APO ALSS RFP Amend 1 - RFP Questions and Responses.pdf

USCG RFP 70Z02321RPAP02500

Amendment 1 - Offeror Questions & Government Responses

Question Attachment Paragraph/Page No. Question Government Response

1 N/A N/A Is this a new requirement?

This contract will consolidate acquisition logistics support services currently being provided under multiple stand alone task orders. Multiple OASIS and PACTS II contractors have been providing these services to the APO.

2 N/A N/A

Will the US Coast Guard be open to new and innovative ideas in terms of customized Integrated Logistics Support Services management tools with the latest analytics technology that will help with the improvement of their business process?

The USCG is open to considering innovative ideas in performance of task orders as the

Scope and performance requirements are negotiated prior to awarding task orders

(TOs). However, products and processes must permit seamless transition to existing

USCG processes and systems.

3 RFP Section L, pg. 65 Which of these guidelines should Offerors be following for the Past

Performance? 10 pages or one page each?

Section B (Past Performance) is limited to 3 pages, 1 for each reference. The RFP has been updated to reflect this change.

4 RFP Section F-3, pg. 13

The RFP states, "The primary place of performance will be on-site at the USCG

APO. However, due to space constraints at the USCG APO, there is work that will need to be performed at an off-site location that shall be owned/leased by the contract awardee." Please clarify if remote work or telework is acceptable for off-site work?

Yes, remote work or telework is acceptable for work not performed at the APO.

5 RFP Section L-4, pg. 64

Section L-4 states, "Volume I (Technical Proposal) shall include a detailed narrative that clearly and explicitly states the Offeror’s understanding of the requirement and its technical approach to meeting the requirements in the

SOW." However, L-6 Contents of Proposals and M-2 Evaluation do not provide instructions that a "Technical Approach" is required as part of the proposal for

Volume I: Technical Proposal - Experience and Management Approach. Please clarify if a Technical Approach is required to be included in Volume I and any instructions or page count limits if it is required?

A technical approach is not required. The language in Section L-4 has been updated to reflect this change.

6 RFP Section L-5, pg. 64 Please clarify if a title page of 1 page may be included in Volume I, Section B, as well?

A title page may be included. The language in Section L-5 has been updated to reflect this change.

7 RFP Section L-5, pg. 65 Please clarify if Volume II, Section A, Subsections 1 through 4 are to be submitted as four sepearate electronic files or a single file?

Volume II, Section A, Subsections 1 through

4 should be provided as a single file.

8 RFP Section L-5, pg. 65

Please confirm Volume II, Section A Subsection 2 (Representation and

Certifications) should be 20 pages, as that is the length of Section K provided in the RFP?

Yes, it should be 20 pages. The language in

Section L-5 has been updated to reflect this change.

9 RFP Section L-5, pg. 65

Please confirm Volume II, Section B (Past Performance) should be limited to 3 pages, as each of the three (3) past performance references shall not exceed one (1) page in length?

Section B (Past Performance) is limited to 3 pages. The RFP has been updated to reflect this change.

10 RFP Section L-6, pg. 67

Volume II, Section B: Past Performance (Factor 3) requires inclusion of both the names of the contracting and technical person to be contacted with their address, telephone, and email address. Please clarify if both the contracting and technical person need to complete and return Attachment 4 - PPQ, or if only a single point of contact for each contract included needs to complete the

PPQ?

A single point of contact for each contract included needs to complete the PPQ.

11 2 N/A

Would the USCG please clarify which IDIQ labor categories are non-exempt from the Service Contract Act (SCA) and which specific Occupation Codes from the Wage Determination apply to those non-exempt labor categories? Under the SCA at section 8(b) the wage determination does not apply to any employee who individually qualifies as a bona fide executive administrative or professional employee as defined in 29 C.F.R. Part 541. On our review of the

IDIQ labor categories, all IDIQ labor categories appear to be bona fide executive administrative or professional support and should all be thus exempt from SCA.

After further review the Government has determined that the Service Contract Act

(SCA) does not apply to the labor categories required for this acquisition. The RFP has been updated to remove the applicable clauses in FAR 52.212-5 and wage determination associated with the SCA.

