Attachment 11 -Draft Soli QA Gov Response.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 35 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- RFPHC104726R0015
- Issued by
-
Defense Information Systems Agency
About this file
This file is a Questions and Answers (Q&A) document containing 54 government responses to contractor inquiries regarding an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) solicitation for Electromagnetic Spectrum (EMS) Services, Applied Engineering, and Spectrum and Electromagnetic Environmental Effects (E3) Engineering Analysis Support issued by the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA).
The solicitation employs a two-phase competitive evaluation process with Phase I proposals due April 14, 2026. Key clarifications from the government responses include: (1) Both pricing scenarios in Attachment 4 will be used for total evaluated price determination; (2) Up to three offerors will advance from Phase I to Phase II based on highest ratings; (3) CMMC Level 2 requirements have been removed from the solicitation; (4) The Senior Spectrum Engineer key personnel position aligns with the Senior Electrical/Electronics Engineer labor category in Attachment 4, with equivalent degrees in Physics, Applied Mathematics, and Radio Frequency Engineering acceptable in lieu of strictly Electrical Engineering; (5) Four on-site seats at Fort Meade are available with both Government and contractor site fixed-price labor rates to be established at contract award; (6) Subcontractor personnel must hold independent Facility Clearance (FCL) registered with DCSA; (7) A DCAA-approved accounting system is required prior to award of cost-type task orders; (8) MIL-STD-461G (current version) will apply for equipment spectrum certification testing; (9) Classified work must be performed on-site at Government locations only; (10) The Program Management Plan requirement at contract award has been removed and will instead be required with the first task order; and (11) Individual task orders will define specific parameters including period of performance, deliverables, contract type (FFP or CPFF), staffing levels, and travel requirements. The government will not provide Service Level Agreements for Government-Furnished Information/Property availability, though reasonable remedies will be provided if tools are unavailable or delivered late.
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Attachment 13 - Section I and K (Word).docx | DOCX document | |
| HC104726R0015 0001.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - Solicitation DD254 Rev 1.pdf | ||
| Attachment 12 - Final Solicitation QA - Gov Response.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 1 - Solicitation DD254.pdf | ||
| Attachment 8 -Exhibit A0001-A0002 - Sample TO CDRL.pdf | ||
| HC104726R0015 Final.pdf | ||
| Attachment 2 - QA Template.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 3 - Past Performance References.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 4 - IDIQ FP Labor Rates Price Eval WB Rev1.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 5 - IDIQ QASP.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 6 - Sample TO PWS Rev 1.docx | DOCX document | |
| Attachment 7 - GFP Attachment.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment 9 - Exhibit B0001 - Sample TO CDRL.pdf | ||
| Attachment 10 - Exhibit C0001-C0002 Sample TO.pdf |
Show all 15
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| # | RFP Page | RFP Section/ Paragraph | CLIN/ Clause/Appendix/Attachment/Other | Questions/Comments/Recommendations | Government Response | RFP Change Required (Y/N) | Location of Change |
| 1 | pp. 118–119, |
pp. 103–105,
| Attachment 4 | M2.4 – Price Factor, | ||||
| L7.0 – Pricing Instructions | Attachment 4 – IDIQ FP Labor Rates and Price Evaluation Workbook | Would the Government please confirm whether both scenarios will be used in determining the Total Evaluated Price? | Yes. Both scenarios provided in the Attachment 4 spreadsheet will be used to determine total evaluated price. | N | N/A |
| 2 | pp. 114–115 | M2.1.2 – Down‑Select Process, | |||
| M2.1.2.1 – Phase I Selection | None | Will the Government please clarify how the Phase I evaluation would handle more than three (3) hi-confidence / acceptable offerors? | Only the highest rated offeror's will proceed to Phase II. The Government will select up to three. All others will receive a letter advising the contractor not to proceed. If there are more than three offerors, the Government may elect to schedule additional oral presentations, but the likelihood of this occurring is low. Please note, Phase I evaluations will be utilized with Phase II evaluations to determine best value. If the offeror does not receive a letter advising them to proceed to Phase II, the offeror has a high likelihood of not receiving the award. | N | N/A |
| 3 | p. 24, | ||
| p. 105 | Section 15 – CMMC Requirements, | ||
| L7.1.11 – CMMC Inputs | DFARS 252.204‑7021 – CMMC Level 2 Requirement | CFR §170.3 lays out the Department of Defense’s (DoD) approach for the incremental incorporation of CMMC requirements into new awards and contract modifications via the DFARS 252.204-7025 provision and DFARS 252.204-7021 clause. Booz Allen requests that the contracting officer consider modifying the DFARS 252.204-7021 CMMC requirements to align to the phased roll-out: CMMC Level 2 (Self) from award through the first year, CMMC Level 2 (C3PAO) for year two, and CMMC Level 3 (DIBCAC) for year three. | In accordance with the revolution FAR overhaul, it has been determined that CMMC is no longer required for this solicitation. The CMMC Level 2 (C3PAO) requirement has been removed from the solicitation. Please see revised draft solicitation released with the draft solicitation Q&A responses. The CMMC requirement in the PWS was removed (Section 15), clause DFARS 252.204-7021 was removed from Section I, and provision DFARS 252.204-7025 was removed from Section K of the RFP. If CMMC is required at a later date, it will be added after award . |
