Attach L6 QA Log 23R8003 231031.pdf

1 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

Q&A Log

UET Recompete

M67854-23-R-8003

No. Question Answer

1 The Government has stated that graphs and tables must fit on an 8.5 x 14 printed page. This legal page size is unusual. Will the Government please consider changing this requirement to tabloid, 11 x 17?

No. Please follow RFP 2.0 instructions

2 The Government stated graphs and tables shall be presented in no smaller than a 10-point font. Does this include graphics?

Yes, given the relevant paragraph under Subpart 2.0 of Section L.1.A associates with the word “graphic” items like tables or charts, the latter being a synonym for graphs.

3 [Intentionally left blank]

4 The Government only required I/O in Section L for Okinawa, Pendleton, and Lejeune, with no mention of Hawaii, Guam, or Camp Pendleton (Del Mar). Is this intentional? Recommend the Government require offerors to address its staffing plan for all locations.

Section L, Factor 1, C) 2. is for all sites. Solicitation will be amended.

5 It appears the Government has a typo on the Phase-In dates which are listed as one Month, but the dates are 1 Jan 2024 - 31 Jan 2025. Will the Government please correct the dates for Phase-In?

See Section F, RFP Amendment 0001.

2 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

6 The Period of Performance is listed as 60 months, but the dates overlap with the Phase-In (beginning 1 Jan 2024). Does the Government intend for vendors to price the phase-in month twice? If not, should the PoP be 59 months? Or should it begin 1 Feb 2024 and last for 60 months?

The total PoP is 60 months inclusive of Phase-In.

7 Request the Government provide the appropriate SCA/WD tables for all locations.

8 In the Price Volume, each Option Year / Ordering period is a separate CLIN (0002, 1002, 2002, 3002, 4003 for example for Camp Pendleton). In the RFP, however, there is only one PoP for 60 months…and the CLINS for phase-in and performance at the two new sites are not listed (as they are in the Price Workbook). Request adjustment to the RFP to reflect the CLIN structure in the Price Workbook.

See RFP Amendment 0001.

3 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

9 The data in this attachment is limited to 11 months, some of which included COVID-reduced throughput. In order to provide an FFP bid for the full period of perfomrance, we request the Government provide a larger sample of historical workload for each site. Also reqeust the Government provide the required student demand for each site for the full period of performance, to include epected workload / demand at the two new sites.

This is required to accurately estimate a Firm, Fixed Price Bid.

Please provide historical and expected number of students for Each Type of Equipment for Each Site.

Reference: Attachment 2 UET CLS TSUR

10 "The contractor shall maintain and replace wetsuits IAW with the OEM and local policy". Will the Government confirm that TRAINEEs' wetsuits will be paid for via CLIN XX12?

11 The Government added "Instructor travel to new sites to qualify new instructors." Is it the Government's intent to reimburse travel to the new sites (specifically Camp Blaz) for new instructor training?

12 Will the Government provide more detail for this deliverable to facilitate a more accurate level of estimate for preparation of this cost proposal worksheet?

4 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

13 [Intentionally left blank]

14 Would the Government please provide the current template and an example of a completed CDRL D004 for each of the four sites please? If the CDRL is not available would the Government please provide the information currently in the IUID Registry that has been entered via PIEE, to allow the proposer to accurately assess the effort?

15 [Intentionally left blank]

16 [Intentionally left blank]

5 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

17 Will the Government provide forecast throughput data for the two new sites? If this is not available, will the Government please consider either providing a number to facilitate estimates or make this a T&M CLIN? This information is critical to provided a realistic estimate and will provide better data for the Government's evaluation and a more level playing field among the competitors for this effort.

Del Mar is expected to be similar to that of performance at Camp Pendleton site, and Guam is expected to be similar to that of performance at the Okinawa site.

18 Can Government please confirm if any and/or all of the pools are chlorine or salt water systems?

19 CLIN 0001 Phase-in has a 1/1/24 - 12/31/28 POP. Can the government please clarify that phase-in will be 30 days?

See RFP Amendment 0001

20 1.2. The Government will evaluate each Offeror’s Technical Proposal by evaluating the Offeror’s response to the submission requirements detailed in Section L, Part B, paragraph 1.1(a – e). Item "f" is not listed. Should item "f" be evaluated as well?

