RFP Questions and Answers.pdf

RFP: 70CDCR24R00000007

Questions and Answers

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

# RFP Section and Page # Contract or Technical

1 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement, 1.5 Transition-In, page 2 Technical

The Performance Work Statement states that there is a 30-60 day transition-in, but also notes that the contract must not bill for any ramp-up costs until direct employees are fully investigated, cleared, and given notice to proceed by the Contracting Officer after the COR confirms that the Contractor is ready. Will the government consider the use of preliminary clearances until full clearances can be obtained?

No, preliminary clearances

2 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement, 2.5 Key Personnel, page 10 and Section G, page 16 Technical

These sections note that a Project Manager is required for each Area of Responsibility (AOR). The pricing template (Attachment 4) does not identify a Project Manager position for the Salt Lake City AOR. Please clarify this conflicting language.

All AOR's will have one PM, SLC attachement has been revised to show the correction

3 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement, 9.3.3 Technical ICE previously indicated office space could be used as available. Please identify which locations and how much office space will be available, as this will affect how the submission is priced.

It will vary based on availability of workspace at each ERO office. Gov will not commit to provide workspace for the exclusive use of the contractor due to limited space. If available, contractors will use shared workstations.

4 Attachment 1 - Performance Work Statement, 9.3.4.2 Technical Maintenance - If GOVs are used, would ICE consider allowing maintenance to be managed by the offeror and passed through to ICE at cost?

No

5 Attachment 1 - Appendices 1a-5a Technical Can historical guard service hours detail for each specific AOR be provided to the offerors? No, as RFP states what the gov need is moving forward.

6 Attachment 1 - Appendices 1a-5a Technical Similar to the Salt Lake Appendix 5a, can more detailed trip/route histories/requirements be provided for the other AORs? No, as routes vary on a daily basis.

7 Attachment 1 - Appendices 1b-5b Technical Can ICE advise as to which locations are currently operating with GOVs and if ICE anticipates the continuation of GOVs at these locations?

All locations currently have GOVs. GOVs will continue if gov. proceeds with GOV option.

8 Attachment 1 - Appendices 1b-5b Technical

Would ICE consider a transition period for the temporary use of GOVs to COVs, if necessary? In the Government's response to this question during the draft Solicitation review, it was stated that the Government would make a decision for the use of all COVs or GOVs. Has the Goverment made a final determination?

Gov will consider a transition period for COVs only option with a 90 day transition period.

9 Attachment 2 - Wage Determination Contract Would you please provide copies of all current and existing Collective Bargaining Agreements incorporated as Wage Determinations currently in place for all five AORs covered by this solicitation?

not applicable

10 Attachment 4 - Pricing Contract Can the offeror add rows to the Attachment 4 pricing schedule to incorporate additional administrative positions that are not part of the existing staffing detail in the model?

yes

11 Section G, page 16 Technical

This section notes that Supervisory Detention Managers are key personnel. The pricing template (Attachment 4) identifies site-specific “1st line Supervisors” and “2nd line Supervisors.” Are both the 1st and 2nd line supervisors considered supervisory detention managers and thus key personnel?

Yes

12 Section H, page 22 Technical Will the contractor be using a DHS-provided system to manage and/or maintain PII and/or SPII? Yes

13 Section H Technical Will the Government allow the contractor to install connectivity to its private network for support services such as employee time management, rostering, and dispatch?

Yes, but it may vary by location based on workspace availability.

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

Section B.5, Table 1, page 2 Section H.8, D.b.1, page 41 Section H.8, D.h, page 43 Section H.11, page 47 Section I.4, B.1, page 66

Contract

Page 2 states a transition timeline of 60 days.

Page 41 states that compliance that "adequate security includes compliance with DHS policies and procedures in effect at the time of contract award."

Page 43 states that the Contractor cannot "collect, process, store, or transmit CUI" before an ATO is recieved.

Page 47 states a 6-month transition.

Page 66 states that "within 30 days after contract award, the contractor shall submit for approval of its IT Security Plan."

Question: Please clarify the timeline for the transition period. Almost all of these statements contradict each other with differing timelines ranging from award to six months.