| CMMC levels 2 and 3 can be in a conditional level for a period not to exceed 180 days from the CMMC status date (32 CFR 170.21), and award can occur with a conditional CMMC level. Only CMMC level 1 requires a final CMMC level for award. | Y | PWS, Section 15 (Removed), Section I, and Section K of the RFP. |
| 4 | pp. 99–100 |
Section K
| p. 96 | L3.3 – Contract Documentation | |||||||
| Table 1.1 Proposal Organization | FAR 52.219‑9 – Small Business Subcontracting Plan Requirement | Ref Table 1.1 - indicates a Small Business Subcontracting Plan must be included in Vol 1 part C. Would the government please clarify whether small business participation targets exist (e.g. participation percentage by socio-economic category or total participation percentage), and if the subcontracting plan would be included in the Phase II evaluation. | A small business subcontracting plan is required as a submission but will not be evaluated with Phase II evaluations. | N | N/A | |||
| 5 | 92 | L1.2.2 | FCL/Subcontractor Structure - Section M, Subfactor 2 states all personnel including subcontractors and independent consultants must possess a final Top-Secret Facility Clearance (FCL) with NATO access. Must subcontractors hold an independent FCL registered with DCSA, or may their personnel receive access under the prime's DD Form 254 without holding a separate corporate FCL? | The subcontractor will need to hold an independent FCL registered with DCSA. | N | N/A | ||
| 6 | 101 | L3.5 | FCL/Document Safeguarding Compatibility - FCL Verification Notification reflects Document Safeguarding Level: None, meaning classified material cannot be stored at the contractor facility. The RFP specifies classified work at Government locations (Fort Meade, 4 on-site seats). Is a Document Safeguarding Level of None acceptable for this contract, given that all classified work is performed at Government locations? | "None" is acceptable given that classified work will be performed on a Government site. | N | N/A | ||
| 7 | 101 | L3.5 | FCL/Re-Pull Timing - Section L3.5 states the Facility Verification Notification shall be retrieved within one week of proposal submission. For Phase 1 proposals due April 14, 2026 at 1:00 PM ET, does the one-week window mean the notification must be dated on or after April 7, 2026? | That is correct. | N | N/A | ||
| 8 | 101 | L3.4.1 | Prior Experience/3-Year Window - Section L3.4.1 requires relevant and recent (from the last three years) experience. If a contract was awarded more than three years ago but performance is ongoing through today, may the offeror cite the full period of performance, or only work performed strictly within the March 2023 - March 2026 window? | If you are still conducting the work today and the contract was awarded three years ago, the contract is still relevant and recent, as you are currently still performing the work on the contract (This is with the assumption that the period of performance for that contract ends within the March 2023 - 2026 window.) However, you must indicate that the contract is still active by citing the period of performance of the contract in the prior experience paper. The PoP end date must be within the must 2023 - 2026 window. | N | N/A | ||
| 9 | 101 | L3.4.1 | Prior Experience/Subcontractor Role - May prior experience performed in a subcontractor role be submitted in the Prior Experience Paper? If so, what documentation is preferred: (a) prime contractor attestation letter, (b) government customer reference, or (c) contract number/Period of Performance narrative? | We believe that you may be confusing the Past Performance References (PPR) with the Prior Experience paper required for Phase I of the solicitation. PPRs are required in Phase II and should not be provided until Phase II and if the offeror is selected to move forward to Phase II of the solicitation process. |
| As for the Phase I, Prior Experience Paper, please reference M2.1.1. The paper and the experiences listed must demonstrate/substantiate relevant prior experience. Contract number and a period of performance would be needed to substantiate recency and relevancy. If your prior experience is subcontracting work, you may include it in the paper. The Government will validate subcontractor work to ensure that the work was substantial, relevant, and recent. | N | N/A | ||||||
| 10 | 113 | M | Prior Experience/Seven Evidence Areas - Section M, Subfactor 1 specifies seven (7) areas of prior experience to demonstrate. Must an offeror demonstrate evidence in ALL seven areas, or will the Government award a High Confidence rating if an offeror demonstrates strong evidence in a majority of areas (e.g., five of seven)? | Yes, the offeror must demonstrate all seven areas. | N | N/A | ||
| 11 | 14 | C9 | Attachment 4 | On-Site Seats/Task Order Structure - Section 9 states only four (4) on-site Government seats are available at Fort Meade. Will the number of on-site versus off-site positions be specified in each task order, and will Attachment 4 differentiate between on-site and off-site labor rates for all labor categories? | The overall ID/IQ contract currently only has four on-site Government seats available at Ft. Meade. | |||
| Attachment 4 provides a tab to provide Government and Contractor site rates for all labor categories anticipated on being utilized throughout the duration of this contract. Both Government and Contractor site fixed-price labor rates will be incorporated in the base ID/IQ schedule at award and will be applied to all future firm-fixed-price task orders awarded against this ID/IQ contract. Attachment 4 states that Scenario 1 will use Government site rates and 2 will use Contractor site rates. Attachment 4 will not result in the award of the first task order and will only use scenarios to conduct a price evaluation. | N | N/A | ||||||