See RFP Amendment 0001

21 Will the contractor be reimbursed for the total cost of the repair or only the cost to repair over $5,000?

See RFP Amendment 0001 and PWS 3.2.15.3.1.

6 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

22 Can the government provide the dates of when the MAET supply systems (Air Compressor, Hoist, and cylinder) were last replaced and repaired and how often?

23 Can the government provide a listing of the property and information about how much space is currently used for the property?

See updated PWS 3.2.9.1

24 Can the government please confirm that lists of acronyms are not included in the page count?

Per RFP 3.0 “title and table of contents pages do not count towards the page limit.”

25 Should the table in attachment L-2 be included within the main Volume II, Past Performance, or should offerors submit the attachment as a separate appendix to Volume II?

If it should be a separate appendix document, are the pages included in the volume page count? Should offerors submit one copy of L-2 for each past performance reference, or include all past performance references within a single, separate appendix document?

Yes. L-2 is included in Volume II. Per L-2 "The Offeror shall complete one for each past performance contract submitted"

7 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

26 Should the table in attachment L-4 be included within the main Volume II, Past Performance, or should offerors submit the attachment as a separate appendix to Volume II?

If it should be a separate appendix document, are the pages included in the volume page count?

See RFP Amendment 0001.

27 The RFP states "Cost or pricing information shall only appear in the Price volume," (pg. 59) but then states "The table above shall include the dollar value proposed under the Contractor’s name. Adding up the dollar values identified in this table shall equal the total proposed price." (pg. 60-61)

Can Government please clarify whether to include pricing information in the past performance volume or not?

See RFP Amendment 0001.

28 [Intentionally left blank]

29 [Intentionally left blank]

30 [Intentionally left blank]

8 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

31 [Intentionally left blank]

32 Section 1.2 states "The Government will evaluate each Offeror's Technical Proposal by evaluating the Offeror's response to the submission requirements detailed in Section L, Part B, paragraph 1.1(a-e)." Shouldn't it read "......Section L, Part B, paragraph 1.1(a-f)"?

See RFP Amendment 0001

33 Can the Government please provide the definitions of strengths, weaknesses, significant weaknesses and deficiencies as depicted in Section 1.3?

See RFP Amendment 0001

34 [Intentionally left blank]

35 [Intentionally left blank]

9 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

36 [Intentionally left blank]

37 [Intentionally left blank]

38 PWS Appendix B states "At least one Instructor shall be provided during MAET underwater egress training, for two trainees during the underwater egress practical exercises using the MAET. S/I - 2:1". The POI, Attachment 11_27, Helo Prac App states Min. S:I = 3:1 (1 front & 1 back instructors). What is the minimum S:I ratio that must be maintained for training purposes?

39 [Intentionally left blank]

40 [Intentionally left blank]

10 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

41 PWS states "The contractor shall pause training to requalify personnel on the updated version of the curricula and work with scheduler to mitigate impacts". How long will the contractor be given to requalify on new curricula?

The duration of pause will be coordinated with local scheduler based on the complexity of the curricula released in order to mitigate training impact.

42 [Intentionally left blank]

43 [Intentionally left blank]

44 Please provide all CDRL attachments The RFP included Exhibit B UET Combined CDRLs.

45 When is the Maintenance Support Plan due? Per CDLR D002, “The initial submission shall be delivered no later than 5 calendar days before the Post Award Conference (PAC).”

11 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

46 PWS states a Post Award Conference (PAC) will be conducted in Orlando within 10 days of Contract Start Date (CSD). Is that pre or post CSD?

Post Contract Start Date (CSD).

47 The Maintenance Management Report (MMR) does not include the XGH for any of the sites. Will the XGH be included in the MMR for all sites?

No. The MMR is aligned to the PWS Ao that only covers MAET, SVET and SWET.

48 "The Offeror shall propose at a minimum, one designated Instructor/Operator who will also serve as a Maintainer per training site who will be responsible for the performance of all day-today work, maintenance and inspections at a given training site." Can the Maintainer be exempt from the Instructor requirement?

