Questions and Answers - 4.pdf
PDF 79 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- 47PH5326R0017
- Issued by
- Not on record
About this file
This is a Questions and Answers document for the GLS MAX RFP (47PH5326R0017).
The document addresses seven questions from offerors regarding proposal evaluation criteria and submission requirements. Key clarifications include: (1) Amendment AM0005 takes precedence over previous amendments, particularly superseding Q&A answers 19-24 from AM0002; (2) offerors must clearly identify which past performance references correspond to which zonal submission in their Technical Proposal under Factor 3; (3) for both Firm Experience (Factor 2) and Past Performance (Factor 3), offerors may rely on projects performed by proposed subcontractors; (4) previous Q&A answers inconsistent with the updated RFP should be disregarded; (5) evaluation criteria for Factors 2 and 3 remain unchanged regarding favorable consideration of projects where proposed subcontractors performed as prime contractors; and (6) the page limit for the Organizational Structure section remains unchanged and will not be expanded to accommodate Transaction Manager correlations. The Government emphasizes that offerors should reference the most current RFP version and disregard any superseded guidance.
View the file
Other files
Show all 30
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
GLS MAX RFP
47PH5326R0017
Questions and Answers - 4
1. Please confirm that questions and answers 1 through 6 from AM0005 revised and takes precedence over questions and answers 19 through 24 previously provided in AM0002.
a. Yes, confirmed. The latest Amendment takes precedence as does the updated, most current RFP.
2. How will the Government know which references submitted using the google form will be for which zone submission?
a. The Offeror should make clear in its proposal under Technical Proposal - Factor 3 which past performance reference is for which zonal submission. This has been updated in the RFP, Factor 3 Past Performance.
3. Will the Government confirm that, for Firm Experience (Factor 2), an offeror may rely on projects performed by its proposed subcontractor?
a. Yes. See updated RFP, Factor 2 Firm Experience.
4. Will the Government confirm that, for Past Performance (Factor 3), an offeror may rely on projects performed by its proposed subcontractor?
a. Yes.
5. Previous Answers (e.g., Q&A version 2, Answer Nos. 12, 19-24, 42.b, 44 ) suggested the
Government would not consider Firm Experience and Past Performance projects that were not performed by the offeror legal entity itself. Will the Government revise those answers or confirm that, in light of Amendment 5, offerors should disregard them?
a. Offerors are directed to the updated RFP. Previous answers inconsistent with the updated
RFP should be disregarded.
6. For Factors 2 and 3, will the Government also give favorable consideration to projects that a proposed subcontractor performed as a prime contractor?
a. Regarding this question, the evaluation criteria remain unchanged.
7. Considering the need to correlate Transaction Managers to Firm Experience and current limitations on page count, would the Government please consider expanding the Organizational Structure to 2 pages?
a. The page limit remains unchanged.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .