3. | |
| Section K | 140 | Please confirm that all Certification and Representations required to be submitted in the proposal are contained only in RFP Section K. | Yes | Certification and Representations required to be submitted in the proposal are contained in Section K. See changes to Section K. | ||
| Section L.3 | 147 | Please confirm that No response is required in the submitted proposal for Full text Provisions. | No | Offerors must complete Section I full text provisions in the cover letter as applicable . Also see row 204. | ||
| Section L.2 | 146 | Please confirm that No response is required in the submitted proposal for Provisions incorporated by reference. | No | Offerors should be responsive to all provisions, as applicable. | ||
| Section L | 145 | Please conform that all instructions for proposal submission are contained only in Section L. | No | Confirmed | ||
| Section G.17.1.4 | The text is “The Government may choose to not exercise an Option Year due to low participation at the order level.” | 53 | Please provide the participation rate at which exercise of an Option Year would be in jeopardy | No | When, or if, CBP exercises an option period is a matter within the agency’s sole discretion. | |
| C.18.4 Start of Warranty Period | 1 | 17 | The RFP states "Operation and Maintenance by non-government personnel shall not void, or in any way affect, the manufacturer’s warranties for the systems and/or services provided under this contract." The Company agrees to this provision with the following clarification: "Operation and/or Maintenance by non-government personnel shall only be performed in accordance with the manufacturer's operations and maintenance procedures. Failure to adhere to the manufacturer's requirements may void the warranty." | Yes | See additional language added to the RFP in C. 18.4.. | |
| section L.7.3 Volume 3 – PRICE | For the Equipment Category, are Contractors supposed to create our own list of items to be priced, based say our GSA Schedule? Do we only price the sample items listed on the Subcategory Equipment Pricing Template? Do we extract items from the Common Requirements List? What are or from where do we get the items we should price? | Yes | Per Section L.7.3.1., offerors shall submit price quotes on the Subcategory Equipment Pricing Template for the Technical Subcategory that corresponds to the reference projects submitted in the Self-Scoring Worksheet. The make and model proposed equipment must meet or exceed the minimum requirements of the sample order to be considered technically acceptable. See changes to self-scoring spreadsheet and Section L.3.1 specifying the minimum number of items to be proposed for award consideration. | |||
| Relevant Experience Form | We request the NAICS Codes listed in #5 of the Relevant Experience Form be expanded to include: |
• 237137 Power and Communication Line and Related Structures Construction , and
• 811219 Other Electronic and Precision Equipment Repair and Maintenance The assignment of NAICS Codes by Federal Contracting Officers arguably is not an exact science and these additional 2 codes clearly have applicability to the Scope contemplated in TACCOM II
| No | There is no requirement that the NAICS code on the Relevant Experience Form match the NAICS code on the TacCom II RFP or any other list of NAICS codes. |
| TACCOM_II_RFP/L.5 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS/L.5.1 GENERAL |
147 5 "Offerors may make minor formatting changes to Section K and Section J templates used in proposal submission. For example, minor formatting changes include such things as adjusting page breaks, adding corporate identification logos, and identifying proposal volume identifiers in the headers and footers, including disclaimers of proprietary information."
| Please confirm Offerors are only permitted to modify Volume 1 and that none of the other files to be submitted may be modified in either the header or footer to add Company Name, Volume # , page # or disclaimers. | No | Incorrect. Section J templates/attachments apply to other Volumes as well. |
| TACCOM_II_RFP/L.5 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS |
TACCOM_II_RFP/L.6.2 PROPOSAL FORMAT TABLE/3-Price/Discount and Services Pricing
1. TC1:
Portable Radio Tiered Pricing (Radios Only)
2. TC2: Services Tables (required for all subcategories) 147
152 2
N/A "To be considered for award under both Technical Categories, an Offeror must submit two separate proposals that are individually and independently responsive to the solicitation instructions."
| Is offeror permitted to extract the two tabs entitled "Government Site Rates" and "Contractor Site Rates" from the spreadsheet "TACOM_II_DISCOUNT_AND_SERVICES_PRICING" if they are only proposing under TC2? | No | Offerors are only required to complete the sheets relevant to the TC which they are bidding. Note that the Discount tables have been removed from the Services Pricing Template. |
| TACCOM_II_RFP/B.7 LABOR SUBJECT TO THE WAGE RATE REQUIREMENTS (CONSTRUCTION) STATUTE/B.8 LABOR SUBJECT TO THE SERVICE CONTRACT LABOR STANDARDS |
L.7.3.2 TECHNICAL CATEGORY 2 (SERVICES) INSTRUCTIONS/Instructions for completing TACCOM II DISCOUNT AND SERVICES PRICING 5,6
170 1
3 DHS has included both the SCA and Construction Wage Requirements clauses at the IDIQ contract level. The four SCA labor categories at the IDIQ level: Electrician, Transportation-Truck Driver, Transportation-Helicopter Pilot and Warehouse Worker, include skill sets that could also be governed by the Construction Wage Requirements. Would the DHS consider removing these four labor categories from the IDIQ level pricing ?
| Removing these labor categories would not preclude either SCA or Construction Wage requirements at the task order level. Classifying SCA and Construction Wage rates as Ancillary labor at the task order level would allow the OCO to work with the DOL to identify and define the Occupation Code and wage rate that most closely aligns with the task order scope of work & place of performance. | Yes | The Government will keep these categories in the Labor Category definitions for the IDIQ so they will not be treated as ancillary labor. Task order level adjustments are permitted. See changes to Section B.8, H.29 and L.7.3.2. | ||||
| TACCOM_II_LCAT_MAP_TEMPLATE_V2 | Columns L-O | N/A | If Offeror does not have a GSA or Commercial Catalogue, what data should be used to populate these columns? Should Offeror follow the same guidance provided for TC1 Offerors with no GSA or Commercial Catalogue and use current established LCAT data from an existing, awarded commercial contract with similar LCATS or leave this template blank? | Yes | See updates in Section L.7.3. | |
| TACCOM_II_RFP/L.7.3 VOLUME 3 – PRICE/L.7.3.1 TECHNICAL CATEGORY 1 (EQUIPMENT) INSTRUCTIONS/Instructions for completing Attachment TACCOM II DISCOUNT AND SERVICES PRICING (for Equipment)/GSA Schedule or Commercial Catalog | 169 | 1 | If Offeror is a reseller of OEM equipment but does not have a GSA Schedule, may the offeror submit the OEM's published price catalog/price list or IDIQ contract level pricing with the proposal, as price justification? | Yes | Sales data must be that of the offeror proposing under TacCom II, with certain exceptions. See changes to Section L.7.3.1. | |
| TACCOM_II_Labor Categories | 1 | LMR Technician | This description is relevant to an IT network professional. Description for Land Mobile Radio technician is completely different. Please revise. | Yes | Addressed error and flipped labor category names between Technician to LMR Technician. | |
| TACCOM_II_Labor Categories | 1 | Technician | This is the description applicable to the LMR Technician. | Yes | Addressed error and flipped labor category names between Technician to LMR Technician. | |
| TACCOM II Self Scoring Worksheet | While going through the TACCOM II Self Scoring Worksheet that was posted along with the other RFP documents, I noticed that the equation in Cells C18, F18, and I18 on all of the tabs are inaccurate. Although it does not affect the scoring for all of the subcategories because the areas of delivery may be limited, it does negatively impact the scoring on the TC1-Equipment tab Subcategory: Radio and Accessories as well as the TC2-Services tab Subcategory: Engineering. Specifically, the equation as stated does not score any of the points after row 28 for Section 5 on any of the tabs. | Yes | See updated spreadsheet. | |||
| TACCOM II Self Scoring Worksheet.xlsx | TC1 - Equipment | Cell C30 does not calculate a point if an offeror selects "Yes" for providing General VHF/UHF capability. Will the Government please include the appropriate formula to provide a score in C30? | Yes | See updated spreadsheet. | ||
| RFP | C.1.2 | 6 | Comment: Section C.1.2, states that satellite service plans are within the scope of the solicitation (i.e. “… and to include any satellite service plans for voice, video, and data”); and includes satellite service requirements defined in TACCOM II REQUIREMENTS v12, TAB TC 1 EQUIPMENT; however Draft RFP Section L.1 does not include the NAICS code for satellite telecommunications (517410). | |||
| QUESTION: Will the government revise section L.1 to include NAICS 517410? | No | DHS can only list one NAICS code per TC. The offeror's NAICS code(s) in SAM do not need to match the NAICS code of the RFP in order to propose. This is already stated in Section L.1. | ||||
| RFP | L.1 CONTRACT INFORMATION | 121 | COMMENT: The government has removed the small business set-aside portion of the TC1 equipment and moved the responsibility to the large businesses to meet the government's small business goal of 40%. | |||
| QUESTION: If a contractor is a small business as defined by NIACS CODE 334220 of having less than 1,250 employees, does the offer still need to submit a small business subcontracting plan since bidding in an unrestricted track? Will agencies still receive a small business credit when buying from a small business in the unrestricted track? | No | If an offeror meets the small business size standard for the Technical Category NAICS code under which it is proposing, a small business subcontracting plan is not required. Certification of the offeror's small business size standard shall be submitted within the Cover Letter. |
Agencies will still receive small business credit when issuing orders to a small business through the unrestricted track.
