A-10-042 Amendment 4.pdf

OMB Approval 2700-0042

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT 1 6

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE 4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO. 5. PROJECT NO. (If applicable)

0004 10/13/2010

6. ISSUED BY CODE DO/MAK/JMC 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than Item 6) CODE U.S. Department of the Treasury Procurement Services Division c/o Treasury Office for Asset Forfeiture 1341 G Street, N.W., Suite 900 Washington, DC 20005

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No. Street, county, State and ZIP: Code) (4) 9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

A-10-042 x 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

9/13/2010

10A. MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

TIN DUNS 10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

CODE 0GS16 FACILITY CODE

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of offers is extended, is not extended. Offerors must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended, by one of the following methods: (a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning 1 copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted; or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATA SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and data specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS,

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

(4) A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET

FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(b).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF: Mutual consent of contracting parties.

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not __ , is _X_ required to sign this document and return 1 copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

The purpose of the amendment is to provide answers to questions submitted by offerors regarding Amendment 3.

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR 15C. DATE SIGNED 16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 16C. DATE SIGNED

(Signature of person authorized to sign)

BY _____________________________________________

(Signature of Contracting Officer)

NSN 7540-01-152-8070 30-105 STANDARD FORM 30 (REV. 10-83)

PREVIOUS EDITION UNUSABLE Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

Question 1 - In an effort to respond effectively to Solicitation A-10-042, we would like to obtain additional clarification as well as to communicate Our Team's concerns with respect to the Finance and Accounting Systems requirements in L 12 C iii, Ll3 and Ll6, and subsequent responses to Proposal questions.

Section L. 12. C. 3.iii of the Solicitation describes an imperative for the Offeror to "demonstrate that these systems are able to meet the requirements of the Section C, Part IV - Representations and Instructions Solicitation A-10-042.

Additionally, in L 16, the imperative states that the Offeror include in the proposal "evidence that such systems have been certified by a federal agency and identify the relevant Cognizant Federal Office, a contact point at the office, appropriate phone number, e-mail address, etc., for each such system."

In addition, C.14.12.2.1 also requires that "any proposed system must be reviewed and approved by the Government."

Our concerns with respect to these imperatives is that none of these conditions can be met unless the Offeror has performed this work previously to demonstrate that the finance and accounting systems can meet the requirements. In addition, the process of certification of the financial and accounting systems is not defined in the Solicitation nor in the FAR Subpart 16.3,

9.1 or 10 U.S.C. 2306 (d) and 41 U.S.C. 245 (b) and also could not be met without performance.

We are contending that New Offerors to the Treasury for work described in Solicitation A-10-042 are at a significant competitive disadvantage because of the imperatives for demonstration and evidence of certification required of the Offeror and as new entrants, could not be appropriately considered.

We fully understand and support the Government's goal of ensuring a robust risk management and accounting with effective controls and transparent reporting. However, the insertion of the requirement to demonstrate accounting system DCAA certification (or better, "adequacy" requirements) prior to contract award supersedes any comprehensive assessment of all program accounting system requirements, including those that are conveyed to the Contractor post award.

We believe the requirement that accounting systems must be DCAA "certified" prior to proposal submission should removed and replaced with prior to contract award.

Answer 1 - The communication above references Section L .2.C.3.iii. Treasury believes the proper reference is Section L.12.1(1)C.iii, which states:

“The Offeror shall provide documentation and a description of how its proposed financing/accounting systems will support and collect data from online sales, broker sales, and live auction events (i.e., serve also as a cashier system). The Offeror shall demonstrate that these systems are able to meet the requirements of the Section C, SOW and applicable terms and conditions with respect to property management, sales information, and any other applicable Section C, SOW or other Solicitation requirements.”

The requirement listed in Section L.12.1.C.iii would be submitted with an Offeror’s technical proposal, in Volume II(A) specifically, and is specific to the ability of the offeror to document and provide a description of their proposed financing/accounting systems and the ability of these systems to support and collect data related to sale disposition of General Property. The requirement also states that the Offeror shall demonstrate that the proposed system meets the requirements of the solicitation document with respect to property management, sales information, and other applicable financing/accounting system requirements set forth in the solicitation document, including but not limited to the Statement of Work.

Section L.16 states:

“Accounting and purchasing systems to be used under any resultant contract must be certified by a federal agency. In Volume IV of the Offeror’s proposal, the Offeror shall provide evidence that such systems have been certified by a federal agency and identify the relevant Cognizant Federal Office, a contact point at the office, appropriate phone number, e-mail address, etc., for each such system.”

This is a requirement for an offeror to provide documentation to be included in the cost/price volume of a submitted proposal. Treasury is requesting proof of the adequacy of the contractors accounting and procurement systems. Note that pursuant to Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 16.301:

“(a) A cost-reimbursement contract may be used only when –

(1) The contractor’s accounting system is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract; and

(2) Appropriate Government surveillance during performance will provided reasonable assurance that efficient methods and effective cost controls are used.

The communication above references C.14.12.2.1, Treasury believes the proper reference is C.4.12.2.1, which states:

“There are two kinds of indirect charges. The first is corporate costs. Corporate costs include such items such as administrative salaries, accounting, purchasing, divisional management and other general overhead costs that are not allocable to a single contract. These costs are allocated to the Contract based on Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA)-approved, provisional indirect rates (i.e., general and administrative (G&A), overhead and fringe) and will be adjusted annually.

The second kind of indirect charges are for costs that are accrued to multiple seizure or blocking event line items. This includes the rent on any Contractor-furnished facilities, if any, and other associated facilities costs such as utilities, security, etc.

The Contractor shall provide a proposed system to allocate all indirect costs based on the seizure or blocking action line items held in inventory during a billing period. The Government will provide requirements for the automated information format which can be uploaded into SEACATS. Any proposed system must be reviewed and approved by the Government (See Technical Exhibits 4.12-001 and 4.12-002 within Attachment J.37 and J.38 for examples of an indirect cost allocation).”

The solicitation requires the Offeror to be able to calculate indirect charges in two separate manners. The first paragraph requires that the Offeror have a system deemed adequate to calculate these costs. That certification must be done by the Cognizant Federal Agency. The second paragraph is cost and pricing date used in determining Seizure Line Item Cost

Accounting, which is separate and distinct from the requirement to having an accounting system deemed adequate by a Cognizant Federal Agency. The Government will review this system during the proposal submission period and prior to implementation to ensure information uploaded to SEACATS is accurate.

FAR Subpart 16.3 is specific to the description, application, and limitations of the different type of cost reimbursement contract. As noted above, FAR 16.303(a)(1) states a cost-reimbursement contract may be used only when the contractor’s accounting system is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. In the evaluation of any action in which cost reimbursement is contemplated must take in to account the adequacy of the contractor’s system for determining costs applicable to the contract. This is not requirement that Treasury can or will waive.

FAR Subpart 9.1, Responsible Prospective Contractors prescribes policies, standards, and procedures pertaining to a prospective contractors’ responsibility, not the Offeror’s proposed accounting system’s compliance with the Cost Accounting Standards.

The Contracting Officer reviewed the Title 10 of the United States Code as posted on http://uscode.house.gov. Both of cited portions of the Unites States Code in the question at issue, generally address fee limitations, and in the case of 14 U.S.C. 254 (b) barred contracts and advance notification by the contractor to the procuring agency related to certain subcontracts.

The contention that new offerors to Treasury are at a significant competitive disadvantage is incorrect. The requirement for an accounting system that is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract is clearly states in the FAR.

Through the acquisition planning process, Treasury has determined that a hybrid contract includes certain Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) is necessary to ensure adequate performance by the successful offeror under the resulting contract. As such, Offerors are required to propose an accounting system that is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract.