60 days transisition; 6-month optional extension; 30 days after award

Section H.2, page 20 Section H.7, Information Technology, page 25 Section H.8, A.2, page 26 Section H.8, D.2, page 32 Section H.8, H, page 33 Section H.10, page 46 Section I.2, B, page 62 Section I.4, A, page 66

Technical

Page 20 states the "Contractor is expected to have the necessary facilities to perfom the requirements of the contract" including "any equipment or interconnected system" under the umbrella of Information Technology.

Page 25 states that the Contractor access to sensitive data will be through an interface with the OPR-PSU which all logs, systems, and alarms will be managed by the Agency.

Page 26 states that the "Contractor shall perform all tasks on authorized government networks, using government-furnished IT and other equipment" and that all "tasks described in this document at authorized government facilities."

Page 32 states that the Contractor provides full access to log files and event information to identify incidents.

Page 33 states that the Contractor shall not "collect, process, store, or transmit CUI" until an ATO has been granted including the security authorization process with Agency sponsorship.

Page 46 states that the Contractor will provide access to installations, operations, and databases to carry out a program of inspection, investigation, and audit.

Page 62 defines the requirements for "Covered Contractor Information System" by a contractor-managed system unique to Page 66 states the Contractor shall be responsable for Information Technology (IT) security for all systems that includes Information Technology resources or services for which the Contractor must have physical or electronic access to sensitive information that directly support the agency's mission in support of the contract.

Question: The listed references range from the contractor not having any data outside agency-issued hardware and software, to the Contractor being responsible for its IT Security in partnership with the agency, up to no

16 PWS Appendix 13 Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan Section 3, page 286 Contract

Section 3 of the QASP requires the frequency and type of the Contractor's reviews be consistent with what is necessary in order to ensure compliance with performance standards, but no less frequent than what is described in the Government's monitoring instrument/worksheets within Appendix C (Performance Monitoring Tool). Could ICE please clarify the required frequency of reviews, as this information is not specified in Appendix C of the RFP?

Refer to Appedix 13, Appendix C – Performance Monitoring Tool in accordance with color chart

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

17 PWS, Appendices (all) Technical

All of the appendices include the statement “The Contractor shall be required to operate Government

Owned Vehicles (GOV), which will be made available by ICE/ERO, or Contractor

Owned Vehicles (COV), but not a combination of the two.”

Does the Government have enough fleet inventory to provide all of the requirements of the RFP if Offeror is utilizing an all-GOV solution?

yes

18 L.5.2 Page 89 Technical Could the government increase the page limits for Vol. 2 plans? yes, changed to 50 pages

19 RFP 70CDCR24R00000007_Section B Page 16; Section G.1.2 Minimum Contractor Key Personnel Contract

This section indicates that "A Project Manager is required for each Area of Responsibility (AOR)". The pricing sheets do not include a Project Manager for Salt Lake AOR. Please clarify.

All AOR's will have one PM, SLC attachement has been revised to show the correction

20 RFP 70CDCR24R00000007_Section B Page 18 ; Item 3 - Invoice Supporting Documentation Contract This section states that "Invoice charges must align with the contract

CLINs". What CLIN would incorporate Sack Lunches if needed? Not applicable. No sack lunches are needed

21 RFP 70CDCR24R00000007_Section B Page 93; 6. Proposal Contents Phase II: Volume II Operations Plan Contract Can you identify which AORs in this RFP will be utilizing Contractor-

Owned Vehicles (COVs) for operational planning purposes?

If awared as COVs, then all AORs and it locations within the AOR will be using COVs.

22 Attachment 1 - PWS Appendix 3a San Francisco AOR Transportation Routes Page 2 Officers Contract The number of officers has a typo, number of 1st Line Supervisors shows both six (6) and seven (7). • 1st Line Supervisors (Sgts) – Six (7)

Should read "1st Line Supervisors (Sgts) – Seven(7)" as shown later in Staffing Requirements Table in Appendix 3a

23 Attachment 1 - PWS Appendix 2a San Diego AOR Transportation Routes Page 2 Contract

Position requirements included for San Diego in Table titled "Positions by Post Location" show a total of 98 officers and one (1) Project Manager.

There are not any supervisor positions indicated. Please clarify.

Appendix 2a has been revised to reflect 170,560 hours annually representing forty 7x24x365 day posts and ten 5x8x52 week post. As a result 90 officers and (1) Project manager.

24 Attachment 1 - PWS Appendix 2a San Diego AOR Transportation Routes Contract Can you please provide the shift breakdown/schedule for San Diego?

Appendix 2a has been revised to reflect 170,560 hours annually representing forty 7x24x365 day posts and ten 5x8x52 week post. As a result 90 officers and (1) Project manager.

25 Attachment 1 - PWS Appendices Transportation Routes Contract

Can you please provide more detailed route information so contractor can do an analysis and calculation of COVs needed? The information provided in Appendix 5a_Salt Lake AOR Transportation Routes under "Routes Needed" starting on Page 2 is what is being requested for the rest of the AORs.

No, as routes vary on a daily basis.

26 Attachment 3 - Price Schedule for COV Contract

When performing transport duties, there could be delays that are out of contractor's control that requires payment of officer hours while not incurring any reimbursable mileage. In the use of COVs, how will contractor be reimbursed for delays outside of contractor's control, (paying of officer's time - hours) when miles are not being incurred during this time? Attachment 3 - Price Schedule for COV only shows payment for Mileage Reimbursement. Surge Mileage Reimbursement is payment also based on miles. Suggest adding a CLIN for payment of Delay Hours to this Pricing Sheet.

revised attachment 3

RFP Section L.5.3, page 90 Contract Would the Government extend the submission deadline for Phase I to 1 week following release of Government responses to questions? This will allow sufficient time for offerors to adjust their proposals based on those responses related to Phase I.

yes. Phase I extended to 12/19/2023

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

RFP Section L.5.6 Phase I, page 91 Contract Factor 1: Experience Submission states "Each experience should reference only one contract and no contract should be included in more than one response".

Will the Government remove these two restrictions and allow offerors to include more than one contract in each response and also use the same contract(s) in both responses?

Offerors have contracts that are relevant to both experience/case studies and may also have multiple contracts that provide the requested experience.

Removing these restrictions allows offerors to more accurately and thoroughly describe their overall capabilities - enabling broader competition that would otherwise not be qualified to move to Phase II.

yes, revised

RFP Section L.5.6 Phase I, page 91 Contract The instructions state, "At least one of the case studies must be performed by the prime contractor, and both case studies must clearly demonstrate the prime contractor’s experience in performing services similar to the those required in the PWS."

This appears contradictory, as a case study performed by a subcontractor would not necessarily demonstrate the prime contractor's experience. Will the Government remove or clarify the second part of this requirement?

yes, revised

RFP Section L.5.6, Phase I, page 91-92 Contract The instructions for Factor 1 state "Each experience should reference only one contract." Further down in the section, the instructions for Experience 1 and Experience 2 state "Provide at least one detailed example…"

Will the Government remove the restriction to only one contract reference per experience/case study? This will allow bidders with significant relevant experience to demonstrate their overall capabilities, which typically exceed that of any single contract.

yes, revised

RFP Section L.5.2, page 89 Contract Will the Government allow offerors to include a title page, table of contents, list of figures and tables, and glossary that are exempt from the page limitations for each volume?

yes, revised

32 Attachment 2 - Wage Determination Contract Will the Government provide a Seniority Lists for all SCA and/or CBA-covered incumbent employees? no

PWS Appendices 1a and 5a; RFP Section G.1.2, page 16; and PWS Section 2.5.1, pages 10-11

Technical Throughout the appendices the terms Program Manager/Deputy Program Manager and Project Manager/Deputy Project Manager Program Manager are used interchangeably. We recommend one Program Manager and one Deputy Program Manager for this effort, apparently located in Los Angeles.

Please confirm that the staffing requirement is a Program Manager and Deputy Program Manager in Los Angeles, and a Project Manager in each region, including Los Angeles.

One PM per AOR, with LOS having a DPM only.

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

PWS Appendices 1a, 2a, 3a, 4a and 5a; Draft RFP Q&A #1 Technical The Q&A response indicated that Appendices 1a-5a have been clarified regarding the quality of data provided.

We performed a line-by-line and number-by-number comparison of the DRFP documents to the RFP documents and found no substantial changes that provided the needed level of detailed data.

The type of data requested in DRFP Q&A #1 remains necessary for offerors to accurately analyze the workload and prepare staffing, equipment, and price proposals. Without this information, the Government will not receive accurate bids, will have no basis for comparison, and the awarded contract will require substantial modifications.

Will the Government provide detailed historical data, including the same level of detail to Appendices 1a, 2a, 3a, and 4a as what is provided in Appendix 5a?

No, as routes vary on a daily basis.

PWS Appendices 1a, 2a, 3a, 4a, 5a Technical Please confirm that the 'majority of the services delivered' for each AOR will be providing stationary guard posts. Will the Government provide the historical number of stationary guard hours by AOR for the past three years?

Yes, in most office it is a stationary guard post. No, as RFP states what the gov need is moving forward.

PWS Appendix 1a Technical The schedules and frequencies were not provided for the Los Angeles AOR; the only projection of mileage provided is the Government’s Attachment 3 Price Schedule for COV, CLIN 0001A Regular Mileage Reimbursement of 93,750 miles.

Will the Government confirm that the mileage listed is a guaranteed minimum so that offerors are able to provide a basis for their price proposals?

No

PWS Appendix 2a Technical The detailed staffing charts in the Draft RFP, which showed San Diego Federal Building Post headcounts by shift for weekdays and holidays, were replaced with higher-level summary charts that appear to overstate the requirement. It appears an error was introduced in the calculations when making the change to the higher-level chart. This has to do with not recognizing the DRFP requirement required 5 shifts (2 swing) of 10 officers from 0000-2400 on weekdays, and 4 shifts (one swing) of 10 officers from 0000-2400 on Saturdays and Sundays. The current RFP states a requirement for 90 posts x 2080 hours (40 hours/week x 52 weeks). In the draft RFP the hours for the San Diego Federal Building totaled 3,280 per seven-day week, for a total annual requirement of 170,560 hours. In the new, high-level RFP chart for San Diego, the total hours are 187,200 for five-day-per-week coverage.

Please confirm that the correct number of hours for San Diego is 170,560 hours annually, representing forty 7x24x365 day posts and ten 5x8x52 week posts (in the simplest terms).

The RFP has been revised to reflect 170,560 annually representing forty 7x24x365 day posts and ten 5x8x52 week post.

PWS Appendix 2b Technical Would the Government please confirm this is the final version of Appendix

2b, as there are tracked changes and comment boxes that appear to make it a draft?

Track changes have been removed. Final Appendix 2b attached.

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

PWS Appendix 3a Technical We note that schedules and frequencies were not provided for the San Francisco AOR, so the only projection of mileage offerors have is the Government’s Attachment 3 Price Schedule for COV, CLIN 0003A Regular Mileage Reimbursement of 162,500 miles.

Will the Government confirm that the mileage listed is a guaranteed minimum so that offerors are able to provide a basis for their price proposals?

No

PWS Appendix 4a Technical We note that schedules and frequencies were not provided for the Phoenix AOR, so the only projection of mileage we have is the Government’s Attachment 3 Price Schedule for COV, CLIN 0004A Regular Mileage Reimbursement of 173,750 miles.

Will the Government confirm that the mileage listed is a guaranteed minimum so that offerors are able to provide a basis for their price proposals?

No

PWS Appendix 5a Technical The total of the routes shown in the PWS Appendix 5a for the Salt Lake AOR is 498,114 miles.

The Government’s Attachment 3 Price Schedule for COV, CLIN 0005A Regular Mileage Reimbursement of only 173,750 miles shows a huge discrepancy.

This presents disadvantages for both ICE and offerors:

-If offerors amortize their costs over an artificially low regional annual mileage, ICE will pay an exorbitant penalty when the amortized costs exceed the Mileage Reimbursement CLIN quantities.

-If non-incumbent offerors amortize their costs over an artificially low regional annual mileage, and incumbents amortize their costs over a much higher, actual value only they are aware of, non-incumbents will be penalized for depending on the artificially low Government PWS Attachment 3 Mileage Reimbursement values.

We ask that the Government review in detail and address the discrepancies. Will the Government confirm that the mileage listed is a guaranteed minimum so that offerors are able to provide a basis for their price proposals?

No

PWS Overall and PWS Section 2.10.4.1.4, page 12 Technical The number of contractor vehicles to be provided is not clear based on the PWS and Appendices.