12 2 N/A

Please confirm that cell B57 should be entered as a percentage representating the general administrative and/or overhead fee applied to travel in accordance with their standard accounting practices?

Cell B57 should be entered as a percentage.

13 2 N/A

The primary place of performance will be on-site at the USCG APO. However, due to space constraints at the USCG APO, there is work that will need to be performed at an off-site location that shall be owned/leased by the contract awardee. Please clarify if labor rates proposed in Attachment 2 - APO ALSS

Pricing Spreadsheet should be established for on-site or off-site locations? In addition, would the USCG consider modifying Attachment 2 - APO ALSS Pricing

Spreadsheet to enable Offerors to propose separate rates for on-site or off-site work?

On-site and off-site rates will not be used.

The labor rates proposed in Attachment 2 will be used for both on-site and off-site work.

14 2 N/A

The RFP identifies multiple potential places of performance in Section F-3, including Baltimore, MD; Alexandria, VA; Portsmouth, VA; Washington, DC;

Mechanicsburg, PA; and USCG Project Resident Offices co-located at the respective shipbuilder production sites. Should the USCG require Offerors to propose different rates for different places of performance to account for various market conditions and cost of living in each of these areas? Alternately, can the USCG identify the labor categories and quantity of hours that will be expected to perform in each location to enable Offerors to align proposed costs with the prevailing markets in each location?

At this time there is no requirement for work to be performed outside of the Baltimore, MD area. The work that may be required to be performed outside of the Baltimore, MD area would be minimal. Labor rates for outside of the Baltimore area will not be required at this time. After contract award, if a task order requires work to be performed outside of the Baltimore, MD area, different rates may be proposed and negotiated.

15 4 N/A

Would the USCG consider removing the requirement for the PPQ to be signed by the completing point of contact (POC)? With most people working remotely due to COVID-19 and without their normal office equipment it might not be feasible for the POC to print, sign, and scan the form.

The USCG will remove the requirement for the PPQ to be signed electronically but the

PPQ MUST be submitted by the person completing the PPQ. Signed PPQs are still acceptable. Attachment 4 has been updated to reflect this change.

16 N/A N/A

How is this requirement currently being accomplished? Is there an incumbent for this work (are there multiple incumbents performing portions of this work)? If there are incumbents, please identify the company(ies), the contracts utilized, and their respective end of performance dates.

See the response to Question 1

17 N/A N/A

Does the Government anticipate issuance of DD Form 254, and a request for cleared personnel to support the ALSS requirement? (The 22 January 2020 draft SOW referenced a potential requirement for personnel cleared to the

SECRET level, this requirement does not appear in the current solicitation.)

No. The 22 January 2020 draft SOW should not be used in responding to this RFP.

18 RFP Multiple Are we correct to presume RFP Sections 2.1.4, 2.1.5, and 2.1.6 are redundant, since these sections also appear in RFP Sections 2.2.4, 2.2.5, and 2.3.1?

RFP Sections 2.1.4, 2.1.5, and 2.1.6 have been deleted. The RFP has been updated to reflect this change.

19 RFP Section F-2

“The term of the basic IDIQ contract shall have a 12-month base ordering period and six (6) 12-month option periods. TOs shall have individual periods of performance set forth in the task order, which may include option periods.

However, no task order period of performance shall exceed more than 12-months past the expiration of this contract.” In order for us to accurately estimate rates will the Government please provide an estimated Period of

Performance for the Base and each option year (e.g. 1 Jan 2021 to 31 Dec

2021)?

The estimated period of performance for the base ordering period is 2/1/2021 -

1/31/2022. Ordering periods 1-6 would be

2/1/2022 - 1/31/2028. The RFP has been updated to reflect this change.

20 2 N/A

Cell B57—is the Government asking for the burden (percentage) the offeror will apply to travel (e.g. General and Administrative or Materials and Handling expenses)?

Yes

21 2 N/A Will the Government provide plug-in Travel cost numbers for the Base Period and each Option Period to ensure consistent cost burden evaluation?

No. Only the burden percentage will be evaluated to determine if it is fair and reasonable.