No. They have to be an Instructor and an Operator.

49 Contractor required to maintain an electronic student database.

Will 24/7 access to the database meet the government requirement?

Yes.

50 Due to the substantial increase in administrative requirements in the new PWS, will the government consider adding an administrative assistant position to each site?

No.

51 Please confirm that Attachment L-5 is not required if our contract reference has final CPARs dated within the previous 12 months from the solicitation date.

Yes, provide per attachment L-5.

52 "All pages must be numbered with section and page numbers."

Is the government referring to section numbering of the paragraphs? Or is the section the Volume?

53 Please confirm form L-4 and L-2 be included in Volume 2, Past Performance, and not as standalone attachments.

Yes, L-4 and L-2 is included in Volume 2, Past Performance.

12 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

54 [Intentionally left blank]

55 This PWS section states a contractor will be providing “advisory and assistance services” (A&AS) to the Government. No other area in the solicitation references that the UET contract will be an A&AS contract. Per FAR 37.2, the following is excluded or exempt from the definition of advisory and assistance services:

“(a) Routine information technology services unless they are an integral part of a contract for the acquisition of advisory and assistance services.”. Request the Government clarify if this solicitation effort is for A&AS.

Solicitation efforts is not for A&AS.

56 Will the government extend the solicitation due date? See RFP Amendment 0001

57 The contract number shown on the Attachment is Solicitation No. N61340-23-R-8003. Will the government provide an amended form with the correct solicitation number?

Solicitation is M6785423R8003 but for PIEE purpose the same number could not be used due to draft RFP.

58 There are two numbers associated with the RFP within PIEE- M6785423R8003 & M6785423R8037. Which is the correct site to pull documents?

See the answer to question 57 in this table.

59 On what site or means will the government post the answers to the questions?

This Q&A log will accompany an RFP amendment posted in the same fashion as the base RFP.

13 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

60 The referenced RFP paragraph states that this Solicitation is subject to the Services Contract Act (SCA). That being said, other programs of a similar nature (and Customer) have been subject to collective bargaining agreements (CBA). Are there CBAs in place for the incumbent personnel at the RFP designated domestic locations? Are there any CBAs in place under the current contract? If so, when will those be made available to bidders?

There is no CBA in place for the incumbent personnel.

61 Since the SCA, and typically CBAs, are not applicable to foreign locations, as in the case of the Okinawa, is there another baseline that the Government would like the Contractor to use? Is US citizenship required for the job positions in international locations? Is there a COLA for the international locations?

Each offeror is responsible for ensuring its proposal meets all applicable laws.

62 [Intentionally left blank] .

63 Will the Government be providing the Contractor (and its subcontractors) with appropriate certificates to obtain exemption form local (Japanese) consumption tax for any in-country material/service procurements?

No.

64 Will the Government verify that there are no exemptions - under this Solicitation - to the Guam Business Privilege Tax of 5.0%?

See the response to question 61 in this table.

65 Please confirm that there is no written narrative for the Past Performance volume.

Section L covers submission for past performance.

14 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

66 Will the government please clarify what criteria are used to determine whether an offeror’s proposal may contain an area of strength?

The solicitation will be amended to include definitions.

67 “When a competitive range is established, the Government may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.” What criteria is the competitive range based on?

Refer to Provision 52.215-1(f)(4), which states the following in pertinent part:

If the Contracting Officer determines that the number of proposals that would otherwise be in the competitive range exceeds the number at which an efficient competition can be conducted, the Contracting Officer may limit the number of proposals in the competitive range to the greatest number that will permit an efficient competition among the most highly rated proposals.

68 Does the 20 page limit for the Past Performance encompass Attachment L-2, L-4, and supporting documentation addressing all three contract references?

See RFP Amendment 0001

69 [Intentionally left blank]

70 "The Offeror should provide written consent from its principal subcontractors that will allow the Government to coordinate any of those entities’ past performance issues with the Offeror."

When does this consent need to be provided and in which volume?

Written consent should be provided within the Past Performance Volume of the proposal.