Further, Treasury will not amend this requirement to allow for a system to be deemed adequate prior to award. This would place significant risk on the Treasury and would likely significantly delay award of the resulting contract. The requirement stands as written.

Question 2 - If the Offeror proposes to NOT charge any indirect costs to the Government under any of the Cost Plus Fixed Fee CLINs, will the Government waive the requirement for the Offeror's accounting system to be certified by a federal agency before award (as specified in Section L.16 of the Solicitation)? In other words, the Offeror will absorb all indirect costs associated with the contract and only charge direct costs for reimbursement in exchange for not waiving the requirement to have their systems already certified at the time of submitting their proposal.

Answer 2 - This is a hybrid contract in which some CLINs will be orders on a cost reimbursement basis. FAR 16.303(a)(1) states a cost-reimbursement contract may be used only when the contractor’s accounting system is adequate for determining costs applicable to the contract. In the evaluation of any action in which cost reimbursement is contemplated must take in to account the adequacy of the contractor’s system for determining costs applicable to the contract. The CLIN structure of this procurement and the requirements related to an Offeror’s accounting system stands as written.

Question 3 - Can the Offeror provide more than one rate for a Fixed Rate subCLIN? For example, for CLIN xx2l, Full Narrative Appraisal - Commercial, can the Offeror provide one price for properties under 10,000 square feet and a second price for properties equal to or greater than 10,000 square feet?

Answer 3 - No. The Offeror shall provide one rate per Fixed Rate CLIN or SubCLIN as requested in Section B of the Solicitation. The CLIN and SubCLIN structure stands as written.

Question 4 - If multiple prices per Fixed Rate CLIN are allowed, should all prices be indicated in Column F (Unit Value) of the Cost Proposal Workbook set forth in Attachment J.1?

Answer 4 - Multiple rates are not allowed. See answer to Question 3.

Question 5 - Can an Offeror submit price sheets, price quotes, or past invoices from its vendors to meet the requirement specified in L.14.J.C, which states:

"For Cost Reimbursement CLINs, the Offeror shall provide supporting documentation."

Answer 5 – The language quoted in the question above requires the Offeror to provide supporting documentation and price sheet, price quotes, and past invoices are types of supporting documentation. The Offeror should provide what it deems necessary to support the cost estimate and to meet the requirements of the solicitation.

Question 6 - Is the completed and signed certification form included in section K.4 (Certificate of Current Cost or Pricing Data) the only item to be included in Section 3 of Volume IV? In addition, does this completed and signed form fulfill the requirement specified in section L.14.M., which states "the Offeror shall submit Certified Cost and Pricing Data to support all direct and indirect proposed costs for the CPFF Contract Line Items"?

Answer 6 - The offeror is required to include the executed certification at K.4, which is the certification required by FAR 15.406-2. The certification itself is a certification that the cost and pricing data submitted by the Offeror are current, accurate and complete. As such, such certification does not fulfill the actual requirement to submit cost and pricing data specified in Section L.14.M, although it does fulfill the certification requirement specified in Section L.14.M.

Question 7 - In a follow up this our previous question (attached), we are attempting to initiate a DCAA review; however, we need the CO (you) to request this in order to get DCAA to move forward. Would you please provide this request and let us know what we need to provide you in order to complete the request to DCAA.

Answer 7 - Treasury is requesting that Offerors bid an system that has already been audited and deemed adequate at the time of proposal submission. At this time, where there are neither submitted proposals nor a contract award, the CO will not request any DCAA review related to this procurement.

Question 8 - Thank you posting the amendments to RFP A-10-042. We have a quick follow up question regarding the approved accounting systems. Does the requirement for the approved accounting system apply directly to the prime contractor? Or can we be compliant, if we have a subcontractor that maintains the approved system?

Answer 8 - The Offeror may propose the use of the subcontractor’s system.