| 12 | 21 | C11.2 | Cleared Workforce/Aggregate vs. Concurrent - Section 11.2 specifies workforce clearance levels: 8 CONFIDENTIAL, 8 SECRET, 5 TOP SECRET, 5 TS/SCI. Are these aggregate lifetime counts across all task orders over the contract period, or the simultaneous concurrent personnel requirement at any point in time? | This will be defined at the task order level. There is a chance that this can be simultaneous as there could be concurrent tasks on this requirement. | N | N/A | ||
| 13 | 7 | C6.2 | Spectrum Databases/GFE - Will classified Government spectrum management databases (e.g., SPECTRUM XXI, EL-CID, SAMS) be provided as Government-Furnished Equipment (GFE) to the contractor, or is prior independent access to these systems required as a personnel qualification at time of hire? | No, the offeror does not need to have independent prior access to these system as a personnel qualification at the time of hire and access will be provided after award. Having prior access will reduce risk when it comes to transitioning-in, but it is not required. | N | N/A | ||
| 14 | 104 | L | Attachment 4 | Attachment 4/Labor Categories - The current labor categories do not distinguish between a Senior Spectrum Engineer (MS EE + 8 years, key personnel) and a mid-level spectrum analyst. Will the final Attachment 4 include separate categories for key personnel vs. staff engineers, or should offerors add rows and provide narrative explanation? | The Senior Spectrum Engineer will map with the Senior Electrical/Electronics Engineer in Attachment 4. The Mid-level Spectrum Analyst will map to the Mid-level Electrical/electronics Engineer. Attachment 4 will not include separate categories for key personnel vs. staff engineers and no edits to Attachment 4 will be allowed. If an alternative is proposed, it must clearly be delineated in the technical proposal and price narrative. Please note, the Government may choose to accept or not accept any deviations from what was requested in the solicitation. |
| The PWS has been revised to incorporate the Senior Program Manager requirements to the PWS. | Y | PWS, Task 6.1, Attachment 4 (Rev 1 ), Labor Category Description Tab. | ||||||
| 15 | 119 | L | Attachment 6 | Attachment 6/Sample TO PWS Size - The Sample TO PWS does not specify a period of performance or dollar ceiling. Is the sample representative of a typical initial task order (e.g., 6-12 months, $X ceiling), or is it illustrative only? Understanding typical TO size will directly inform staffing plans and rate competitiveness. | Attachment 6, Sample Task Order PWS states that the period of performance is 365 days from the date of award (one-year). This sample task order showcases a typical task order, but the period of performance, deliverables, contract type (between FFP and CPFF), and dollar ceilings for each task order may vary. The task order awarded against this ID/IQ may require any level of work/combination of tasks as provided in the base ID/IQ PWS. The staffing plan (should only be provided if selected to move forward to Phase II) should showcase the offeror's ability to increase and decrease staffing, as needed. | N | N/A | |
| 16 | 3 | B | DCAA Accounting System/Timing - For cost-reimbursable (CR/CPFF) task orders: Does the Government require a DCAA-approved accounting system at time of award, or will the Government allow a reasonable post-award period for DCAA audit initiation and completion, as referenced in Section B? | No. However, the contractor will be required to immediately initiate an accounting system review after award. Having a DCAA approved accounting system that follows the criteria listed in 252.242-7999 is required prior to the award of a cost type task order. | N | N/A | ||
| 17 | 9 | C6.2 | GFP Attachment | GFI Tools/Database Availability - Section 6.2 requires contractor use of 'Government-supplied worldwide frequency assignment databases, sophisticated coupling models, and interference prediction tools.' Section 12.B states these will be 'hand receipted' to the contractor. Please confirm: (a) the specific tools and databases that will be provided, (b) the delivery date relative to contract award, and (c) contractor remedies if Government-provided tools are not operational at contract start or become unavailable during performance. | (a) Specific tools and databases will be provided at the time of contract award. (b) The delivery date will be provided when a task order is awarded, after contract award. There is no delivery date for the base ID/IQ contract. (c) The Government will remedy if the Government-provided tools are not operation at the contract start or become unavailable during performance. | N | N/A | |
| 18 | 9 | C6.2 | Attachment 4 | Software Tools/Contractor Procurement Responsibility - Section 6.2 references 'sophisticated interference prediction tools' and Section 6.4.1 requires contractor to 'employ automated tools as directed by the Government.' Please clarify: (a) which specific RF analysis or simulation tools (e.g., FEKO, AWR, HFSS) the contractor is expected to procure independently versus receive as GFE, (b) whether contractor-procured software costs are direct-charged to the contract or included in overhead rates, and (c) whether there is a Government-approved tools list from which contractors must select. | (a) The offeror's solution and choice in what tools to use to conduct this should be part of your proposal. (b) Contractor procured software costs would be directly charged under the ODC CLIN at the task order level, if required/needed and Government approved. If there are software costs incidental to the work (to be classified as ODCs), it will not be charged indirectly. However, we do not anticipate there to be a requirement to provide any RF analysis or simulation tools on task orders. (c) There will not be a Government-approved tools list. | N | N/A | |
| 19 | 12 | C7 | Deliverable Acceptance Criteria - Section 7 Performance Standards require deliverables be 'complete and free from major technical errors' and must 'reflect innovative solutions or unique insights.' These terms are not defined. Please provide: (a) criteria or examples distinguishing a major technical error from a minor error, (b) definition of 'innovative solutions or unique insights' in the context of spectrum analysis reports, (c) the dispute resolution process if the contractor believes a Government rework request is not justified, and (d) whether there is a template or format guide for the Program Management Plan required at contract award. | The Program Management Plan is no longer required at contract award (Please see updated draft solicitation). However, it will be required with the first task order award. There is no template for the plan. The Program Management Plan will be contractor formatted and will need to meet all the requirements delineated in the PWS. |
| Regarding the deliverable acceptance criteria, please reference Attachment 5 - ID/IQ QASP. (a) Minor technical errors are errors that have no, or a very minor impact on the final conclusions drawn from reports. A major one is one that has a major impact on the final conclusions drawn from the report. (b) If you worked in the industry, this should not be an issue. For certain situations and problems, there may be creative/new proven solutions and insights that may provide better quality analysis to the end customer. The reports should include these. (c) This will be worked through with the COR and KO after award. | Y | PWS, Task 6.1 | ||||||
| 20 | 12 | C7 | Performance Standard/Reperformance AQL - Section 7 requires 95% of deliverables be accepted without reperformance. Please clarify: (a) whether the 95% AQL is calculated monthly, quarterly, or over the contract term, (b) whether a Government-initiated rework request based on difference in technical approach or methodology (rather than contractor error) counts against the 95% threshold, and (c) what formal dispute or escalation process exists when the contractor disputes a rework requirement. | (a) Over contract terms. AQL calculations will be reflected in the contractor's CPARS ratings. (b) This is not a technical approach or methodology. (c) The errors/mistakes would be discussed with the contractor when the deliverable is submitted. The contractor will have an opportunity to dispute issues in the CPARS response. | N | N/A | ||
| 21 | 12 | C7 | Cost Performance Standard/105% Cap - Section 7 states invoices shall not exceed 105% of 'planned costs' for all tasks. Please define: (a) what constitutes 'planned costs' — is it the Government's independent cost estimate, contractor-proposed cost, or TO-level authorized funding, (b) whether the 105% cap applies per individual task order or cumulatively, (c) whether a Government-authorized scope increase or change order resets the planned cost baseline, and (d) the process for the contractor to request a cost baseline adjustment when scope grows without a formal modification. | Planned costs is the costs that will be negotiated at the task order level for CPFF task orderss only. If you go over this cap, you will not be meeting standards. A) Planned costs is what is negotiated between the Government and Contractor when the TO is awarded. B) 105% cap applies per task order. C) Government-authorized scope increases/change requests will give equitable adjustments to the contractor and the cap will be based on what is negotiated if a scope increase occurs. The likelihood of this occurring is low on this requirement. D) Surge will be incorporated into the requirement. When the COR agrees that there is a mission need, this will be negotiated by the KO and surge will be utilized to supplement any CLINs that require a scope increase. The likelihood of this occurring is low. A COR cannot approve scope increases or cost baseline adjustments. Only the KO can do so. | N | N/A | ||
| 22 | 7 | C5 | Scope/COR Direction Authority - The PWS uses 'as directed by the Government' language throughout Tasks 6.2, 6.4, and Section 5 without defining the mechanism or limit of COR authority. Please clarify: (a) what form of written direction (e.g., task order modification, COR letter, email) constitutes a binding scope change versus informal guidance, (b) whether task expansions referenced as 'may also include' in Section 6.2 can be directed by COR without a contract modification, and (c) what the maximum surge staffing increase is that COR can direct at TO level without triggering a formal modification. | When the COR is assigned to this contract, a copy of the COR Designation Letter will be provided to the Contractor. The limits of the COR's responsibilities and authority is defined in this letter. (a) Only a KO can change the terms of the contract. The COR makes the determination if the requirement is needed and no changes in the terms and conditions can be made without KO approval and a modification to the contract. (b) The ID/IQ is generic. It is stating that the task orders awarded under this contract may include these tasks. The TOs will be specific and will not include this type of language. CORs do not have the authority to change the terms and conditions of the contract without KO approval. (c) Surge will be assigned at the task order level and will be based on the task order need. Surge will always required a modification. A notification that surge will be utilized will be provided prior to it being utilized. This will need KO approval. | N | N/A | ||
| 23 | 7 | C5 | Response Time/Service Level Requirements - Section 5 authorizes surge support and Section 6.2 requires 'appropriate response' to interference events, but no response time standards are defined at the IDIQ level. Please specify: (a) target contractor response time for ad hoc Government analysis requests (e.g., 4 hours, next business day), (b) definition of 'appropriate response' for interference events — initial assessment or full resolution, and (c) whether baseline staffing levels for surge support will be defined in individual task orders or at the IDIQ level before award. | There is no surge at the ID/IQ level. Surge will only be defined and identified at the task order level. (a) A written notice will be provided 7 days prior to the use of surge at the task order level. (b) This is not applicable to this solicitation. (c) Baseline staffing levels for surge support will be defined in the individual task order and not at the ID/IQ level. | N | N/A | ||
