Final Qs and As 12-16-10.doc

Questions and Answers from Solicitation HDTRA1-11-R-0001

Q1. Will DTRA consider revising the pricing requirements for Sample Task 1 to require T&M rates in lieu of CPFF? This change would expedite the price evaluation and lower the government's risk regarding total cost of performance after award.

A1. This effort cannot be done under a T&M type structure. CPFF is the only contract type feasible.

Q2. When does the Government plan to establish a reading room for relevant classified directives and other documents?

A2. DTRA will not provide a reading room. All of the documents pertaining to this solicitation are attached to the solicitation and are unclassified.

Q3. Will the Government allow an Executive Summary in Volume II and if so, will the Government allow up-to-5 pages additional for such a summary?

A3. No, the Government will not allow an executive summary. Volume II shall be organized as described in Table L.1.2 of the solicitation.

Q4. Will the Government consider setting January 5 rather than January 3 as final delivery date for proposals because of the New Year’s three-day weekend during which nothing can be delivered to DTRA by delivery services?

A4. Yes, DTRA will extend the proposal due date. All proposals are due by 4:00 PM on January 7, 2011.

Q5. RFP Clause 252.215- 9007 Substitution of Personnel states, “…Prior to removing, replacing, or diverting any of the specified personnel….” [emphasis added]. We assume that “specified personnel” here refers to the “specified individuals” identified as “key personnel” in Section 252.215-9004, Key Personnel. Please confirm.

A5. Clause 252.215-9007 will be deleted in the pending amendment to the solicitation.

Q6. Is it permissible to seek Past Performance input (via the L-2 form) from the Government office that exercised technical but not contractual oversight for the work?

A6. Yes, it is permissible to have the Government office that exercised technical oversight fill out the L-2 form.

Q7. In the event that an Offeror wishes to cite a Past Performance effort that was performed as a subcontract with a company that is anticipated to be a competitor for this A&AS contract, would it be acceptable to submit the L-2 form to the prime’s Government point of contact for completion rather than to the prime for which it was a subcontractor?

A7. Yes, it is acceptable for the Prime’s Government point of contact to complete the

L-2 form for the subcontractor’s efforts. Please note, past performance references who complete the Past Performance Questionnaire must have direct knowledge of the Offeror's past performance to properly evaluate the Offeror's past performance. All Past Performance questionnaires (L-2’s) shall be completed by the references identified in the Present and Past Performance Volume.

Q8. The first cited reference states: “…the Government expects the contractor to have contractor supplied office space within 25 miles of the Government location…” The second reference states: “…provide offsite facilities …. within the max distance requirements of thirty (30) miles of the DTRA Headquarters….” Will the Government please clarify the distance requirement?

A8. The offsite facilities provided by the Offeror shall be located within 30 miles of DTRA Headquarters. The Basic IDIQ SOO will be updated for consistency in the pending amendment to the solicitation.

Q9. We assume that the “total initial value” in the statement “…subcontracting goal of at least 10% of the total initial Task Order 1 value ….” refers to only labor. Please confirm.

A9. No, it does not refer to Labor only. The 10% goal refers to 10% of the entire contract value (Base and all Options) inclusive of labor, ODCs, fee, etc…

Q10. Please confirm that the Staffing Plan table L.3.3.4 specifying labor categories, FTE estimates, and skill level qualifications required to fulfill the requirements of each Directorate is “not count[ed] against the page limit for the Task Order 1 subfactor.”

A10. The Staffing Plan table will not be counted toward the Volume II page count. The page limitation for Factor 1 Mission Capability, Section C is unlimited and will be updated in the pending amendment to the solicitation.

Q11. We assume that the Volume III Table of Contents has an unlimited page count; the Description of Team has a 2 –page page count; the Present and Past Performance Efforts/References has a 2-page per reference limit; and Organizational Structure Change History has an unlimited page count. Please confirm our reading of Table L.1.1.

A11. The Page Limits for Volume III (referenced in Table L.1.2) were not properly aligned with the Volume contents. This will be corrected in the pending amendment to the solicitation and is as follows:

Page Limit

Table of Contents

Unlimited

Description of Team

2 Pages

Present and Past Performance Efforts/References 2 Pages per reference

Organizational Structure Change History

Unlimited

Q12. This table does not include a page count for the Form L-1s required by Paragraph L.5.3, page 68. We assume that the Government will allow two pages for the “detailed narrative” and up to three additional pages for the Present and Past Performance Information Form (Attachment L-1). Please confirm.

A12. The detailed narrative shall not exceed 2 pages per reference. There is no page restriction for the L-1s. If more space is needed to answer the questions on the form, the Offeror is permitted to attach additional pages to the L-1 form only.

Q13. What is the required type font (style and size) and page limit for completion of the Attachment L-1?

A13. The font size shall be no less than 12 point. It is desired to have a consistent font style throughout the entire proposal. Please see the answer to question 12 for the page limitation of L-1.

Q14. We assume that the due date for the Present and Past Performance Questionnaire (PPPQ), Attachment L-2, from the Government reference is the same as the proposal due date. Please confirm.

A14. Yes, all PPPQs are due at the same date and time the proposals are due.

Q15. Section L.3.3.4, Section (2) states that at least 50% of the small business total should go to Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business (SDVOSB). It then states: “The SDVOSB percentage equates to 5% of the total initial Task Order value.” These are not necessarily the same. If an offeror has more than 10%, e.g., 12%, going to small business is it required to meet 50% of that total to a SDVOSB, e.g., 6%, or does the 5% total Task Order 1 contract value meet DTRA's intent?

A15. To meet the Socioeconomic Commitment Goal, Offeror’s must propose at least 5% of the total initial Task Order 1 value (Base and all Options) to SDVOSB and another 5% to any Small Business Entity. Hence, the percentage applicable to SDVOSB does not increase above this 5% minimum threshold should the Prime choose to exceed the net 10% sub goal.

Q16. RFP pages 3-7 denote FFP CLINs, yet there is no narrative detailing applicable pricing for these CLINs. Does DTRA anticipate awarding follow-on TOs that will fall under these CLINs?

A16. The Basic IDIQ includes Firm-Fixed-Price (FFP) CLINs to allow maximum flexibility in case future Task Orders warrant that contract type. Task Order 1 is a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) Task Order only.

Q17. Section L.1.3.9 and Section L.3.3.4, The first reference states: “…all cost information shall be addressed only in Cost Volume IV.” However, according to L.3.3.4, the Socio-Economic Commitment Template, which details subcontractor cost allocations, is to be included in Volume II (Technical). Please clarify whether the socio-economic information should be included in Vol II or IV or both.

A17. The socio-economic information shall be included in both Volume II and IV. The socio-economic information should be included in Volume II as described in paragraph L.3.3.4, Section 2 and utilize Attachment S-1 to verify the net % of small business participation based on the total value of Task Order 1. No cost data shall be provided in Volume II. All cost information, including subcontractor costs shall be included in the Cost Volume IV ONLY.

Q18. Requirements for the Cost or Pricing Information for Task Order 1 (Section L.6.4) make no mention of proposals from subcontractors. Does DTRA require sealed proposals from subcontractors?

A18. DTRA does not require sealed proposals from subcontractors. If subcontractors are used, the prime contractor has the principle responsibility for ensuring the proposed subcontracting costs are fair and reasonable in accordance with FAR 15.404-3 (b) and (c) prior to including such costs. The results of this analysis shall be submitted as part of the prime contractor’s proposal.

Q19. The Task Order 1 SOW identifies on-site positions at Kirtland AFB. For DTRU positions not identified as being on-site, should the offeror assume that those positions are located off-site in the vicinity of Kirtland or is it DTRA's intent that the work reside in the NCR? For example, Section 1.2.1 lists an estimated requirement for 7 FTEs, but the RFP identifies on-site working spaces for 6 FTEs. Is the 7th individual located off-site vic Kirtland or somewhere else? If somewhere else, where?

A19. For DTRU positions not identified as being on-site, the offeror shall assume off-site in the Kirtland/Albuquerque area. In Section 1.2.1, the 7th individual will be located in the Albuquerque area.

Q20. Table L.1.2 of the solicitation cites a two-page limit for each Present and Past Performance effort referenced; however, the Present and Past Performance Information Form (PPPIF) is 3 pages long and the Pages Not Counted section of the solicitation (L.1.3.5.3) does not include the PPPIF in the Pages Not Counted list. Section L.5.3 indicates that the PPPIF is a supplement to each reference narrative, but does not specifically state that the form is excluded from the page count limitation. Please confirm that each the PPPIF is included in the Pages Not Counted section of the solicitation (L.1.3.5.3)?

A20. See answer to question #12.

The PPPIF is three pages long. Sections 5, 6, 7 and 8 require providing text which could cause the form length to exceed 3 pages. Also, sections 5 and 6 of the PPPIF (description of effort and relevance of experience) appear to duplicate the information requested in the narrative required by Section L.5.3 of the solicitation (description of effort and results of performance). The following questions arise:

Q21. Is it intended that each PPPIF as submitted not exceed three pages? If so, may the narrative and PPPIF reference each other so that information is not duplicated?

A21. See answer to question #12.

Q22. If each PPPIF as submitted can exceed 3 pages, is there a page limitation on the PPPIF?

A22. See answer to question #12.

Q23. Please confirm our understanding that, given the staffing requirements of Task Order 1, resumes of proposed personnel are excluded from the page limitations of Volume II—Mission Capability, Section C—Task Order 1.

A23. Yes, resumes of proposed personnel are excluded from the page limitation of Volume II. See answer to question #10.

Q24. Would DTRA consider extending the proposal due date to Wednesday, January 5th in order to accommodate mail courier delivery times affected by office closures due to the New Year weekend?

A24. See answer to question #4.

Q25. Please clarify the discrepancy between the RFP Section B CLIN Items (RFP pages 2 through 6), which list some items as FFP, and the CLINS listed in the Task Order 1 SOW, which are listed as CPFF. Should CLIN 0003 and CLIN 0004 in the SOW be relabeled as CLINs 0005 and 0006 respectively?

A25. See answer to question #16. The CLIN structure for Task Order 1 shall correspond with Table L.6.6.1 of the solicitation.

Q26. Is there the potential, in support of SOW A2.1 and/or B1.2, that contractor support personnel will be required to deploy OCONUS?

A26. Yes, in support of A.2.1, one of the positions shall be located in Darmstadt as stated in the SOW. The other may be off-site in the HQC area, however, both positions are considered deployable and can go OCONUS. For B.1.2, yes, all positions are considered deployable personnel and can be sent OCONUS.

Q27. Page 22, Section H2 (Increase Level of Effort) suggests that additional LOE authorized by the Government will be priced based on a hourly rate, T&M like, calculation. Typically with CPFF type CLINS, a bottoms-up estimate is used to determine the price for the additional effort. Please provide further clarification as to the price calculation of any additional required effort.

A27. If additional man-hours are required (not to exceed 30% of the level of effort of the CLIN), the Contracting Officer may unilaterally modify the contract by procuring up to 30% additional labor hours of the effected CLIN based on the original negotiated labor hours for the effected CLIN. The pricing of the increase for these additional hours is based solely on the previously negotiated, fully loaded cost and fee rate by dividing the negotiated Cost and Fee with the negotiated level of effort hours and applying those respective rates to the increased hours (up to 30%) to establish a net increase to the cost and fee of the effected CLIN.

Q28. RFP page 56 – L.1.3.5.3 and RFP page 65 – Section L.3.3.4. Section L.1.3.5.3 states that the Labor Category Table is not included in the page count. Does this mean that the complete tabular response to L.3.3.4 Section C - Task Order 1 is outside the page count?

A28. As indicated in Section L.3.3.4, the Labor Category table does not count against the page limit. See answer to question #10.

Q29. RFP page 64-65 – L.3.3.2. Section A: Management Approach (3) requires a transition plan, but does not provide any specific timing on transition. Since this is compilation of two existing contracts, we have developed our plan based on a 45 day transition. Does this match up with DTRA's projected transition time? If not, please clarify transition time for planning purposes.

A29. Yes, the estimated transition time is approximately 45 days.

Q30. We have a small business team mate with excellent skills. Their only past performance citation is a single classified contract. The Government Contracting Officer will not allow release of any information about the contract without CO approval. A FOUO write-up, which the Prime has not seen, has been approved by the Contracting Officer. The Contracting Officer will provide DTRA with a Current and Past Performance Evaluation. How would DTRA like us to handle the past performance requirement in Volume III? Some options:

1. Leave the Volume III citation blank except for Government contact information and note that the contract is Classified.

2. Insert the approved FOUO material and mark the Proposal Volume III as FOUO.

3. Insert a place-holder in Volume III and submit the FOUO information in a separate sealed envelope.

A30. It is preferred to insert the approved FOUO material and mark the Proposal Volume as FOUO.

Q31. RFP page 73 - L6.6.2. Travel – Table L.6.2 indicates that travel costs for NS O&M and NS R&D should be allocated against CLINs 0003 and 0004 respectively. It appears that these should be charged against CLINs 0005 and 006 respectively (pages 4 – 5). Can DTRA please clarify?

A31. The Basic IDIQ CLIN structure is located in Section B of the Solicitation and will not be priced. All proposed costs shall be associated with Task Order 1 and shall be in accordance with Table L.6.6.1, to include travel as detailed in Table L.6.2. Travel costs for NS O&M and NS R&D shall be allocated against Task Order 1 CLINs 0003 and 0004 respectively. Travel shall also be applied to all Option CLINs.

Q32. RFP page 67 – L.5.2. Description of Team states “Offerors shall also provide an approximate percentage of effort, based on cost of the initial task order and all Options individually, that each subcontractor/team member will contribute to the effort.” We assume that this refers to options on TO 1 only. Is this correct? If not, please clarify.

A32. Yes, the percentage of effort that each subcontractor/team member will contribute refers to Task Order 1 (Base and all Options).

Q33. Would the Government be willing to entertain a flowdown exception for clause 252.204-7000 “Disclosure of Information” for Universities who are acting as subcontractors to interested primes?

A33. No. This DFARS clause is applicable to the Prime and subs with no exception.

Q34. Provided that offerors can provide sufficient detail concerning their purchasing systems, is it an accurate assumption that offerors without approved purchasing systems will be rated no differently than offerors with approved purchasing systems?

A34. The Government will consider compliance with the solicitation terms and conditions, and status of contractor and teaming members’ estimating, purchasing and accounting systems. General considerations do not receive a color rating or proposal risk rating, but may be considered by the Government in making the best value decision. Note, ALL Offeror’s will have to adhere to the terms and conditions of FAR clause 52.244-2.

Q35. Section L does not require any rates schedule as part of offerors’ cost submissions – please confirm that the only pricing requirement is for the sample task and that offerors are not required to provide a schedule of rates in addition to the Task Order 1 cost proposal.

A35. Correct, a separate rate schedule is not required. NOTE: All cost information, with the exception of the cost narrative, must be submitted in Microsoft Excel format with formulas and working links to the maximum extent practicable.

Q36. Please confirm that the Task Order 1 cost proposal need only identify those labor rates, categories, descriptions, and levels that are used in the preparation of the Task Order 1 cost proposal.

A36. The Task Order 1 cost proposal shall identify those labor rates, categories, descriptions, and levels that are required to perform the work outlined in the Task Order 1 Statement of Work (Base and Options). The cost proposal shall also include travel and shall include the content outlined in Section L.6.2.

Q37. FAR 52.244-2 part C states that offerors without approved purchasing systems must obtain consent to subcontract – does part J exclude any subcontracts for work submitted as part of offerors’ task order pricing?

A37. If the Prime does not have an approved purchasing system then the Offeror will require approval for all subcontract efforts described in FAR clause 52.244-2. Any approved subcontractors will be identified in paragraph J of FAR 52.244-2 upon award.

Q38. Pages 53-54 specify that offerors are required to provide 3 copies of Volume I and 5 copies each of Volumes II-IV. Please confirm that only 3 copies of Volume I are required, and that 5 copies of Volumes II, III, and IV are required.

A38. The copies described in Table L.1.2 are correct; 3 copies of Volume I are required, and 5 copies of Volumes II, III, and IV.

Q39. Pages 53-54 do not specify the number of copies required for any subcontractor sealed packages. Please confirm that offerors will be required to provide 5 copies (1 original, 4 ‘copies’) of any sealed submissions by subcontractors.

A39. DTRA does not require sealed proposals from subcontractors. See answer to question #18. Note, it is the Prime Offeror’s responsibility to support the cost/price reasonableness for their entire proposal including subs and the Government will evaluate the Primes proposal as a whole, inclusive of subs, in determining realism, reasonableness, and completeness.

Q40. This RFP was released as an IDIQ plus 1 Task Order requirement; does the Government have plans to award future task orders against this IDIQ?

A40. The basic IDIQ has a 5 year ordering period. The Government anticipates award of future Task Orders over this 5 year period.

Q41. Page 67 states that offerors shall use Attachment S-1 to document the Small Business Participation. It is assumed that offerors must provide this completed attachment as part of their Volume II submission, Section C; please confirm that this is the “Small Business Subcontracting Plan” as referenced on page 56 L.1.3.5.3 “Pages Not Counted”. Please also confirm that no other detail or explanation regarding offerors’ socioeconomic goals is required besides Attachment S-1 and the Offeror’s proposed Task Order 1 Staffing Plan, inclusive of key personnel.

A41. No, Attachment S-1 is not considered the offeror’s Subcontracting Plan. As detailed in Section L.2.11 of the solicitation, other than small business offerors shall submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan for Task Order 1 (Base and all Options) in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 and DFARS 252.219-7003. The Subcontracting Plan page count is unlimited.

Q42. Page 81 states that “The Government will use the relevancy ratings of recent contracts, in combination with performance assessments, to determine an integrated Performance Confidence Assessment”. In generating this assessment, does the Government give equal weight to both performance and relevancy or are these factors weighted differently? If differently, how so?

A42. Performance and relevancy will not receive two separate ratings. A strong record of relevant past performance will be considered more advantageous to the Government than a strong record of non relevant past performance or a “Neutral/Unknown Confidence” rating. Based on the relevancy of past performance, each offeror will receive a Confidence Assessment rating as described in Section M.2.5.

Q43. Page 64 states that Section Two of Volume II shall clearly demonstrate Offeror’s capability to provide offsite facilities that meet all facilities requirements detailed in the Basic ID/IQ SOO, however no plug amounts for any ODC’s are included in Section L instructions for Volume IV. Are offerors required to provide an estimate of any ODC’s or labor related to this requirement in their cost volume?

A43. See answer to question #70.

Q44. (Section L.1.2 Proposal Organization and L.3.3.4 Section C – Task Order 1.) Please confirm that the 30 page limit includes the staffing plan, key personnel resumes and socioeconomic commitment, and excluded from the page count is the labor category descriptions.

A44. See answer to question #10.

Q45. (Section L.1.3.5.1 Page Size.) Is it possible to use 8pt Arial on tables, charts, graphs and figures?

A45. No. The lettering within tables, charts, graphs, and figures shall be no smaller than 10 point. It is desired to have a consistent font style throughout the entire proposal.

Q46. (L.5.2 DESCRIPTION OF TEAM pg 67) The RFP states, “The Offeror shall provide a matrix of all proposed subcontractors/team members and the specific areas within the Task Order 1 SOW requirement for which they will be utilized”. Question: May we assume this matrix does not count in the 2 page limitation for Description of the team?

A46. Correct. The matrix does not count toward the 2 page limitation for the description of an offeror’s team.

Q47. (L.5.3. RELEVANT PRESENT AND PAST PERFORMANCE EFFORTS pg 68) The RFP states, “Further, each past performance effort provided shall be supplemented with a completed Present and Past Performance Information Form (Attachment L-1).” Question: Since there is a 2 page limit on the narrative, is there a page limitation to the completed L-1?

A47. See answer to question #12.

Q48. Section B1. Contract Min/Max Value indicates a contract ceiling value of $97,000,000. Is this intended to be the maximum value for the entire contract, or just the maximum value for Task Order 1?

A48. The ceiling value of $97,000,000 is intended to be the maximum value for the entire IDIQ contract during a five year period.

Q49. Section H. Clauses Incorporated by Reference includes 52.228-4 Workers’ Compensation and War-Hazard Insurance Overseas. Is 52.228-3 Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act) applicable to this procurement, and if so will it be incorporated in the resultant contract?

A49. Clause 52.228-4 will be removed from the solicitation and Clause 52.228-3 will be added in the pending amendment to the solicitation and resultant contract.

Q50. In order to avoid having Offerors ship the proposal during the holiday closings, would the Government consider an extension to the proposal due date from Jan 3 to Jan 7?

A50. See answer to question #4.

Present and Past Performance contract references provided by an offeror's team members may include work performed as subcontractors. In those cases the prime contractor provides the assessment of subcontractor performance. For this solicitation, some of our team members would like to reference efforts as subcontractors to prime contractors who are not on the team and who may also be bidding on this solicitation. In such instances, Q51. Would the government consider a conflict of interest to exist for either the subcontractor or prime contractor if a prime contractor were to provide present and past performance reference information (e.g., the Present and Past Performance Questionnaire (PPPQ))?

A51. See answer to question #10.

Q52. Would the government allow the reference information (e.g., PPPQ) for the subcontractor's present and past performance to be provided by a government representative associated with the prime contract (e.g., COTR or program manager)?

A52. See answer to question #10.

Q53. Reference Task Order 1 SOW specific tasks, if the number of government spaces is fewer then the specified number of FTE, can we assume that the contractor provided space is at the contractor’s facility in the National Capital Region? For example, the SOW #A2.1 specifies 2 FTEs but only identifies one government space in Darmstadt.

A53. Yes, if the location is not particularly specified, the contractor provided space is at the contractor’s facility in the National Capital Region. In the SOW paragraph A.2.1, there is an estimated 2 FTEs required for that task, 1 position in Darmstadt, GE and the other position at the contractor’s NCR facility. However, in all other cases the offeror shall assume the FTEs are in the local vicinity of where the Government provided spaces are located.

Q54. In reference to Section L.6.1, does the Government require the transition plan be priced separately from the other requirements of Task Order 1?

A54. Yes, the Government requires the transition plan to be priced separately under CLIN 0006. CLIN 0006 will be added in the pending amendment to the solicitation under Table L.6.6.1. Transition hours and costs shall be discretely identified within the Task Order 1 Technical and Cost proposal.

Q55. Section L.6.3.3 states that the Government intends to provide 40 laptops however the contractor is responsible for providing other peripherals such as printers, scanners, etc necessary to operate the computers in the contractor’s facilities. Paragraph 6 of the Statement of Objectives states the contractor shall be required to provide off-site personnel the standard business equipment (telephone, computers, desks, internet access, etc) to conduct normal business activities. Can the Government please clarify the intended use of the 40 laptops?

A55. The Government furnished laptops are intended to allow the contractor remote access to the DTRA unclassified network OR the SIPRNet for offsite contractor personnel. Task Order efforts may require additional computers at contractor facilities to meet Task Order requirements beyond the GFP furnished Laptops. The computers referenced in Paragraph 6 of the Statement of Objectives identify these additional computer requirements (beyond the approximate 40 furnished laptops) which shall be the sole responsibility of the contractor to furnish to accomplish Task Order requirements for classified or unclassified efforts. Remote access will only be authorized using Government provided computers.

Q56. Section L.6.3.4 states the contractor and any teaming members are required to provide information regarding their systems. Section L.6.3.4.1, Estimating System states “Offerors shall indicate whether there are any Forward Pricing Rate Agreements (FPRA) in place and identify the applicable DCAA of the Prime Contractor and major subcontractors/teaming partner.” In accordance with paragraphs L.2.4 and L.2.6 are all first-tier subcontractors classified as major subcontractors provided a Teaming Agreement or Letter of Commitment exists?

A56. Yes, “major subcontractors/teaming partners” referenced in paragraph L.2.4 refers to first-tier subcontractors.

Q57. Section L.6.4 states, “the cost proposal shall delineate labor hours, labor categories, indirect costs, ODCs, G&A, and fee for the prime and all subcontractors.” Given the proprietary nature of this information, subcontractors are not willing to disclose this data to the prime contractor. Therefore, will the Government consider permitting the subcontractors to provide this information directly to the Government?

A57. Yes, the Government is permitting the subcontractors to provide their cost breakout directly to the Government. All subcontractor proposals can be emailed to Contracting Officer, Daniel Vola at Daniel.Vola@dtra.mil and Contract Specialist, Deonna Reyes at Deonna.Reyes@dtra.mil.

Q58. In reference to the FTE estimates identified in Attachment 2, Task Order 1, Contractor assumes it may deviate from these estimates for the purpose of preparing the proposed cost in accordance with provisions L.6.6.4 and L.6.6.4. Would the Government please confirm whether this interpretation is correct and clarify whether deviations from the Government’s FTE estimates are permitted for both on and off-site positions, for off-site positions only, or for neither?

A58. No, it is not acceptable to deviate from the FTE estimates for on-site and off-site personnel identified in Attachment 2, Task Order 1 SOW.

Q59. Reference Attachment 1, IDIQ Statement of Objectives, Section 4.0 (p), which requires that Contractor shall meet and maintain deployment and weapons qualifications (p. 4), and DFARs Clause 252.225-9075, Contractor Personnel Authorized to Accompany U.S. Armed forces Deployed Outside the United States. Contractor notes none of the locations identified in the IDIQ SOO or Task Order 1 SOW are considered to constitute warzone or other high-risk areas at the current time. Can the Government identify the deployment locations, if other than those identified in the IDIQ SOO, Paragraph 6.0, Place of Performance (pgs. 4-5) and the weapons the Government anticipates the Contractor shall be required to use in the performance of the services?

A59. None of the locations specified are in hostile environments, but it may be necessary for contingency contractor personnel to be armed for individual self-defense. If necessary, the geographic Combatant Commander may authorize contingency contractor personnel to be armed for individual self-defense. In such a case the Government shall provide or ensure weapons familiarization, qualifications, and briefings on the rules regarding the use of force to the contingency contractor personnel.

Q60. Section L.2.12 requires the Contractor to disclose all relevant facts concerning any past, present, or planned interests relating to work to be performed under the proposed contract. In an effort to assess the implications of the limitation of future contracting provisions which restricts the Prime Contractor from providing non-A&AS services to the NS and CS Directorates, it is necessary to understand how these contracts are classified by the Government currently and in the future. In some cases existing contracts do not include a designation of A&AS or performer work. Similarly the designation of many tasks identified in this solicitation were previously classified as performer work that are now classified as A&AS. For the sake of clarity and consistency and in light of the near- and long-term implications of the OCI approach as laid out in the RFP will the Government provide a list of active contracts and their applicable classification i.e. A&AS or performance so offerors can assess the implications of the restriction as well as to enable Prime Contractors to make informed decisions related to their teaming/bidding decisions, disclosures, etc.?

A60. No, the Government will not provide a list of active contracts and their applicable classification. Unless a current DTRA contract has been awarded as an A&AS contract, or otherwise been determined to be A&AS and identified as such with the respective Prime, then Offerors shall assume that all other DTRA contracts not originally awarded as A&AS are “performer” efforts.

Q61. Section L.2.12 states “the prime contractor is precluded from participating as a contractor, subcontractor or consultant on future non-A&AS contracts within the Operational Enterprise, CS and NS Directorates.” In the event the successful offeror(s) or subcontractor is currently performing a non-A&AS contract within an affected Enterprise/Directorate, Contractor assumes that, in the interests of avoiding the potential divestiture of Contractors’ non-A&AS contract(s), it will consider either permitting the submission of an Organizational Conflict of Interest Mitigation Plan provided the potential or actual OCI can be reasonably and adequately mitigated or granting a waiver?

A61. The OCI approach for this CS/NS A&S effort is a restrictive approach. As a result, no awardee can provide any A&AS support to a Directorate to whom they are also providing performer work. Should a Prime awardee of this CS/NS A&AS effort have any existing performer contract efforts supporting the CS or NS Directorates, those contracts would have to be terminated for convenience or otherwise cancelled. No mitigation plan shall be accepted nor a waiver of this restrictive OCI requirement. For subcontractors, if a subcontractor to the Prime is performing A&AS support to CS, but not NS, the subcontractor could maintain a performer contract within the NS Directorate, and vice versa. In no instance shall a Prime or a sub provide both A&AS support and performer work to the CS or NS Directorates.

Q62. Similarly, it is conceivable that DTRA organizational changes could result in the end user of the solicited A&AS services residing in a different Enterprise and/or Directorate than those provided herein or in any resultant contract. Given the OCI concerns that such a reorganization could give rise to for the CS/NS A&AS prime contractor and all the subcontractors performing thereunder, is it correct to assume the prime contractor shall be permitted to revise the approved OCI Verification and Prevention Plan with regards to any affected non-A&AS contract(s) it holds in that instance?

A62. Yes, in the event of a DTRA reorganization which has an effect upon existing OCI compliances of an awardee, the prime contractor would be permitted to revise the OCI Verification and Prevention Plan in order to ensure and prevent any OCI implications with the effected Enterprise/Directorate through coordination with the DTRA Contracting Officer.