22 RFP Section F-3

Place of Performance, advises that, “due to space constraints at the USCG APO, there is work that will need to be performed at an off-site location that shall be owned/leased by the contract awardee.” The RFP does not mention time frame, quantity of contract staff anticipated to be housed in contractor facilities, or any required proximity to APO offices.

Correct. There will be daily interaction between CORs and the Contractor PM and

TO leads, as well as meetings of all team members, as required. However, the location of workforce is left to the contractor to manage.

23 RFP Section F-3

To properly price the potential cost of this work we need to know the approximate percentage of the total 85,280 hours per year that can be expected to be performed within contractor owned/leased facilities.

Moreover, Section F-3 indicates the on-site presence of key personnel

(presumably the Contract Program Manager) at the APO is highly desirable.

Therefore, would the Government please provide an estimate of the percentage of work (or person hours) anticipated to be performed within contractor facilities; and, can the Government clarify the desired location (or acceptable proximity) of the referenced “key personnel”?

See the response to Question 22

24 RFP Section F-3

Can the Government provide an estimate of the projected staffing required to support Government’s off-site locations (e.g. USCG locations in Alexandria and

Portsmouth VA, Washington DC, Mechanicsburg PA, and at various USCG

Project Resident Offices co-located at various shipbuilder production sites)?

Does the Government anticipate permanent or temporary (e.g TDY) posting at the remote USCG facilities?

At this time there is no requirement for work to be performed outside of the Baltimore, MD area. The work that may be required to be performed outside of the Baltimore, MD area would be minimal. This will be determined at the task order level. If required, the work could be permanent or temporary.

25 RFP Section F-3

Support for the Operating Systems Command (OSC) at Martinsburg WV was referenced in the 22 January 2020 draft SOW for this requirement. This location does not appear in the current solicitation. Are we correct to presume support services for/at this location are no longer required?

Yes, services at OSC in Martinsburg, WV are no longer required. The 22 January 2020 draft SOW should not be used in responding to this RFP.

26 RFP Section L-5

For the Table of Contents and Glossary (Volumes I and II), should these items be provided as stand-alone files or be included, respectively, within the primary files for Volume I and Volume II?

The Table of Contents and Glossary for each

Volume may be stand-alone files or included with the primary files for Volumes I and II.

27 RFP Section L-5

Will the Government please confirm the following file structure is compliant with the instructions provided?

Company_RFP#_Vol_I_Table_of_Contents&Glossary

Company_Vol_I_Section_A

Company_RFP#_Vol_I_Section_B

Company_RFP#_Vol_II_Table_of_Contents&Glossary

Company_RFP#_Vol_II_Section_A_Subsection_1-4

Company_RFP#_Vol_II_Section_B

Company_RFP#_Vol_II_Section_C_Cost_Narrative

Company_RFP#_Vol_II_Section_C_Attachment_3_Pricing_Spreadsheet

Company_RFP#_Vol_II_Section_D

Yes this is acceptable.

28 RFP Sections L-5 & L-6

Will the Government please confirm that the page limit for Vol. II, Section B

Past Performance is 10 pages as stated in RFP Section L-5? There is a conflicting instruction regarding the page limit in L-6 arising from the content instructions for Section B Past Performance specifying: "Each of the three (3) references shall not exceed one (1) page in length, and do not count against the page limitation." Please clarify.

See the response to Question 3

29 RFP Section M-2.1.3

In evaluating Past Performance does the Government plan to differentiate

Prime vs Subcontractor inputs? If yes, please expand on the evaluation criteria and methodology that will be used.

No

30 N/A N/A Is there a sample Task Order that will be used in the evaluation of awardees and as the first task on the contract?

No

31 N/A N/A Is there a targeted Award Date for the contract? Mid-late January

32 N/A N/A Is there a targeted Start Date for the contract? Early February

33 RFP Section L-5

Volume II, Section B - Past performance – Is the 10-page past performance volume limited to the three past performance references or can additional past performance examples be included in the 10-page volume?

See the response to Question 3

34 RFP

Section 2.1.4 & Section C -

2.2.4

RFP Section 2.1.4 Technical Support appears to be a duplicate of Section C-

2.2.4

RFP Section 2.1.4 has been deleted. The RFP has been updated to reflect this change.