| 24 | 10 | C6.4 | MIL-STD Reference/Currency - Section 6.4 references 'MIL-STD-461F' for Equipment Spectrum Certification testing. MIL-STD-461F (2007) has been superseded by MIL-STD-461G (2015). Please confirm: (a) whether the Government intends testing to be conducted per MIL-STD-461F or the current MIL-STD-461G, (b) if 461F is required, the rationale for using the legacy standard, and (c) whether contractor test equipment and facilities must be calibrated and certified to the specific standard version referenced. | (a) Will be tested using current MIL-STD-461G. (b) N/A based on answer to question (a). (c) Yes. | Y | PWS Section 6.4 | ||
| 25 | 14 | C9 | Travel Requirements/OCONUS Authority - Section 9 states long-distance CONUS travel may be required, but Section 6.6 requires support for 'international forums' and Section 6.4.2 requires contractor briefings to Host Nations. Please clarify: (a) whether OCONUS travel is in scope, (b) if so, which countries or forums are anticipated (e.g., ITU WRC, NATO NACOSA, bilateral HN coordination), (c) the annual travel budget or maximum travel days expected at the IDIQ level for planning purposes, and (d) whether travel costs are direct-charged or included in labor rates. | This will be defined at the task order level. Travel costs not to exceed amounts will be determined at the TO level and is not relevant to this RFP. If the task order requires travel, it will be negotiated. This will happen after award. | N | N/A | ||
| 26 | 6 | C3 | FMS/Foreign Entity Support - Export Control Responsibility - Section 3 authorizes support to foreign entities via FMS, and Sections 6.4.2 and 6.6 require contractor participation in Host Nation coordination and international forums. Please clarify: (a) contractor responsibility for export control compliance (ITAR/EAR/AECA) when discussing spectrum or RF technical information with foreign parties, (b) the mechanism for contractor to verify authorization before any foreign disclosure, (c) whether NATO-member discussions require separate foreign disclosure review, and (d) required export control training for contractor personnel prior to FMS support. | The contractor will not be coordinating with foreign entities. The Government will be coordinating with input from the contractor. (a) You will need to follow ITAR requirements. (b) This will be identified at the task order level. (c) This will be identified at the task order level. (d) Required training will be identified at the task order level. | N | N/A | ||
| 27 | 20 | C11.6.6 | Classified Work/Telework Conflict - Section 11.6.6 restricts handling of classified material to Government locations only. Section 9 permits telework flexibility for unclassified work. Given that Tasks 6.2 through 6.7 regularly produce classified outputs, please clarify: (a) whether teleworking contractor personnel may access classified systems remotely (e.g., via JWICS/SIPRNet), or if all classified analysis must be performed on-site at Fort Meade, (b) how contractor handles intermediate classified drafts produced at Government facilities that require revision, (c) what classified document safeguarding or destruction procedure applies to classified work-in-progress at Government workstations. | (a) Classified systems cannot be accessed remotely. Work with classified systems will be on site. (b) Classified drafts produced at Government facilities requiring revisions will remain at the Government site. (c) Please review Section 11 of the PWS and read the appropriate DoD Instructions regarding the handling of classified information. | ||||
| N | Y | |||||||
| 28 | 11 | C6.8.1 | Transition-In/Continuity of Services - Section 6.8.1 requires 'smooth and seamless transition-in ensuring continuity of services' but provides no baseline timeline, activities, or acceptance criteria. Please specify: (a) definition of 'continuity of services' — does it require 100% of prior contractor output volume from contract Day 1, (b) expected transition-in period duration and key milestones, (c) what knowledge transfer documentation or access to prior contractor deliverables the Government will provide, and (d) whether transition-in performance is subject to the same 95% AQL standard as steady-state performance. | This will not apply to the base ID/IQ contract or the solicitation. Some task orders will not need the transitioning in of a requirement. However, here is a general answer to your questions if transition in needs to occur for a task order. (a) Defined at the Task Order level. (b) Defined at the task order level. (c) Provided and defined at the task order level, when needed. (d) Yes. | ||||
| N | N/A | |||||||
| 29 | 11 | C6.8.2 | Transition-Out/Final Compilation of Deliverables - Section 6.8.2 requires a 'final compilation of deliverable[s]' and 'final index of deliverables.' Please define: (a) scope of 'final compilation' — does it include raw data, analysis workbooks, source files, and draft documents, or only final Government-approved deliverables, (b) required format and delivery method (digital repository, classified media, hard copy), (c) whether contractor may retain copies of deliverables after transition-out, and (d) whether the contractor is expected to conduct knowledge transfer sessions with the successor contractor, and if so, the duration and location of those sessions. | This will not apply to the base ID/IQ contract and will be defined at the task order level. | N | N/A | ||