15 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

71 "Supporting Documentation shall be provided as part of the Annex A Volume."

Please verify that Annex A needs to be submitted as part of Volume 2.

See RFP Amendment 0001

72 When are Camp Blaz (Guam) and Del Mar (CA) projected to become active, and what will the transition period be to allow for hiring staff?

Estimated in FY26 based on NAVFAC current MILCON projections. See Amendment 0001.

73 Is there a requirement to establish ACAs with the OEMs? No.

74 [Intentionally left blank]

75 Can we get copies of historical CDRLs for utilization and availability?

76 Will the GOV provide any Inventory of GFP located at the Incumbents Facility in Orlando, FL?

16 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

77 PIEE has the Solicitation number as M6785423R8037. The notation in PIEE is "NOTE: ***Previously associated with RFI M67854-22-R-8053 and DRAFT Solicitation M67854-23-R- 8003, the final solicitation number in PIEE of M67854-23-R- 8037 is being utilized in place of M67854-23-R-8003. However please be advised that the solicitation and all associated documents will contain solicitation number M67854-23-R- 8003.***" The Standard Form 33 states the Solicitation number as M6785423R8003 and all pages in the header reflect this number. Will the Government release an updated Standard Form 33 (along with the headers in the RFP document) or should Offerors submit with the documents reflecting M67854- 23-R-8003?

Solicitation is M6785423R8003 but for PIEE purpose the same number could not be used due to draft RFP.

78 In Section L.2.1.a) on page 61 of the RFP, the Goverenment states: "The table above shall include the dollar value proposed under the Contractor’s name. Adding up the dollar values identified in this table shall equal the total proposed price."

QUESTION: Does this dollar value include the price related to the Option To Extend for 6 months?

17 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

79 In Section L.2.2.(h) on page 62 of the RFP, the Goverenment states: "For past performance contract references that are still ongoing in performance, the Offeror shall demonstrate that relevant delivery has been made on those contracts."

QUESTION: Can the Government provide requirements/guidance as to the documents needed to demonstrate that relevant delivery has been made for ongoing contracts? Will the Government accept Monthly Status Report submissions?

No. RFP Volume 2 specifies the requirements for submission.

18 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

80 In Section L.2.3 (RELEVANCY) under "Supporting documentation" on page 63 of the RFP, the Goverenment states: "Supporting Documentation shall be provided as part of the Annex A Volume."

COMMENT: This is the first reference to an "Annex A" for Supporting Documentation and no guidance is provided with respect to location and page count limitations.

QUESTIONS:

1) Can the Government clarify the intent for Annex A - is it only for "supporting contract documentation"?

2) Is "Annex A" to be provided as an Annex (Appendix) to the PP Volume? If not, which Volume should this Annex A be provided in?

3) Does this Annex A contribute to the 20-page constraint for the PP Volume? Are there any page count limitations for Annex A?

See RFP Amendment 0001

19 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

81 In Section L.2.4.a) on page 63 of the RFP, the Goverenment states: "The use of Attachment L-5 is necessary for past performance contract references (1) that do not have CPARS Reports or (2) where the most recent CPARS Report completed by the Assessing Official is dated more than 12 months prior to the solicitation’s release date and is not the final CPARS Report."

QUESTION: In part (2) of the Government's requirement referenced above that states "is dated more than 12 months", can the Government clarify "dated" - is this the end date of the Assessment Period defined in the CPARS or is this the date that the CPARS is signed by the Assessing Official?

2.4 DEMONSTRATED Performance/Quality of Performance

Information of the Past Performance Contract References. "dated" is the end of the assessment period.

82 Attachment 1 does not have a section numbered 1.4.21. Can the Government please provide the PWS number that this should be referencing?

See RFP Amendment 0001

83 Attachment 1 does not have a section numbered 3.1.3.1. Can the Government please provide the PWS number that this should be referencing?

See RFP Amendment 0001

84 The PWS specifies that Contractors are responsible to purchase, maintain, and replace consumables in the "associated quantities included in UET CLS Consumables List" In the past, these items were to be part of a Cost Reimbursable CLIN. Will the Government consider making CLIN 0012 a CR CLIN and providing a Plug Number for all bidders?