Please identify the locations where contractor owned vehicles are expected to be provided.

Each AOR vehicle quantity and type needed is establish within each AOR appendix. Gov discression on the set number of vehicles at each location based on operational need.

PWS Overall and PWS Section 2.10.4.1.4, page 12 Technical The number of contractor vehicles to be provided is not clear based on the PWS and Appendices.

Which routes will be Contractor vs. Government Owned vehicles?

GOV or COV but not a combination of the two.

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

PWS Overall and PWS Section 2.10.4.1.4, page 12 Technical The number of contractor vehicles to be provided is not clear based on the PWS and Appendices.

Please specify the actual expected routes along with frequency or miles that will be performed using Contractor owned vs. Government owned vehicles.

GOV or COV but not a combination of the two.

PWS Overall, Appendices 1a, 2a, 3a, 4a, 5a; PWS Section 1.4, Technical Will stationary guard services for monitoring non-citizens in hospitals and hotels always require security officers to be armed? If not, under what circumstances or within which AORs would this not be required? Neither the PWS or the PBNDS specify when armed vs. unarmed officers are required.

Determination will be based on hospital requirements which may differ by AOR.

PWS Section 1.4, page 4 Technical Will the Government specify the number of Government owned vs.

contractor owned vehicles will be required for each Area of Operation

(AOR)?

There are conflicts within the PWS indicating the contractor will need to match the number of vehicles OR that contractors will not use a combination of the two, indicating it will be one or the other. However, a significant number of vehicles have been or appear to have been requested but a defined number does not exist. This section appears to need very specific clarification to ensure the contractor can sufficiently price and account for all required capital expenditure for each AOR.

Will the Government please clarify where Government vs. contractor vehicles are needed and specify the number and type of vehicles needed by location; or provide the specific historical route data so that offerors can estimate the requirements?

Each AOR vehicle quantity and type requirement is establish within each AOR appendix. Gov discression on the set number of vehicles at each location based on operational need. No combination. GOV only or COV only.

PWS Section 1.5, page 5 Technical The Government indicates an expected transition plan of 30-60 days. This is a large transition involving 5 Field Offices and their various sub-offices.

This procurement also requires a large acquisition of vehicles to meet minimum vehicle requirements in a commercial environment that does not maintain a large on-hand inventory. Such a requirement will require advance purchase of vehicles and vehicle modifications, and may have a detrimental affect on the number of qualified bidders. Previous contract proposals of this size and magnitude have been provided a minimum of a 90 day transition and as much as 120 days to ensure that all required equipment can be successfully procured.

The complexity of the transition-in is also dependent on whether this is a GOV or a COV transition.

For a COV transition, will the Government please consider a longer transition period?

Gov will consider a transition period for COVs only option with a 90 day transition period.

PWS Section 10, pages 40-42; RFP Section F.7 Table 5, pages 12-14

Technical Will the Government reconcile the deliverables lists in PWS Section 10 and RFP Section F.7. We note that one identifies 35 deliverables and the other has 37. Specifically, RFP Section F.7 Table 5 rows 7 and 8 do not appear in the PWS; are these required contract deliverables?

PWS will become contract award

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

PWS Section 2.10.1.1, page 11;

PWS 2.10.4.1.3, page 12

Technical The PWS refers to "sites deemed appropriate by ICE."

Are these sites to be provided by ICE or by the contractor? ICE determined what those sites will be.

PWS Section 2.10.1.1, page 11;

PWS 2.10.4.1.3, page 12

Technical The PWS refers to "sites deemed appropriate by ICE."

Please confirm that all holding facilities, hotels, and hospitals will be identified by and provided by ICE.

No, as this changes frequently.

PWS Section 2.10.1.1, page 11;

PWS 2.10.4.1.3, page 12

Technical The PWS refers to "sites deemed appropriate by ICE."

Will the contractor or the Government be responsible for securing hotel rooms at various designated locations? If contractor provided, will the Government amend the RFP to include a cost reimbursable CLIN for hotel charges?

Gov will secure hotel rooms.

PWS Section 2.10.4.1.1, page 12 Technical It is critical that the Government delineate which sites will use Government owned vs. contractor owned vehicles to ensure that bids are equal and competitive and ensure sufficient vehicles are in place for use at each assigned location throughout the five field offices and multiple sub-offices.

Will the Government identify in detail the total number of vehicles needed for each office by Government vs. contractor?

Each AOR vehicle quantity and type requirement is establish within each AOR appendix. Gov discression on the set number of vehicles at each location based on operational need. No combination of GOV and COV

PWS Section 2.10.4.1.1, page 12 Technical Based on the general language and number of vehicles requested in the various attachments, is it the Government's intent to replace the current aging Government fleet in its entirety as Government vehicles reach their expected retirement or deadline mileage or date?

Yes

PWS Section 2.10.4.1.2, page 12 Technical The PWS states that the Contractor shall use ICE Government Owned Vehicles or Contractor Owned Vehicles, but not a combination of the two.

Please identify which routes will be contractor vs Government owned vehicles.

Each AOR vehicle quantity and type requirement is establish within each AOR appendix. Gov discression on the set number of vehicles at each location based on operational need. No combination of GOV and COV

PWS Section 2.5.1.2, page 11 Technical The PWS indicates that all Supervisory DOs are key personnel. Please confirm that resumes for Supervisory DOs are not required with proposal submission, as that would preclude offerors from the ability to hire incumbent personnel into those positions.

Not required

PWS Section 2.6, page 11 Technical In PWS Section 2.6, the Organizational Chart is due "within 30 days after contract review."

Would the Government please clarify, as the Organizational Chart is listed as due with proposal submission in RFP Section L.5.6 (page 94), RFP Section F row 16 (page 13), and PWS Section 10 row 14 (page 41)?

The Contractor shall provide an organizational chart that describes the structure of authority, responsibility, and accountability within the facilities to the COR within 30 days after contract award. Organizational chart shall be available for review upon request and the Contractor shall notify the CO and COR if changes are made throughout the contract.

57 PWS Section 3.3, page 15 Technical Will all incumbent personnel be required to complete new hire health screenings before beginning work on the new contract? No

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

PWS Section 5.9 and 5.2, pages 31 and 29 Technical Throughout Sections 5.9 and 5.2, contractor personnel are described as Detention Officers and Armed Detention Officers. Section 5.2 describes basic training subjects that all employees shall complete; there is no reference to firearms training in this section. Section 5.9.2.12.7 indicates that firearms training is required for all armed DOs.

Please clarify whether 100% of Detention Officers are to be armed.

Yes, 100% armed

PWS Section 5.9 and 5.2, pages 31 and 29 Technical Throughout Sections 5.9 and 5.2, contractor personnel are described as Detention Officers and Armed Detention Officers. Section 5.2 describes basic training subjects that all employees shall complete; there is no reference to firearms training in this section. Section 5.9.2.12.7 indicates that firearms training is required for all armed DOs.

If 100% of Detention Officers are not armed, please provide the percentage of posts that are required to be armed for each AOR.

N/A

PWS Section 5.9.2.4, page 31 Technical The PWS states, "The Contractor shall account for all firearms and ammunition daily."

Is it the Government's intent for all officers to return to a central location at the end of every shift in order to conduct a firearm and ammunition accountability check? This will have implications for shift scheduling and the mandatory shift restrictions.

Yes - DOs will return to the office upon completion of tranpostation assignments. The contarctor will be responsible for the accountability check in accordance with the PWS.

PWS Section 5.9.2.9, page 31 Technical Section 5.9.2.9 states, "Firearms shall be carried with the safety on."

Will the Government allow the carry of a "safe action weapon" with no external safety? This is currently an approved practice on other ICE contracts.

Yes, double action only.

PWS Section 6.2, page 33 Technical The PWS references the continued use of logbooks.

Will the Government confirm that logbooks will be provided by the Government?

Yes

PWS Section 6.2, page 33 Technical The PWS references the continued use of logbooks.

If it is expected that the contractor provide logbooks, will the Government specify how many logbooks are required per performance period?

N/A. Gov provided

PWS Section 6.2, page 33 Technical The PWS references the continued use of logbooks.

If contractor provided, under which FFP CLIN should the cost of logbooks be applied?

N/A

PWS Section 9.3.3, page 37 Technical Will the Government please specify which locations are included in Government-provided Contractor Workspaces? It will vary based on availability of workspace at each

ERO office. Gov will not commit to provide workspace for the exclusive use of the contractor due to limited space. If available, contractors will use shared workstations.

PWS Section 9.3.3, page 37 Technical Do the Government-provided Contractor Workspaces include training spaces?

It will vary based on availability by each ERO office. Gov will not commit to provide the space for the exclusive use of the contractor. If available, contractor will have to obtain ICE approval prior to.

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

RFP Section F.7, Table 5, row 14, page 13; PWS Section 10 Table row 12, page 41

Contract Would the Government please confirm that the "Plans, Policy and Procedures Manual" required with proposal submission refers only to the Operations, Staffing, and Transition Plans specified in Section L for Factor 2? If required with proposal submission, would the Government please confirm that this requirement is exempt from the 20-page volume limit?

revised to 50 pages

RFP Section F.7, Table 5, row 15, page 13; PWS Section 10 Table row 13, page 41

Contract Would the Government please clarify whether Key Personnel Resumes are due with the Phase II proposal? If they are required, please provide Section L instructions on which positions require resumes, required content/format, and applicable page limitations, etc. In addition, will the resumes will be evaluated as part of the award decision?

yes resumes will be evaluated as part of Key Personnel

RFP Section F.7, Table 5, row 17, page 13; PWS Section 10 Table row 15, page 41

Contract The contractor deliverables lists in Section F and PWS Section 10 identify the Suitability and e-Qip Security Process as due "with proposal submission."

Would the Government please provide instructions in Section L for what documentation is required relating to Suitability and e-Qip Security Process with the Phase II proposal? In which volume should this information be included, and what are the applicable page limits?

refer to PWS and revised page limits

RFP Section F.7, Table 5, row 4, page 12; PWS Section 10 Table row 4, page 40

Contract The contractor deliverables lists in Section F and PWS Section 10 identify the Quality Control Plan as due "with proposal submission."

Would the Government please clarify the Quality Control Plan requirements due with the Phase II proposal, as there are no instructions provided in Section L? In which volume should this information be included, and what are the applicable page limits? In addition, will this Plan be evaluated as part of the award decision?

revised page limits to 50 pgaes

RFP Section I, page 59; PWS Section 1.1, page 4 Contract The PWS states this contract is a "performance-based work environment."

Will the Government please confirm that this is a performance-based acquisition in accordance with FAR Subpart 37.6 Performance-Based Acquisition?

yes it is performance-based acquisition

RFP Section K, pages 77-86 Contract Are offerors to complete and return Section K as part of their Phase II proposal? If yes, please confirm it should be included in Volume IV and that there is no applicable page limit.

yes, need to complete and yes there is no applicable page limit

RFP Section L.2 52.216-1, page 87; Draft RFP Q&A #13 Contract The RFP states, "The government anticipates the award of a hybrid Firm- Fixed Price/Labor Hour Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contract as a result of this solicitation."

In addition, in the DRFP Q&A, #13 asked "Please clarify regarding the Government’s intention regarding utilization of BPA/Call orders for this contract." The Government's response was, "This is an IDIQ not a BPA."

However, the final RFP was not amended accordingly, as there are 18 references to BPA in the final RFP. Please confirm that this is an IDIQ and update the RFP accordingly.

yes, this is IDIQ

RFP Section L.5.2, page 89 Contract Will the Government please confirm that the 5-page limit for Volume 4 Pricing applies only to the pricing narrative, and that the Legal Offer (Identification and Cover Letter), Signed SF 1449, and two Pricing Templates are exempt from the volume page limitation?

yes

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

RFP Section L.5.2, page 89 and RFP Section L.5.6, Volume II instructions, pages 93-94

Contract The instructions require an Operations Plan that complies with "all elements of the contract and the PWS." This plan is one of three to be provided within a 20 page limit.

Given the PWS is 43 pages with 11 Subsections and numerous elements, would the Government please confirm that offerors are to provide an overarching solution in their Operations Plan, rather than individually and specifically addressing each element of the contract and PWS?

refer to PWS and RFP section L&M

RFP Section L.5.2, page 89 and RFP Section L.5.6, Volume II instructions, pages 93-94

Contract Section L allows "no more than 20 pages" for all of the Volume II plans (Operations, Staffing, and Transition) combined.

The requirements for the three written plans are extensive and require detailed descriptions in numerous areas and multiple Field Office Areas of Operation. Will the Government increase the volume page limitation to 50 pages in order to be commensurate with the complexity and level of detail of the responses required for the plans?

yes, revised to 50 pages

RFP Section L.5.4, page 89 Contract Will the Government confirm that there will be an additional opportunity to ask questions or clarifications following the advisory down-select notification and release of the solicitation amendment?

no

RFP Section L.5.6 Factor 4(b), pages 96-97; Section M.5 page 103; Attachment 2 - Wage Determination

Contract RFP Sections L and M.5 state, "In addition to increases to wages and fringe benefits prescribed by a revised wage determination, including bona fide fringe benefits specifically called out in a collective bargaining agreement...." and "Increases to supervisor and other Service Contract Act (SCA) exempt wages and benefits are not subject to contract price adjustment in the subsequent ordering periods under FAR 52.222-43(d), unless the positions are expressly covered under a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) or DOL wage determination."

Attachment 2 includes the statement, "Offeror can submit a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) that are covered for each County and approved by the Department of Labor."

Please confirm whether there are CBAs currently in place for any of the incumbent workforce.

no

Question No. Reference Question Category Question Response/Clarification

RFP Section L.5.6 Factor 4(b), pages 96-97; Section M.5 page 103; Attachment 2 - Wage Determination

Contract RFP Sections L and M.5 state, "In addition to increases to wages and fringe benefits prescribed by a revised wage determination, including bona fide fringe benefits specifically called out in a collective bargaining agreement...." and "Increases to supervisor and other Service Contract Act (SCA) exempt wages and benefits are not subject to contract price adjustment in the subsequent ordering periods under FAR 52.222-43(d), unless the positions are expressly covered under a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) or DOL wage determination."

Attachment 2 includes the statement, "Offeror can submit a Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) that are covered for each County and approved by the Department of Labor."

Please provide all relevant and applicable Collective Bargaining Agreements (CBA) currently utilized to provide these Detention Officer Transportation security services.

no

RFP Section L.5.6, page 92 Contract Will the Government provide an anticipated date for advisory down-select notifications to be made to offerors? This will enable contractor resource planning (especially giving the upcoming holiday period when resources can be thin).

yes. Phase I extended to 12/19/2023; advisory nofitication will be sent on or before 12/22

RFP Section L.5.6, Volume III Instructions, page 95 and RFP Section M.5, Factor 3, page 102

Contract Section L states, "Offerors shall provide information for no more than three

(3) recent and relevant contracts in which they served as the prime contractor or subcontractor for services..."

Section M states, "An overall past performance rating determination will be made of the offerors’ past performance including, if applicable, the extent of its subcontractors’ and teaming partners’ involvement."

Would the Government amend Section L to match Section M, allowing offerors to include past performance references performed by their subcontractors/teaming partners?

yes updated

82 RFP Section M.3, page 98 Contract Please confirm that this will be a single award contract. This is a multiple-award IDIQ Contract

SF1449 block 8; RFP Section L.5.3, page 90 Contract The SF1449, block 8 lists a due date of 01/10/2024 0900 PT.

Will the Government please allow at least 30 days between the advisory down-select notification and Phase II submissions?

No, however the RFP Phase II submisson due date was changed to 1/17/2024

84 Attachment 1-Performance Work Statement. Section 1.4 - Performance Work Statement, Page 4. Contract

Is the work described in the PWS being performed by a contractor or the Government at the moment? Contractors

85 Attachment 2- Use of Government-owned Vehicles/Contractor- Owned Vehciles and Hold Harmless Statement. Page 1 Contract

If a contractor were to use Government owned vehicles. Are the Government owned vehicles in California up to date with the emission requirements for the state of California? Exempt. US GOV fleet

86 Attachment 2- Use of Government-owned Vehicles/Contractor- Owned Vehciles and Hold Harmless Statement. Page 1 Contract

If the contractor were to provide contractor owned vehicles, is there an age or mileage limitation on what can be provided?

Yes, refer to ICE fleet manual for vehicle replacement standards

Vendor 1