| 30 | 8 | C6.1 | Key Personnel/SSE Qualifications and Government Addition Authority - Section 6.1 defines SSE qualifications as MS-EE + 8 years OR BS-EE + 12 years and reserves Government right to 'designate additional key personnel throughout the life of this contract.' Please clarify: (a) whether equivalent degrees (e.g., Physics, Applied Mathematics, RF Engineering) are acceptable in place of Electrical Engineering, (b) definition of 'spectrum-related experience' — does it include antenna design, propagation modeling, EMI/EMC testing, or only frequency allocation and certification, (c) whether the Government will consider equivalent professional qualifications (e.g., PE license) in lieu of the strict year requirement, and (d) the process and cost implications if the Government designates additional key personnel post-award. | (a) Physics, Applied Mathematics, and Radio Frequency Engineering. (b) Spectrum-related experience should include experience in all work defined in the ID/IQ PWS to include, but not limited to antenna design, propagation modeling, and EMI/EMC testing. (c) Knowledge in frequency allocation and certification is desired. Experience should map to a spectrum engineer, not a spectrum manager. The Government may consider PE licenses as a substitute to some of the years of experience required for the labor category. However, a PE license in itself is not a substitution for the minimum years of experience and will be considered with the number of years of spectrum related experience when assessing SSE qualifications (Key Personnel). (d) If a new key personnel is added, it will be added to Task 6.1. Each task order will have a CLIN for Task and the cost for any additional key personnel will be determined per task order. | N | N/A | ||
| 31 | 21 | C12 | GFP Attachment | GFI/GFP Government Responsibility and SLA - Section 12.B states that spectrum analysis tools and databases 'maintained under separate DISA contracts' will be hand receipted to the contractor but provides no delivery schedule, availability SLA, or contractor remedies if GFI is unavailable. Please confirm: (a) an SLA for GFI/GFP tool and database availability during contract performance, (b) contractor remedies (e.g., schedule extension, cost relief) if Government-provided tools are unavailable, incompatible, or delivered late, (c) who bears responsibility if a GFI tool defect results in incorrect analysis output, and (d) backup or interim procedures if primary GFI tools are inoperable at contract start. | PWS Section 12.B ha been revised. A GFI/GFP tools and databases require IT access and takes approcximately two weeks for contractors to gain access. (a) An availability SLA for GFP/GFP tools and database availability during contract performance will not be provided. Contractor access will be taken into account when developing a schedule. (b) If the Government-provided tools are unavailable, incompatible, or delivered late, the Government will provide reasonable remedies to the contractor. The Government will ensure the contractor has the required access to complete the taskings on the agreed upon schedule c after contract award. The type of GFI provided will vary with each task order. If the GFP is inoperable at the start of a new task order award after the base ID/IQ contract award, the Government will extend the delivery due date on the task order. (c) The Government will bear the responsibility if a tool defect results in incorrect analysis output. (d) Back up or interim procuedres if a primary tool is inoperable at contract start is not applicable. The tools and databases are currently being used daily by Government personnel and there are no issues with the tools being inoperable at contract start. | N | N/A | |
| 32 | 8 | Section C, Para 6.1 | HC104726R0015+Draft | The SSE minimum qualifications state "Master of Science in Electrical Engineering (or similar)" and "Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering (or similar)." Please clarify: (1) What disciplines are considered "similar" to Electrical Engineering for this purpose (e.g., Physics, Computer Engineering, Systems Engineering)? (2) May demonstrated spectrum-related experience substitute for a formal degree where an individual has exceptional professional qualifications? | 1) The only "similar" disciplines to Electrical engineering include Physics, Applied Mathmatics, and Radio Frequency Engineering. 2) Please reference Attachment 4. The individual will need a Masters in Electrical Engineering (or similar) with 8+ years of spectrum-related experience or a Bachelor in Science in Electrical Engineering (or similar) with 12+ years of spectrum-related experience, as indicated in Attachment 4 and in the PWS. Spectrum-related experience is not a substitute for a formal degree. | N | N/A | |
| 33 | 8 | PWS 6.1 and Labor Category Description worksheet | Attachment+4+-+IDIQ+FP+Labor+Rates+and+Price+Eval+WB | Would the Government the key personnel Senior Spectrum Engineer (SSE) aligns with the Senior Electrical/Electronics Engineer labor category listed in the Labor Category Description of Attachment 4. | Yes. Please see the updated Attachment 4. | Y | Attachment 4 (Rev. 1) | |
| 34 | 100 | L3.3.2 | Section L | Section L3.3.2 (Joint Venture/Partnership Agreement) defines a Contractor Teaming Arrangement (CTA) as involving two or more companies forming a partnership or joint venture as a potential prime contractor, or a prime contractor partnering with other companies as subcontractors for a specific Government contract. It further states that, for evaluation purposes, each member of the CTA is considered the prime offeror, as the CTA is treated as a distinct entity. |
Can the Government confirm that this designation does not apply to a standard prime/subcontractor arrangement where the team is not formed as a distinct legal entity, and that in such cases only the prime contractor is considered the prime offeror for evaluation purposes? L3.3.2. states that the offeror may submit a proposal as a CTA in response to the solicitation subject to the following conditions:
1. The Joint Venture or Partnership is registered in the System of Award Management (SAM.gov) and has a corresponding UEI Number.