No.

20 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

85 In Section B of the RFP it states Quantity "Undefined" and Unit of "Each" for CLIN 0012. In the PWS it states we are to use the quantities as shown in Attachment 16, UET CLS Consumables List. Are these items to be purchased one time by the Contractor? Or is this an Annual purchase? Please confirm the quantities required for CLIN 0012.

The consumable list and quantities is based on an annual usage.

86 In section 3.1.4, the PWS states "...Additionally, at the CLNC and CPCA sites, the contractor shall provide sufficient staffing to conduct additional classroom instruction concurrently with pool training….".

In Appendix B, Table 1, the total number of staffing column reflects the Governments estimate...but does not appear to include the additional staffing at CLNC and CPCA to "conduct additional classroom instruction concurrent with pool training..."

This would indicate that the Government's estimate is "short" by at least 1 instructor at CLNC and CPCA. Request the Government update its estimated mimimum to include those additional instructors...or remove the paragraph mandating those instructors on page 12 of the PWS.

[Ref: UET PWS, Section 3.1.4, para 3, page 12, and Appendix B, Table 1, page B-3]

The information provided in the PWS is accurate and establishes a minimum requirement. Offerors may propose a technical approach for staffing and provide rationale for the number and qualifications of staffing proposed.

21 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

87 App B, Table 1 shows 2 Instructors for the MAET/SVET. App B states "At least one Instructor shall be provided during MAET underwater egress training, for two trainees during the underwater egress practical exercises using the MAET." Is it the Governments intent that the MAET will only be used with a maximum of four (4) trainees to conform with the required S/I ratio? Attachment_11_55_UET_Combined_Practical_v2_0_1 shows three (3) Instructors required for the MAET to allow completion of a class of 24 trainees in 4 hours. Would the Government please confirm or clarify the staffing detailed in App B, Table 1? We believe it should show 3 instructors for the

MAET.

Appendix B, the MAET/SVET Student to Instructor ratio is 2:1. The maximum number of student personnel inside the MAET is six; the maximum number of student personnel inside the SVET is 4.

Appendix B. Table 1 provides the Government’s minimum “Estimate of Practical Application and Classroom Staffing Requirements.”

88 Will the Government please provide a fully conformed RFP with all Amendment 4 changes?

As a courtesy, a posting to make the latest conformed copy of Solicitation M67854-23-R-8003 available is the pending intent. Any subsequent release of a conformed copy will be for illustrative purposes only. The RFP exists in the form of the original document as changed by each consecutive amendment.

22 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

89 The Phase-in Period for CPCA (Del Mar) is now a 12 month period. All PWS Phase-in references are for a 30-day period, which is assumed to be for the initial phase-in period. Please provide additional guidance / planning factors for this 12-month phase-in period at CPCA (Del Mar). What specific tasks is the contractor required to perform during this 12 month period? Is it acceptable to only perform phase-in during the final month?

Or does this window indicate that we may be required to begin phase-in sometime during this 12 month window? In order to accurately price this CLIN, we request additional implementation details.

Unless otherwise negotiated, the plan is for all phase-in periods to span up to 30 days per paragraph 3.2.6.1 of the PWS. Item F.1 in Section F establishes that the related timeframes under the collocated “Delivery Information” constitute when orders for the phase-in periods will take effect.

90 [Intentionally left blank]

23 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

91 [Intentionally left blank]

92 Amendment 4 listed multiple changes in attachments for this RFP. Those attachments were not provided in the 4 documents mailed to current offerors. Request a copy of those updated documents be sent by email (or PIEE / SAM) as soon as possible to allow for further review. If possible, request an additional 2 days after those documents are received for further questions.

Only two attachments experienced a change under Amendment M67854-23-R-8003-0004. They were Attachments 1 and L-4. Both accompanied the distribution of Amendment 4 on October 17, 2023. Therefore, the need for added time to review additional documents does not exist.

93 Table 1 shows the Deck Observer only requiring a Lifeguard certification. Given that the Deck Observer is responsible to “coordinate in-water evolutions and to direct operation of the lift system” and the extreme risk of scuba-related or compressed air-related injuries to students, recommend the Government increase the Deck Observer required certifications to be the same as an Instructor Operator (Rescue Diver/Rescue Scuba Diver, Lifeguard, and Neurological Assessment/Identify Compressed Air Injuries)

[Ref: PWS, Section 3.1.3, page 11]

The information provided in the PWS is accurate and establishes a minimum requirement. Offerors may propose a technical approach for staffing and provide rationale for the number and qualifications of staffing proposed.

24 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

94 The Government stated that "...An Offeror’s failure to provide a plan to expedite the Phase-In period will not be considered a deficiency, significant weakness, or a weakness with respect to the expedited phase-in requirement, but instead is an opportunity for Offerors to distinguish additional merit within its proposal...." This appears to provide an unfair advantage to the incumbent who is able to obtain "additional merit" by simply stating it is the incumbent contractor. Request this bullet be removed from Section M in order to provide a level playing ground for all offerors.

[Ref: RFP section M, Part B, 1.2, e)]

The awardee’s performance of the Phase-in requirement begins immediately at award and is precedent to full performance.

Therefore, if Offerors are able to reach full performance more quickly than the requirement of the allowed Phase-in period it will be evaluated with additional merit.

95 Confirm Site Manager is NOT required to be a Certified Instructor [Ref: PWS Table 5]

Confirmed; the Site Manager does not have to possess all certifications which constitute an Instructor. See PWS, Table 5 for Site Manager Certification requirements.

96 Confirm maximum S:I ratio in a classroom setting is 24:1

[Ref: PWS Appendix B Table 1]

The average classroom/ academic portion of training is 24:1.

However, as shown in the provided POIs, the academic portion of instruction is not limited to 24 students. This is also referenced in PWS, Appendix B, Table 1, Note 1.

97 [Intentionally left blank]

98 Is the Government going to provide an updated L3 Pricing Workbook?

See Amendment 0005.

25 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

99 [Intentionally left blank]

100 [Intentionally left blank]

26 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

101 [Intentionally left blank]

102 While Attachment L-2 is still referenced in the list of attachments under Section L Part A 3.0, there are no longer any references/instructions for the attachment under Section L Part B 2.0. Please clarify whether or not Attachment L-2 is still a proposal requirement.

[Ref: RFP Amendment 4 - Section L.1 Part A 3.0 & Section L.1 Part B 2.0]

RFP Attachment L-2 is no longer a proposal requirement.

See Amendment 0005.

103 [Intentionally left blank]

104 Please confirm that CPAQs do not have to be resubmitted.

[Ref: RFP Amendment 4 - Section L.1 Part B 2.6]

An offeror may, at its discretion, make CPAQ submissions in response to Amendment 0004.

105 Please clarify whether "written consent" count towards the Past Performance 20 page limit.

[Ref: RFP Amendment 4 - Section L.1 Part A 30 & Part B 2.8]

“Written Consent” notification will not be considered as part of the Volume II, Past Performance page limitation.

106 Please clarify whether only the content within each of the L-4 Attachments counts towards the Past Performance 20 page limit.

[Ref: RFP Amendment 4 - Section L.1 Part A 30 & Part B 2.0]

The submitted Attachment L-4 is considered part of the Volume II, Past Performance page limitation.

27 of 27 25 Aug 2023 (Rev. 31 Oct 2023)

107 [Intentionally left blank]

108 Please clarify the consumables requirement in the PWS due to the removal of the reference to the UET Consumables List?

PWS 3.1.4 requirements are accurate. The removal of the reference does not change the requirement.

109 [Intentionally left blank]

110 Do bidders need to re-submit all volumes even if nothing has changed?

All Volumes must conform to the amended solicitation.

111 [Intentionally left blank]

112 [Intentionally left blank]

113 Should bidders include CPARS in the PP volume and included in the 20-page limit or should CPARS be submitted as sperate attachments to the PP volume?

[Ref: RFP, 2.01 Past Performance]

Past Performance contract CPARS assessments will not be considered as part of the Volume II, Past Performance page limitation.