35 RFP

Section 2.1.5 & Section C -

2.2.5

RFP Section 2.1.5 Maintenance Planning appears to be a duplicate of Section C-

2.2.5

RFP Section 2.1.5 has been deleted. The RFP has been updated to reflect this change.

36 RFP

Section 2.1.6 & Section C -

2.3.1

RFP Section 2.1.6 Test, Measurement, Handling and Support Equipment appears to be a duplicate of Section C-2.3.1.

RFP Section 2.1.6 has been deleted. The RFP has been updated to reflect this change.

37 RFP Section L-5

“Section A, Subsections 1 through 4 and Sections B through C must be provided in separate electronic files.” TO confirm Would Section A, Subsections 1 through 4 be combined in one file for Section A? or should that consist of four individual files (e.g. Section A-1, Section A-2, Section A-3, etc.)?

See the response to Question 7

38 RFP Section L-5

“Section D may be comprised of separate files sufficient to meet the requirements stated below in L-8.” L-8 refers to proposal preparation costs. Is L-

8 the correct reference?

The correct reference is L-6. The RFP has been updated to reflect this change.

39 RFP Section F-1

“…due to space constraints at the USCG APO, there is work that will need to be performed at an off-site location that shall be owned/leased by the contract awardee.” Assuming that the contractor-owned/leased facility is expected to be near the USCG APO facility in Baltimore, MD, does the government have an estimate of the space required? Does the government anticipate additional contractor-owned/leased space at any of the other four (4) locations?

No, the level of effort and personnel required will be subject to negotiation for individual TOs. A contractor-owned/leased space will not be required at any of the other potential locations.

40 N/A N/A

The draft PWS required that the contractor facility near APO be available within 9 months of contract award. Is a 9-month timeline still accurate to meet the anticipated demand for contractor facilities?

No. The 22 January 2020 draft SOW should not be used in responding to this RFP.

41 RFP Section L-6

Section B (h) of the RFP states “Offeror shall submit documentation demonstrating offerors’ teaming arrangements.” Can this be shown in an

Organization Chart? If not, please identify the documentation that is required.

Also, can this submittal be excluded from page count?

The Offeror shall submit what it feels is sufficient to demonstrate its teaming arrangements, if applicable. This information will not be excluded from the page count.

42 RFP Section B-3, pg. 2

Section B-3 Competition states this is 100% set aside for WOSBs. In regards to the WOSB socioeconomic category, FAR 13 CFR, part 27, section 3,states that

3rd party certification is required, must be certified on an annual basis, and we must provide a copy to the certification to the contracting officer to verify eligibility at the time of initial offer. This is in line with SBA’s WOSB Program, which states that “after October 15, 2020, self-certification will no longer be available, and firms must complete the new 3rd party certification process on beta.certify.sba.gov to compete for WOSB Federal Contracting Program set-aside contracts. The RFP does not have a requirement indicating which volume the 3rd Party Certification should be provided as part of the submittal. Can you please provide direction on the submittal of 3rd party certification? Also, can this submittal be excluded from page count?

The Offeror's WOSB 3rd party certification shall be submitted with its proposal and shall be included in Volume II, Section A, Subsection 4. The certification does not count toward the page limit of that subsection. RFP Sections L-5 and L-6 have been updated to reflect this change.

43 2 N/A

The pricing spreadsheet has lead positions with only 480 hours. However, these personnel will be critical to continuity on the contract. Will the government consider allowing more hours for those positions?

The hours provided in the pricing spreadsheet are estimates and for evaluation purposes only. Actual hours required will vary at the TO level.

44 RFP Section 2.4.4, pg. 7

Page 7, RFP Section 2.4.4 states that USCG uses Tech Illustrator® and

AutoCAD® for graphic illustration. Will the government provide the licenses for

AutoCAD and 3-D modeling tools or is that a contractor expense? If at contractor expense, can an ODC CLIN be added to the pricing sheet and can the government provide a list of software licenses that is Contractor required for this effort.

The contractor will have to provide the licenses for software required for this contract and this will be at the contractor's expense. The Government will not pay for the software required to perform the requirements of the contract.

45 RFP Section F-3, pg. 13

RFP Section F-3 Place of Performance states primary place of performance is on-site at the USCG APO located at 711 E. Ordnance Road, Suite 711, Baltimore, MD 21226. Please clarify if on site at the APO is at the contractor or government’s office locations? Pricing sheet does not reflect two different labor buildups based on on/off site. If there is a mix of positions within the

APO government site and contractor site, can the government identify which ones required at the APO government site?

See the response to Question 13

46 RFP Section F-3, pg. 13

RFP Section F-3 Place of Performance states there are multiple work locations, will the government allow other WDs to be used for different locations for SCA pricing?

See the response to Question 11

47 RFP Section C - 2.2.1, pg.5

RFP Section C - 2.2.1 states “NAVSEA Level II certification” is required. Will the

RCM standard that the SFLC ESD (USCG Specific) is employing suffice for APO

RCM certification? If not, will the government provide the minimum standard to make non-NAVSEA RCM certification acceptable?

The SFLC-ESD Baltimore RCM requirement will not suffice for APO requirement. Those individuals performing RCM analysis need to hold a NAVSEA RCM Level II certification or have the ability to obtain it within 60 days.

48 RFP Section L-6, pg. 67

RFP Section B: Past Performance, required that PPQs are required. Given some of the COVID-19 pandemic related restrictions and barriers, the questionnaires can be challenging for some of our clients. Will the government accept CPARS in lieu of PPQs for past performance?

CPARS records will be reviewed for all

Offerors. Offerors without a record of relevant past performance or for which past performance records are not available shall receive a Past Performance rating of

“Neutral”. Additionally, see the response to

Question 15.

49 2 N/A

The pricing spreadsheet does not identify which positions should be priced as

SCA. Will the government define which positions are considered SCA for this opportunity? For those positions identified as SCA, will the government provide the subsequent SCA labor occupation code numbers associated for those positions.

See the response to Question 11

50 RFP Section C - 2.1.3, pg. 4

RFP Section C - 2.1.3 Configuration Data Management references FLS and

ACMS qualifications. Can the government define the ACMS and FLS system qualifications that are required, can offerors assume those requirements will be defined at the task order level?

Personnel performing CDM will have to go to a CDM training class at SFLC-ESD Baltimore and get certfied in FLS and ACMS. More information will be provided at the TO level if CDM is required.

51 RFP Section F-3, pg. 13

The place of performance shall be specified on each TO issued hereunder. The primary place of performance will be on-site at the USCG APO located at 711 E.

Ordnance Road, Suite 711, Baltimore, MD 21226. However, due to space constraints at the USCG APO, there is work that will need to be performed at an off-site location that shall be owned/leased by the contract awardee.

Alternative work sites may be approved as agreed upon by the Government and the Contractor.

Does USCG want the offerors to propose both Government on-site rates and

Contractor off-site billing rates for this RFP?

See the response to Question 13

52 3 N/A Which of these labor categories are non-exempt Wage Determination covered positions?

See the response to Question 11

53 RFP Section L-6, pg. 67

Offerors must include in their submission three (3) recent and relevant references, consisting of the contract and/or task order number, the agency or company for which the work was performed, a summary of the work product(s), and the name of the contracting and technical person to be contacted with their address, telephone, and email address. To be considered recent and relevant, the services must have been performed within the past three years on efforts of similar scope and complexity to the work outlined in the SOW. Each of the three (3) references shall not exceed one (1) page in length, and do not count against the page limitation. Are the three (3) references limited to both prime and major subcontractors past performance?

Or can the prime and major subcontract each one submit three (3) past performance references?

Only three (3) references total shall be provided. Also, please note the response to

Question 3.

54 RFP Section F-3, pg. 13

For the purposes of this contract, work locations within a USCG facility are also considered “on-site”. These possible locations include the following USCG sites and will be considered:

(1) C5ISC Telecommunications and Information Systems Command (TISCOM), Alexandria, VA and Portsmouth, VA.

(2) U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters Building, Washington, DC.

(3) Naval Sea Naval Sea Logistics Center (NSLC), Mechanicsburg, PA.

(4) USCG Project Resident Offices co-located at the respective shipbuilder production sites (various).

Could the USCG please provide additional clarification on the numbers of personnel who will be in each location, the period they are expected on each site, and whether the personnel are temporary or permanent at these locations.

See the response to Question 24

55 RFP Section L-6, pg. 65

Section A Subsection 4 (Miscellaneous) is limited to 10 pages. With regard to the statement “Section A Subsection 4 (Miscellaneous) is limited to 10 pages” will the Government please describe what is expected to be included within these 10 miscellaneous pages?

Per the RFP, "Include any other information necessary for your proposal to be complete that does not logically fit in the other sections of this Volume II, such as an

Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI)

Mitigation Plan."

56 RFP Section L-6, pg. 67

The Offeror shall have the point of contact for each contract included in

Volume II complete a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) (Attachment 4) and submit it directly to the Contracting Officer by the closing date of this RFP.

Would the Government consider allowing offerors to use CPARS ratings in lieu of PPQs?

See the response to Question 48

57 N/A N/A Is this a new requirement? No

58 N/A N/A If this is an existing requirement, who is the incumbent? See the response to Question 1

59 RFP Section F-3

Considering that the primary place of performance will be on-site at the USCG

APO located in Baltimore, MD, is the primary off-site location expected to be in close proximity to the USCG APO location?

See the response to Question 22

60 N/A N/A Is there a conference room requirement to host meetings at the off-site location? If so, how many seats are expected or needed?

There will be daily interaction with

Contractor PM, TO leads, and meetings of all team members, as required, at the APO.

Depending on location and available accommodations of contractor facility(ies) meetings may be held there, if mutually agreeable, but it is not required for the contractor to have meeting space.

61 RFP Section F-3 How many contractor seats are available for key personnel at the APO/on-site location?

There will be space at the APO for the contract PM and TO leads. The space for the

TO leads will be coordinated at the time of

TO award.

62 RFP Section H-10

The solicitation identifies the PM as a key billet and continues to address TO level key personnel to be identified in individual TOs, as applicable. Should the

Offeror provide recommended key personnel for the baseline IDIQ requirements? E.g. ILS management and Maintenance Planning and Support.

No, this is not required.

63 RFP

The solicitation states that an Exclusive Letter of Commitment is required for

Key Personnel. Requiring a potential employee to sign an “exclusive” letter of commitment is counter to our view and practices in recruitment as a potential employee has the right to look after themselves and their family. Many times this means providing a resume to multiple companies. Also, the practice of exclusivity introduces opportunities for bullying and interference or perceptions of and is not necessarily in the best interest of the government or

Offeror. Will the government change the language by drooping the “exclusive” requirement?

"Exclusive" has been removed. The RFP has been updated to reflect this change.

64 1

On page 13 of the RFP, the Government indicates that “on-site” performance will also occur in Portsmouth, VA, Washington, DC, Mechanicsburg, PA, and various other shipbuilder production sites. If the Service Contract Act is applicable, please confirm the correct wage determinations to be used at those locations.

See the response to Question 11

65 RFP Section L-5, pg. 64-65

The last paragraph states “Section A, Subsections 1 through 4 and Sections B through C must be provided in separate electronic files.” Please confirm three separate electronic files are required: Section A (including Subsections 1 through 4), Section B, and Section C.

Three separate electronic files are required.

1) Section A, Subsections 1 through 4

2) Section B

3) Section C (may be comprised of up to 2 separate files, including the pricing speadsheet)

66 RFP Section L-6, pg. 67 & 71

On pages 67 and 71 of the RFP, the Government indicates that for past performance to be considered recent, the services must have been performed within the past three years. Given that the entire period of performance on the anticipated work is seven years, recommend the Government please consider services performed within the past five years to be recent to more closely align with the length of the period of performance.

Given the period of performance for this requirement is seven years instead of the typical five years, the Government will allow services performed with the past five years to be considered recent. RFP Sections L-6 and M-2.1.3 have been updated to reflect this change.

67 RFP Section L-4, pg. 64

Reference: “Volume I (Technical Proposal) shall include a detailed narrative that clearly and explicitly states the Offeror’s understanding of the requirement and its technical approach to meeting the requirements in the

SOW.” Question:

The above seems in conflict with the Eval Criteria (M-2.1.1) and Instructions in

L-6. Will the government consider revising this sentence to match the

Instructions in L-6 Volume I, Section A: Experience (RFP p.65) and Evaluation

Criteria M-2.1.1 Factor 1: Experience (RFP p.71) – which both focus on

Experience and not approach?

See the response to Question 5

68 RFP

Section L-5, pg. 65

Section L-6, pg. 67

Reference: L6 Section B: Past Performance (Factor 3) says “Three (3) references shall not exceed one (1) page in length ” – RFP p.67, while L-5 Offer

Formatting Volume II says “Section B Past Performance is limited to 10 pages”

– RFP p.65.

Question: Can the government please clarify the total number of pages for Past

Performance? Is it 1-page for the entire 3-references, 1 page for each of the 3 references (3-pages total), or 10 pages total?

See the response to Question 3

69 RFP Section M-2.1.3, pg. 71 Is it a requirement to have at least one past performance reference from the prime?

Past performance references provided may come from the prime or teaming partners.

70 RFP Section L-5, pg. 65

Reference: “Section A, Subsections 1 through 4 and Sections B through C must be provided in separate electronic files.”

Question: Can the government please clarify the total number of files for submittal? And if subsections 1 through 4 are each separate files or if Section

A, includes subsections 1 to 4 as a single file?

See the response to Question 7

71 RFP Section C, pg. 10 Sections 2.14, 2.15, and 2.16 on p.10 of the RFP are redundant and out of place. Will the government please remove these sections from the RFP?

See the response to Question 18

72 RFP Section L-4, pg. 64

Reference: “Section A is limited to 10 pages, excluding the resume and

Exclusive Letter of Commitment. The resume is limited to 2 pages and the

Exclusive Letter of Commitment is limited to 1 page. A title page of 1 page may be included, as well.”

Question: Will the title page count toward the 10-page limit for Volume I, Section A?

No, the title page does not toward the 10-page limit for Volume I, Section A.

73 RFP Section L-6, pg. 66

Section B (h) of the RFP states “Where applicable, the Offeror shall submit documentation demonstrating offerors’ teaming arrangements.” Can the government please clarify what is meant by this statement? Is a table listing teaming partners sufficient? Does the government require the Offeror to attach the teaming agreements? If so, would the government allow these agreements to be included as an appendix and not included in page count restrictions?

See the response to Question 41. Copies of teaming agreements are not required.

74 RFP Section L-6, pg. 66

Section B (i) The Offeror's methodology for managing its proposed team. Is the government referring to how we manage our teaming partners, or personnel at the Task Order level?

Both. The language in Section L-6 has been updated to clarify the requirement.

75 N/A N/A Is there an incumbent contractor, and if so, can the Government provide the contract number and contractor name?

See the response to Question 1

76 N/A N/A Is any portion of this work being performed today by contract support? If so, under what contract number(s) and with which vendor(s)?

See the response to Question 1

77 N/A N/A

Depending on the time required by the Government to provide responses to submitted questions, would the Government consider an extension to the proposal deadline?

The Government will extend the proposal due date until Monday, November 30, 2020 at 12:00 PM EST

78 RFP Section L-5, pg. 64

In L-5 Offer Formatting, instructions for Volume II, it states "Section A, Subsections 1 through 4 and Sections B through C must be provided in separate electronic files." Is the Government's intention for each Subsection of

A to be separated into its own file, or is the intention for one electronic file for all of Section A, one electronic file for B, and "up to 2 separate files" for Section

C?

See the response to Question 7

79 N/A N/A Will a facility clearance be required? No

N/A

N/A Is USCG experience preferred?

Per RFP Section L-6 "The Offeror shall describe and provide evidence of demonstrated experience and performance developing and delivering Integrated

Logistics Support (ILS) for DHS or DOD Major

Acquisitions (e.g., ships, cutters, plans, etc)"

N/A

N/A Will the USCG consider personnel past performance towards past performance requirements?

No, personnel past performance is not acceptable.