Q63. RFP Sections H (Clause 252.209-9000(g), p. 26) and L.2.12(b) (p. 60) preclude the Prime Contractor from providing any performer work for CS or NS Directorates and Subcontractors from providing performer work to a directorate for which it previously provided A&AS support from contract start until one year after final payment is made on the contract. Would the Government consider revising this to one year after the end of the period of performance of all Task Orders given the significant scope of the OCI restriction to which contractors are subjected and extended length of time between the performance end date and when final audited rates are approved by DCAA and the date of final payment on a contract?? If not, would the Government please clarify whether the OCI restrictions are in effect until final payment is made on the applicable Task Order or on all Task Orders issued under the IDIQ?

A63. No, the Government will not revise the OCI restriction. Final payment refers to the final payment on all Task Orders issued under the IDIQ.

Q64. Reference Task Order 1 SOW, L.3.3.4 Section C, which requires offerors to provide detailed, Key Personnel resumes. The list of items that will not be included in page count under Section L.1.3.5.3 does not include Key Personnel Resumes. Are key personnel resumes included in the page count?

A64. See answer to question #44.

Q65. Reference Section L.5.3 requires a minimum of two and maximum of three past performance citations for each of the subcontractors/teaming partners expected to perform aspects of the effort the Prime Offeror considers critical to the overall success of the program. Due to the size of the program and number of subcontractors will the Government consider revising the number downward to reflect a minimum of one and maximum of two?

A65. The Government will not reduce the number of past performance efforts required for the subcontractors/teaming partners.

Q66. Reference Section L.5.3 and Attachment L-2. In the event the teaming partner provided the services as a subcontractor to a prime who may now be a competitor under this solicitation, to prevent an OCI can the subcontractor request the applicable Government representative complete the PPPQ (Attachment L-2)?

A66. See answer to question #7.

Q67. Task Order 1 SOW, Section A1.2.5 Informational Technologies, states, “Demonstrate proficiency in the requirements necessary to ensure both programs are Defense Information Security Agency (DISA) certified and maintain these certifications throughout their lifespans.” Can you please identify which programs “both” refers to?

A67. To clarify, “both” refers to the Defense Nuclear Weapons School (DNWS) - Distant Learning System (DNWS-DLS) and the - DNWS Network (DNWSNet).

Q68. Task Order 1 SOW, Section A1.2.5 Informational Technologies states, “Personnel will be required to be certified, and maintain certification, in the Information Assurance (IA) roles, per DTRA Instruction 8570. Personnel must possess the appropriate certifications to support the network and system administration.” Will all personnel working on this specific task require these certifications or will some require the certification based on role such as network administration?

A68. The certifications are required for all FTEs proposed under Section A1.2.5.

Q69. Reference Sections A2.1, A2.2 and B1.2 of the Task Order 1 SOW, pursuant to which contractor is responsible for providing “rapid, worldwide deployable 24/7 operational and technical expertise to augment DTRA’s CMATs” and may be required to “deploy worldwide for contingency operations on short or no-notice providing technical expertise to matters relating to weapons of mass destruction crises.” Reference DFARs Clause 252.225-9075 (d) Tour of Duty/Hours of Work/Pay (“The Contracting Officer shall provide the contractor with the anticipated duration of deployment(s), and shall provide the contractor with the anticipated daily or weekly work schedule(s). The contractor shall comply with all duty hours and tours of duty provided by the Contracting Officer, and shall be reasonably available to work non-routine hours on high-priority tasks. The Contracting Officer shall define the parameters under which non-routine tasks are to be performed…The contractor is encouraged to provide employee compensation in a manner that promotes flexibility”). Would the Government please clarify to how Contractors should price these possible deployments in their proposals and provide the anticipated number, duration and destination of deployments and provide the anticipated workweek for deployed personnel?

A69. The contractor should be prepared to deploy in the performance of the tasks referenced above. Since these are “contingency operations,” they can not be predicted as to the length, frequency or location. For the purpose of providing costing data, the contractor should assume 2 one-month deployments per year in both the CENTCOM and PACOM AORs (total of 4 trips per year).

Q70. Reference L.6.4 and L.6.6.3, pursuant to which the cost volume shall include both summary and CLIN level pricing and detail the breakdown of cost elements therein. Per L.6.6.2, Offeror’s shall utilize the Government Travel Estimates as the basis for all Travel costs in the cost proposal. Would the Government provide Offerors with plug numbers for ODCs in addition to Travel expenses for the purpose of pricing this proposal? If the Government doesn’t provide plug numbers for ODCs in addition to Travel expenses, can the Government provide the answers to the following four questions (#70a - #70d):

A70. The Offeror shall include the following ODC plug numbers in addition to Travel plug numbers:

CLIN 0001 CS O&M

$85,000

CLIN 0002 CS R&D

$50,000

CLIN 0003 NS O&M

$55,000

CLIN 0004 NS R&D

$35,000

These plug numbers include paper, binders, printing, conference incidentals (refreshments), postage, office supplies, etc. and shall also be applied to each Option Year.

Q70a. Do the requirements contained in Paragraphs 4.0 (n)-(o) of the IDIQ pertaining to contractor-site facilities refer to the conferences, meetings and trainings tasked in Sections A2.6, C1.3.1, C1.3.2, C1.3.4, C1.3.6 and D1.2 of the Task Order 1 SOW? Are they required in any other sections of the SOW?

A70a. See answer to question #70.

Q70b. The number of conferences/meetings/trainings required, broken down by CLIN, as well as the duration of and number of participants at each?

A70b. See answer to question #70.

Q70c. Whether contractor will be responsible for providing refreshments, meals, materials, handouts, honoraria, etc. at these events?

A70c. See answer to question #70.

Q70d. Other expenses contractor will be required to incur in support of these events?

A70d. See answer to question #70.

Q71. The RFP contains DFARs Clause 252.223-9000 pertaining to the reporting of Contractor Acquired Radioactive Materials. Would the Government please specify the radioactive materials it expects Contractors to procure in performance of this contract? Likewise, would the Government please clarify whether the procurement of radioactive materials is an anticipated requirement during the course of Task Order 1 or whether this clause applies to future task orders only?

A71. Contractors may be exposed to radioactive materials, however the contractor will not be required to buy such materials. Therefore, the DFARS Clause 252.223-9000 will be deleted in the pending amendment to the solicitation.

Q72. Section L.1.3.7 Foldouts states that, “These displays shall be uncomplicated, legible, and shall not exceed 11 x 17 inches in size. Foldout pages shall fold entirely within the volume. Each printed side of a foldout will count as one page.” It is our interpretation that this means that each 11x17 foldout counts as one page, is this correct?

A72. The front page of a foldout will count as one page and if any additional information is printed on the back, that will count as an additional page.

Q73. Reference: L.1.2, Table L.1.2 Proposal Organization, Volume III, Factor 2 – Relevant Present and Past Performance. It appears that the information in column 2 and column 3 is misaligned for Volume III. Would the government please confirm page limits for Volume III are as follows:

Table of Contents – Unlimited

Description of Team including consent letters – Unlimited

Present and Past Performance Efforts/References – 2 pages per reference

Organizational Structure Change History – Unlimited A73. See answer to question #11.

Q78. Will the government consider marking the COMSEC account requirement on the DD254 in order to facilitate the offeror’s ability to satisfy the requirement in Section 8(b) of the IDIQ SOO that Contractors have SIPRNet Access to the DTRA Classified Network (SNET)?

A74. A COMSEC account is required and the DD254 will be updated upon contract award.

Q75. Reference IDIQ SOO Section 8.0. Would the Government please confirm that the NIPRNet and SIPRNet Access requirements apply only to the Prime Contractor’s primary offsite facility located within 30 miles of DTRA HQs?

A75. This mandatory requirement is only applicable to the Prime, however if the subcontractor requires access to the NIPRNet/SIPRNet in performance of their duties they must either have access in their facilities or have made arrangements with the Prime.

Q76. In reference to the CLINS identified in Section B (pages 2-6), in table L.6.2 (page 73), and in Attachment 2 (pages 1, 7, 8, 14), there appears to be some inconsistencies as shown in the table below. Can the Government please clarify the CLIN structure?

A76. The Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) structure in Section B is related to the Basic IDIQ contract as a whole. The CLIN structure identified in Table L.6.6.1 and Attachment 2 are both related to Task Order 1. All cost proposals shall be aligned with the Task Order 1 CLIN structure.

Q77. In reference to Section L.3.3.4 (page 57) it states “the labor category in the cost section contains the same information as above, but should include the pricing information.” In section L.6.4 it states, “all labor rates shall be rounded to the nearest penny”. Can the Government clarify if in addition to the CPFF pricing which does not identify the unit cost of a fully burdened labor hour by category, the Offeror is required to provide a separate table identifying the build up and providing a fully burdened labor rate by category by year? If so, is it correct to assume a fully burdened rate shall be provided by each first tiered Subcontractor supporting Task Order 1?

A77. Yes, all Offerors are required to identify the build up of the fully burdened labor rate by category and period of performance. Yes, the fully burdened rates shall be provided by each first tiered Subcontractor supporting Task Order 1. The Offeror is required to provide a full and complete Cost proposal detailing all cost elements which includes discrete labor categories, hours, rates, ODC, G&A, etc. etc. Further, the Prime must also ensure the proposed subcontracting costs are fair and reasonable. See paragraph L.1.3.9 of the solicitation for further details.

Q78. Given the holiday and shipping requirements for delivery, would the Government consider extending the due date for the proposal from 3 January 2011 to 5 January 2011?

A78. See answer to question #4.

Q79. Will the Government consider removing the incoming transition plan from the page count limits of Vol II?

A79. Yes. The Management Approach page limitation will be revised in the pending amendment to the solicitation. The Management Approach shall not exceed 35 pages, exclusive of the transition plan. Outside of the Management Approach page limitation, the transition plan shall not exceed 10 pages. These are two separate documents and the page limitations are not interchangeable.