| TACCOM II LABOR CATEGORIES | Lines 59,60,61,66,67,68,69,72,73,74,83,84,100,101 | N/A | Several labor categories, i.e. Systems Technologist I-Interoperable Systems I, System Technologist/Technician I, Warehouse/Logistics Manager contain specific Educ & Exp. in Column C, Labor Category Details, that is not consistent with the Educ & Exp. requirements in Columns D-J. Please confirm Offeror should base their labor rates on the specific Educ. & Exp reflected in Column C. | No | The labor description takes precedence over the TacCom II Education and Experience table where there is a direct conflict. Where Education and Experience are not stated in the Labor Category Description, refer to the table. See Clarification in Section C.28 and Attachment: TacCom II Labor Categories. | |
| TACCOM_II_LABOR_CATEGORIES | TacCom II Education and Exp. | N/A | The Education and Experience Matrix on this tab includes a Level IV. Column C, Education reflects a Masters degree and 6 years of Experience (Column D). The correlating Columns that define equivalent Education & Experience indicate a Masters degree and 8 years experience. Should Column C for a Level IV read Bachelors degree with 6 years as opposed to Masters degree with 6 years? | Yes | Updated cell E11 from Masters to Bachelors degree with equivalent experience. | |
| RFP | B.4 Task And Delivery order Guidelines | |||||
| Items within the Contractor ’s commercial catalog or GSA Schedule, that align to the scope of TacCom II, shall be available for delivery under this vehicle. At a minimum, the Contractor must maintain its catalog in a format that contains the manufacturer’s name, part number, model number, technical specification, standard commercial warranty information, commercial list price, and GSA schedule price (if applicable). | 2 | Comment: The solicitation discusses that each contractor will provide TACCOM II product catalog, however other than providing a sample catalog such as GSA Schedule 70 there is no requirement to provide one. |
| Question: Will the government require each offeror to provide a TACCOM II specific product and service catalog with their proposal package? If not when and where will it be requested from the offers? | Yes | Offerors will be required to provide their TacCom II catalog within 30 days after receiving contract award. See Section B.4. | ||||
| TACCOM_II_LABOR_CATEGORIES | TacCom II Education and Exp. | N/A | The header for this tab is entitled "TacCom I Education and Experience". Please confirm header in this tab should read "TacCom II". | Yes | Correct. Updated header. | |
| Scoring Spreadsheet | Satellite Tab | Satellite Tab | COMMENT: Lines 19 & 21 of the Scoring Spreadsheet reference program MilSatCom experience. MILSATCOM specifically refers to WGS and other satellites owned and operated by the DoD. They can not be procured by commercial industry. Any MILSATCCOM equipment must meet strict DoD requirements and should be procured on a DoD Contract. We believe it is inappropriate to have any reference to MILSATCOM on the TACCOM II Contract. IT would be more appropriate to only reference COMSATCOM. |
QUESTION: Will the government remove the MilSatCom requirement ?
| No | No, as this sub-category illustrates needs in the current environment. Individual task orders will clarify the specific items needed. The satellite sub categories have been updated to reduce emphasis on just Military Satellite. | |||||
| RFP | M.3.4 | 151 | Section M.3.4 Price Analysis states that the government will determine whether the pricing submitted by each offeror is “fair and reasonable pricing.” | |||
| QUESTION: What is the government’s procedure for making a determination whether a price is fair and reasonable? | Yes | Price analysis techniques as identified in FAR 15.404-1(b)(2) will be used to make a fair and reasonable price determination. Section M.3.4 has been updated to state this. | ||||
| Relevant Experience Form | Question 8 | 1 | Certain Federal Program Offices i.e. PEO-EIS TAO do not submit data to FPDS-NG. Would a letter from a KO in the office of the ordering activity stating that they do not use FPDS-NG be sufficient? This office happens to be the source of several of our past performances, and our ability to bid on TACCOM II will thus be unfairly constrained if the FPDS record is a requirement. | Yes | See "Part II" and "Part III" instructions in L.7.2.2, and the Relevant Experience Form. | |
| TACCOM II RFP Section B | B.7 | 5 | DBA was identified in the RFP however the Job titles allocated to DBA were not identified. Could you denote the DBA job titles? | Yes | The government is providing the SCA WD for purposes of pricing WD Labor Categories at the IDIQ contract level. CBP has updated the RFP to include the relevant WD as attachment WD No. 2015-5637 SCA WD for San Francisco - Revision 6 080317 and identified the Occupational Code that corresponds to each SCA covered labor category. The Occupational Code that corresponds to each of the SCA covered Labor Categories has been added to the LCAT Map Template as well as the revised and renamed Services Pricing attachment. Whether certain labor is covered by the DBA will be determined at the time of task ordering. | |
| TACCOM II RFP Section B | B.7 | 170 | If offerors are to use the San Francisco prevailing wage determination for pricing will this rate that is priced be the ceiling rate at which we can propose future task orders, or will we be able to propose the prevailing wage on a task order basis if the prevailing wage by task order is higher than the San Francisco prevailing wage priced for the IDIQ ceiling rates? | Yes | You will be able to exceed this rate at the time of task order formation where the Ordering Contracting Officer determines it is appropriate. See Section B.4. | |
| TACCOM II RFP Section B | B.7 | 5 | Please furnish the DBA rates you would like used. | Yes | See changes to Section B.7. For SCA applicable labor, the government is providing the SCA WD for purposes of pricing WD Labor Categories at the IDIQ contract level. We have updated the RFP to include the relevant WD as attachment WD No. 2015-5637 SCA WD for San Francisco - Revision 6 080317 and identified the Occupational Code that corresponds to each SCA covered labor category. The Occupational Code that corresponds to each of the SCA covered Labor Categories has been added to the LCAT Map Template as well as the revised and renamed Services Pricing attachment. Whether certain labor is covered by the DBA will be determined at the time of task ordering. | |
| L.7.3.2 | 170 | Please furnish the Service Act rates you would like used. | Yes | The government has updated the RFP to include the relevant WD as attachment WD No. 2015-5637 SCA WD for San Francisco - Revision 6 080317 and identified the Occupational Code that corresponds to each SCA covered labor category. The Occupational Code that corresponds to each of the SCA covered Labor Categories has been added to the LCAT Map Template as well as the revised and renamed Services Pricing attachment. | ||
| TACCOM II RFP Section B | B.7 | 5 | Should the DBA rates not be escalated as they would be bid at a task order level for the prevailing rate for the area? | Yes | Correct. The RFP has eliminated the escalation factor for these LCATS. | |
| TACOMM_II_RELEVANT_EXPERIENCE_FORM and TACOMM_II_PAST_PERFORMANCE_RATING_FORM | Attachments; RFP Sections L.6.2, L.7.2.1, L.7.2.2, L.7.2.3 | Attachments; and RFP 153-166 | Will the Government accept the offeror's customer past performance references signed Relevant Experience Form and Past Performance Rating Form directly emailed from the customer reference instead of the offeror's inclusion in its proposal? Typically, the customer reference emails the past performance rating form(s) directly to the Government as opposed to sending to the offeror. | No | No. As stated in L.7.2.3, Past Performance Rating Form completed by the cognizant Contracting Officer or Contracting Officer Representative shall be returned to the Offeror so that the rating data may be entered into the Self-Scoring Worksheet. The Offeror shall ensure that completed forms are submitted with its proposal. | |
| TACCOMII Requirements Document | missing | COMMENT: The Sample Task Order calls for Inmarsat and Iridium satellite phone service, however there is no reference to them in the technical requirement. This seems to be a contradiction. | ||||
| QUESTION: Will the government add these Satellite Phone and MSS services to the requirements document? | No | The Common Requirements List is a reference document and not an all inclusive list of all needs in the field. Individual task orders will clarify specific requirements needed for each order. | ||||
| Scoring Worksheet - Tab TC-1 Equipment | 5. Relevant technical sub-category areas of delivery | COMMENT: The scoring sheet provide two points to companies providing MILSATCOM equipment or services in the past performance rating. Yet you're asking for Federal government experiences. This is a contradiction to the purposes of the TACCOM II contract. | ||||
| Question: Will the government remove MILSATCOM and UHF MILSATCOM from the scoring worksheet? | No | USCG is a military Component and part of DHS that could require these items, so points available are warranted. |
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 .