2. The Joint Venture or Partnership meets the definition of a Joint Venture for size determination purposes (FAR Part 19).
| 3. The offeror must submit a complete copy of the Joint Venture or Partnership agreement that established the CTA relationship. | N | N/A | ||||||
| 35 | 98 | L2.3 | Section L | Would the Government confirm .pptx is an acceptable file extension for Volume II? | Only for the Slide Deck to be provided prior to oral presentations. | Y | N/A | |
| 36 | 101 and DD Form 254 Page 1 of 7 | L3.6 and DD 254 Blocks 7 and 8 | Section L and Attachment 1 | The "Add Row" function of the DD Form 254 appears to not be working. Will the Government accept an attachment page that lists subcontractors and locations? | Yes. | N | N/A | |
| 37 | 94 | L2.1.4 | Section L | L2.1.4 states that internet hyperlinks are not desired. Would the Government be willing to accept links to demonstratable tools as part of evaluating proven innovation solutions for Phase 2 Subfactor 1 and 2? | This is an acceptable approach as long as the link provided is not a dead link or require a log-in to access data. Accessibility to the contents of the link is the responsibility of the offeror and not the Government. Updating broken links after the submittal of the proposal will count as a revision to the proposal and may be grounds to throw out your proposal. In addition, links are ONLY acceptable if it links to a demonstratable tool that supports the proposal. The link cannot be a substitute to an actual proposal and cannot be the sole substantiation for the demonstration of innovative solution. The link should provide value to the proposal and should not be utilized to circumvent the page limitations provided in the solicitation. Please note, the link and the contents to the link will not be evaluated. ONLY the contents in the oral presentation and the slide deck will be evaluated. | N | N/A | |
| 38 | 96 | L2.2.0 Table 1.1 Volume I/Part C | Section L | In Table 1.1 (Proposal Organization), Volume I, Part C (Contract Documentation) requires submission of a Small Business (SB) Subcontracting Plan and a DISA Small Business Subcontracting Plan checklist. However, Sections L and M do not reference an SB Subcontracting Plan or outline any associated requirements, and the DISA SB Subcontracting Plan checklist is not included as an attachment. |
| Could the Government clarify whether submission of an SB Subcontracting Plan is required? Additionally, would the Government consider reinstating the SB Participation Plan as an evaluation element, as was required in the current contract's RFP, and provide the applicable SB subcontracting requirements and checklist? | A subcontracting plan submission is required, but will not be part of evaluations for this solicitation. A SB Subcontracting Plan Checklist is no longer required for new solicitations. The SBs subcontracting plan is not an evaluation element. The draft solicitation has been updated to remove the SB Subcontracting Plan Checklist in Table 1.1 (L2.2.0). | Y | Section L2.2.0, Table 1.1 | |||||
| 39 | 96 | L2.2.0 Table 1.1 Volume I/Part D | Section L | Give the breadth of the seven topics required for Corporate Experience, would the Government consider giving offerors 8 pages for Volume I Part D Demonstrated Prior Experience? | No. | N | N/A | |
| 40 | 96 | L2.2.0 Table 1.1 Volume II | Section L | Given the breadth and depth of topics required to be addressed in the Oral Presentation, would the Government consider allowing up to 30 slides to enable a presentation pace of approximately two minutes per slide? | No. | N | N/A | |
| 41 | 96 | L2.2.0 Table 1.1 Volume V | Section L | Would the Government confirm that the 3-page limit for Volume V Past Performance References is 3 pages per reference? | Yes. | N | N/A | |
| 42 | 97 | L2.2.2.1 | Section L | L2.2.2.1 lists Arial as an acceptable font; would the Government accept Arial Narrow as part of this? | Please use the font specified in the RFP. | N | N/A | |
| 43 | 97 | L2.2.0 Table 1.1 Volume I/Part D and L2.2.2.1 | Section L | Will the Government confirm that Volume I Part D (Demonstrated Prior Experience/Facilities Clearance) should only be submitted in either Microsoft Word or Adobe PDF but not as both? | One or the other, not both. | N | N/A | |
| 44 | 97 | L2.2.3 | Section L | L2.2.3 (Indexing) requires that each volume contain a more detailed table of contents. Would the Government confirm tables of contents will not be counted against page limits in any volume? | Please reference L2.2.0, Table 1.1. The Table of Contents will not be counted towards the page limit in Volumes I and II. | N | N/A | |
| 45 | 98 | L2.2.5 | Section L | L2.2.5 requires each to volume to contain a Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms. Would the Government confirm the Glossary will not be counted against page limits in any volume? | The glossary of abbreviations and acronyms will not be counted against page limits in Volumes I and II. | N | N/A | |
| 46 | 14 and 99 | PWS Section 9 and L3.1(7) | Section L | Section L3.1 (Volume I Cover Page/Executive Summary) directs offerors to identify all locations where work will be performed, including the percentage of work at each location. However, PWS Section 9 (Place of Performance) indicates that only four seats are available at the Government site for this effort. |
| Should offerors base their work location percentages solely on contractor site locations, or should the limited Government site presence also be reflected in the distribution? | There are two types of fixed-price loaded labor rates that will be negotiated: Contractor and Government site. The precise location of where the work will be performed will be specified at the Task Order level after contract award. | N | N/A | ||
| 47 | 14 and 99 | PWS Section 9 and L3.1(7) | Section L | The Draft PWS Section 9 (Place of Performance) permits alternative work sites, including telework and remote work. Section L3.1 (Volume I Cover Page/Executive Summary) directs offerors to identify all locations where work will be performed and to specify whether each facility is a division, affiliate, or subcontractor. |
| How should offerors identify and classify telework or remote work locations for the purposes of the Cover Page/Executive Summary requirement? | This is an ID/IQ contract and the location/work site will be identified at the task order level. Offerors will not be able to classify telework/remove work locations at the base ID/IQ level, but you may identify potential telework/remote work locations in the cover page/executive summary. | N | N/A | |||||
| 48 | 101 | L4.0 | Section L | Section L4.0 states that "the Government intends to provide no more than three (3) offerors with an advisory notification to proceed." If more than three offerors receive equally high ratings in Phase I, will the Government consider providing advisory notifications to proceed to all such offerors? | More than three offerors will not receive an advisory notification to proceed. | N | N/A | |
| 49 | 102 | L5.1.1 | Section L | Will the Government confirm whether the 30-minute Question and Answer period during the oral presentations will be limited to the content presented in Volume II Factor 2: Technical/Management Approach (Oral Presentation), or if it may also include questions related to Phase I submission materials and/or other aspects of the proposal? | The Q&A in Phase 2 (Factor 2 and all of Factor 2's subfactors) will be limited to the oral presentation. No Phase I submission materials or materials not provided in the slide deck or presented in the oral presentation will be incorporated in the Q&A session. | N | N/A | |
| 50 | 102 | L5.1.1 | Section L | Would the Government consider allowing offerors up to five participants for the oral presentations given the breadth of expertise required? | No. | N | N/A | |
| 51 | 104 | L7.1.3 | Section L | Section L7.1.3 states that the Government reserves the right, but is not obligated, to review prices for realism. Will the Government clarify how its realism evaluation will be performed and under what circumstances? | If the pricing provided does not have adequate supporting documentation, justification, and is not within the competitive range (or within range of the Government estimate or internal market research data), a price realism analysis may be conducted. | N | N/A | |
| 52 | 104 | L7.1.6 | Section L | Section L7.1.6 states that subcontractors fully burdened labor rates will be subject to the prime offeror's fixed price ceiling rates for fixed priced task orders/CLINs." Will the Government confirm no cost or pricing data is required from subcontractors? | This RFP does not include a task order propose against and uses the Rates Only Price Evaluation method. If subcontractors are proposed against a task order after the contract is awarded, there are certain dollar threshold that will trigger additional data to support analysis for subcontractor rates. If any proposal from the contractor proposes subcontracting anything equal or above 20% of the task order value, a cost and price analysis may trigger. | N | N/A | |
| 53 | 105 | L7.1.8 | Section L | Would the Government consider allowing single-award IDIQ contracts with similar scope and structure to this solicitation, including those with multiple task orders, to be submitted as a single past performance reference? | IAW L7.1.8, ID/IQs, BPAs, and GSA Schedule contracts without any associated Task/Call Orders will not be considered in the past performance evaluation. Individual task orders under an ID/IQ contract, BPA or GSA Schedule are each considered to be one (1) past/present performance effort. The Government will consider ID/IQ contracts (with multiple task orders awarded against it) only if the CPARs associated with the ID/IQ contract is rated at the ID/IQ level. ID/IQ contracts with administrative CPARS at the base ID/IQ contract level will not be considered. | N | N/A | |
| 54 | 113, 114 | M2.1.1 | Section M | In Section M2.1.1, Subfactor 1 highlights technical tasks PWS 6.2-6.7; however, the listed areas do not specify any experience from PWS 6.7 Spectrum Standards Support. Is there any particular experience the Government will look for regarding that technical task. | The offeror shall provide information that demonstrates their experience in Spectrum Standards Support, as provided in PWS 6.7. The demonstration shall meet the requirements provided in the PWS. | N | N/A |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .