RFP_DOC52PAPT1300015_Amendment_1.pdf

DOC52PAPT1300015

Amendment 0001

Attachment 1

# QUESTION ANSWER

1.

Page 80, Section L.6.1 (d) states that there are “five (5) required areas of experience”: “(1) Infrastructure, (2) Design, (3) Engineering, (4) Architecture, (5) Integration”. However, “integration” is not addressed in either Section 1.3, Technology and Infrastructure Descriptions or Section C.2, Scope of Work. Section C.2 addresses five main experience areas: Infrastructure (Section C.2.1), Design (Section C.2.2), Engineering (Section C.2.3), Network (Section C.2.4), and Architecture (Section C.2.5). Will USPTO amend the solicitation to add an “integration” section that includes “integration” requirements to Section C or will USPTO delete “(5) Integration” from Section L.6.1 (d)?

Integration services will not be deleted from this requirement. The successful contractor will have demonstrated its experience in performing infrastructure, design, engineering and architecture work in support of networks, and will have demonstrated its experience in integrating such work. See also the answer to question #5.

2. Page 80, Section L.6.1 (d) states that the five areas to be addressed are: “(1) Infrastructure, (2) Design, (3) Engineering, (4) Architecture, (5) Integration”. Section C.2, Scope of Work, also lists a requirement for “Network” (Section C.2.4). Please clarify whether or not experience in “Network” (Section C.2.4) is to be addressed in the proposal, and if so, where is it to be addressed and how is it to be evaluated?

The emphasis of this procurement is networking. Offerors are required to describe the networking services it performed within the five areas (infrastructure, design, engineering, architecture and integration).

3.

Page 8, Section C.1.2 (b) states that, “The requirement is to provide Network Engineering, Security Engineering, Public Key infrastructure (PKI), Unified Communications Engineering (Voice, Collaboration) and Video Engineering services.” However, on page 22, Section C.3.1 deals with the development and support of Agile software artifacts within USPTO’s SDLC. This seems to be outside of the scope of the requirement stated in Section C.1.2.

Is “System Development Life Cycle Enhancement” a requirement for this contract?

Yes.

4. Are any IDEAI contract tasks transitioning to the IDEAI-2 contract? If yes, will the Government be providing further details on the scope of these tasks, and will the Government require bidders to submit a transition plan with the proposal?

All active tasks under IDEAI will end upon expiration of the contract on February 28, 2014. New tasks will be awarded under IDEAI-2.

No, a transition plan is not required.

5. In section 2, beginning on page 19 of 89, the Government defined Infrastructure (C.2.1), Design (C.2.2), Engineering (C.2.3) and Architecture (C.2.5). Please provide a similar definition for integration to ensure we comply with requirements.

"Integration" shall refer to network infrastructure, design, engineering and architecture services, and services performed to integrate such work.

6.

F.4 (c) - Would the Government be willing to consider extending this requirement to a four

(4) hour window for an on-site visit or allow up to one (1) hour for a conference call?

No. It is expected that the Contractor will be able to comply with the meeting requirements with very little exception.

7. F.5 (b) - Can the government please be more specific or give examples of “Other technical products” which may be required to be provided by the Contractor?

This information is not available. Each task order requiring "other technical products" will specify what that specific product may be.

8. Page 79, Section L.6.2.2.1 (c), Experience Description, requires the submission of Attachment 15. However, there was no Attachment 14 or 15 included in the solicitation package. Please confirm that references to Attachment 14 refer to Attachment 12 and references to Attachment 15 refer to Attachment 13.

All references to "Attachment 15" included in L.6.2.2.1 Experience Description and L.6.2.2.2 Past Performance, shall refer instead to "Attachment 13, Experience Reference Worksheet".

9. Reference L.6.2.2.1(c), page 79 and L.6.2.2.2 (1), page 81 – Reference is made to an Attachment 15, Experience Worksheet. This attachment is not included in the RFP files.

Did the USPTO intend this to be Attachment 13? If not, request referenced attachment 15 be provided.

See answer to question #8.

10. L.6.2.2.2 Past Performance - the past contract references refers to Attachment 15. (Q) Should this be Attachment 13?

See answer to question #8.

Attachment 1

# QUESTION ANSWER

11. With respect to L.6.2.2.1(c), the RFP states bidders are to complete and return Attachment

15. However, attachment 15 is not located with the other attachments. Will the Government be providing Attachment 15? Also, can you provide instructions in L.6.1 that identify the location of Attachment 15 in the proposal?

See answer to question #8.

12. L.6.2.2.1 (c) -1st sentence references “Attachment 15”, however, Attachment 15 is not loaded on the FBO website. Can the government provide Attachment 15? Or is this a typo, meant to be Attachment 13 (Section L.6.2.2.2(a)(1), page 81 also references Attachment 15, calling it “Experience Worksheet”)

See answer to question #8.

13. On Page 79 of 89, Section 6.2.2.1 (c), the offeror is asked to fill out Attachment 15. There is no attachment 15 on the FBO website. Attachment 15 is also referenced on Page 81 of 89, Section 6.2.2.2 (a) (1). Please supply Attachment 15.

See answer to question #8.

14. L.6.2.2.1(c) Experience Description - The past contract references refers to Attachment 15.

(Q) Should this be Attachment 13?

See answer to question #8.

15. On Page 79, Section L.6.2.2.1.c, the RFP states “In addition to the Experience description, Offerors are required to submit pertinent information regarding their past contract references using Attachment 15. If a subcontractor(s) is used to demonstrate a prime contractor offeror’s experience, the subcontractor’s past contract reference information shall also be submitted using Attachment 15. Attachment 15 will not be counted against the 20 page limit for the Experience section.” The RFP only contains Attachments 1 – 13.

Is the above section referring to Attachment 13, or do Attachments 14 – 15 still need to be distributed

See answer to question #8.

16. On Page 82, Section L.6.2.3.c, the RFP states “Offerors shall complete a Past Performance Contract Termination Worksheet for each termination action identified.

Worksheets shall not exceed one page and attachments are not permitted. Both the Past Performance Contract Termination worksheet and instructions are included in Section J.3.

Attachment 12.” This information states that the responses provided on Attachment 12 cannot exceed one page per response; however, Attachment 12 is two pages. How should this requirement be addressed?

Attachment 12 consists of one page of instructions and one page for the worksheet. Due to possible formatting incompatibility, the worksheet may have appeared as 2 pages. The offeror does not need to submit the page of instructions with its proposal.

17. L.6.2.2.2 (a) - When is the completed D&B/Open Ratings due to the Government? Within seven (7) days after RFP closing date.

18.

L.6.2.2.2(e) and (a)(1) - There appears to be a discrepancy between L.6.2.2.2(a)(1) and L.6.2.2.2(e): (a)(1) states that if the Offeror is submitting subcontractor’s experience, the subcontractor must also submit its references to D&B/Open Ratings, however, (e) states that “References are specific to the Offeror.”. Please clarify if we are able to submit subcontractors references to D&B/Open Ratings.

There are no discrepancies between these two provisions since L.6.2.2.2(a)(1) refers to an Offeror and its subcontractors. As specified in RFP L.6.2.2.2(e), all references pertaining to experience must directly pertain to the experience of the Offeror (or its subcontractor). No company shall claim the experience of parent corporations, subsidiaries or affiliates unless that parent corporation, subsidiary or affiliate is offered as a subcontractor. In such case, the parent corporation, subsidiary or affiliate will be evaluated strictly as a subcontractor. If an Offeror uses the experience of a proposed subcontractor, then the subcontractor must submit its references to D&B/Open Ratings.

Attachment 1

# QUESTION ANSWER

19. L.6.2.2.2 (2) - Due to the Government shutdown, many of our customers have been furloughed, and therefore may not be available to provide a response to the D&B/Open Ratings Performance Evaluation. Would USPTO allow a 2 week extension to the due date for this solicitation in order to allow for many government workers to return to work and have the ability to respond once they’ve had a chance to catch up on their mission critical duties?

Extensions, if any, will be specified by amendment to this solicitation.

20.

L.6.2.2.2 Past Performance - Question: Does the Government want only one D&B Open Ratings report completed and submitted by the Offeror (or Prime contractor) that includes any subcontractor past performance references, or would each team member that is submitting past performances request a D&B Open Ratings report as well?

If an Offeror is relying on the experience of its subcontractor to supplement its team, the subcontractor must also complete the Experience Worksheet (Attachment 13) and request an Open Ratings report. The Government expects to receive one Open Ratings report for the prime contractor and one Open Ratings report for each applicable proposed subcontractor.

21. Reference L.6.2.2, Past Performance, page 80. Please indicate whether D&B will: a) request information from customer references about the bidder's performance with respect to items such as cost, schedule, and quality of work, or b) will they ask questions regarding the size, scope, and complexity of the referenced contracts as these relate to the IDEAI-2 requirements.

The USPTO does not have access to the questions D&B asks when performing past performance evaluations.

22. With respect to L.6.2.2.2(e), we would like to include our affiliate, a separate legal entity, as a subcontractor on this opportunity. As a subcontractor, will the affiliate’s past performance be evaluated?

Yes, if the offeror is including its subcontractor’s experience to demonstrate expertise and experience in the five required areas of IDEA-I. See also, the answer to #18.

23. L.6.2.2.1 (e) - Our business model is primarily focused on the 5 areas of experience that are required for this contract. However, most of our past performances conducting this exact type of work have not always reached the $1,000,000 professional services contract value. Would the government consider allowing a fully qualified contractor with 5 (or 3 as the Prime and 2 from a subcontractor) past performances that are valued at less than $1,000,000, if that contractor exemplifies the necessary experience to be 100% successful on this contract?

As specified in the RFP, references must be for past contracts valued at $1,000,000 or more (each) and performed within the past 3 years.

All elements specified will be evaluated, and any deficiencies will be noted.

24. L.6.2.2.1 (f) - Can the past experience in managing multiple task orders be the same as one of the Past Performances?

Yes.

25.

Reference section L.6.2.2.1 (f) and (g) Experience Description - Would USPTO consider allowing experience as a subcontractor on a large government IDIQ, where we were completely responsible for performance on a task order under which we completed more than $180,000,000 in Task Awards (TA’s) within the past 3 years and directly managed a significant number of subcontractors, as a substitute for experience as a prime contractor?

As specified in the RFP, references must be for past contracts valued at $1,000,000 or more (each) and performed within the past 3 years.

In addition, experience as a prime contractor is a requirement. All elements specified in the RFP will be evaluated, and any deficiencies will be noted.

26. L.6.2.2.1 (g) - Once again, our business model is primarily focused on the 5 areas of experience that are required for this contract. Therefore, the majority of the service engagements we’ve performed do not require the need for subcontractors, especially near the value of $500,000. Would the government consider removing the dollar value or significantly reducing the value? Or would USPTO consider requesting that the offeror “demonstrate experience as a prime contractor in managing subcontracts and provide the highest $ value”?

The current requirements remain unchanged.

Attachment 1

# QUESTION ANSWER

27. L.6.2.2.1(e) - Will the Government consider the combination of services and hardware to meet the $1,000,000.00 past performance threshold?

No.

28. L.6.2.2.1 (e) - Does each contract reference of $1,000,000 or more have to be from a single award, or can it come from multiple awards from the same customer?

As specified in the RFP, references must be for past contracts valued at $1,000,000 or more (each).

29.

On page 79 of 89, section L.6.2.2.1 (b), the Government clearly states that the contractor must demonstrate expertise and direct experience in all 5 (or all 3 with subcontractors) areas of experience (Infrastructure, Design, Engineering, Architecture and Integration). It is not clear if each of the references must have experience in all of the 5 areas or if in total, the offerors experiences must cover all 5 areas. That is one contract could have Infrastructure and Design, but not Engineering, Architecture and Integration, but the other references cover those areas.

As provided in §L.6.2.2.1(b), “the Prime Contractor shall have direct experience in all five required areas in at least three (3) of the five (5) past contract references.” For the remaining two contract references, a subcontractor’s experience may be used to demonstrate experience in any of the 5 required areas and a subcontractor’s experience does not have to be in all 5 required areas. Although a subcontractor’s experience does not have to cover all 5 required areas, as your question suggests, if an offeror provides 3 required contract references for itself, each covering all 5 required areas, then the remaining 2 contract references from proposed subcontractors can cover any of the 5 areas so long as all areas are covered between the two subcontractor contract references. See the example provided in §l.6.2.2.1(b)

30.

B.5.3(b); L.6.3(c) - RFP uses 2,000 hours as an example in B.5.3 (b), and 1,920 hours as an example in L.6.3(c) – Can the Government confirm the hours that should be used if the Offeror does not have a CAS Disclosure statement?

Those hours were specified as examples only. The USPTO does not specify the number of hours a company shall use in setting up its cost accounting system, nor does the USPTO determine how many hours an Offeror uses for its man-year calculations.

31.

B.6 (b) - Are we required to bid on each task order statement of work issued by the Government?

Yes, as the USPTO may elect to award only one contract under this RFP, the awardee is required to bid on each task order statement of work.

32.

D.3 (a) - When the Government mentions one (1) delivery per day, can you please clarify if that is “as needed”?

One delivery per day to the USPTO is "as needed". Trips to only check for outgoing correspondence to the contractor will not be required; only trips to deliver. Most correspondence will be conducted using email.

33. Reference L.6.2.1, (d)(2), page 79. In order to provide greater clarity of content, and improve readability of the proposal, request that font restrictions be revised to read 12 point for standard text, 10 point for tables, and 8 point for graphics/illustrations.

No, there are no changes to this requirement.

34. Reference section F.3 Place of Performance – The RFP indicates that the Contractors facility must be “in close proximity” to USPTO. Would you please define what is meant by close proximity?

Contractors must be able to support meeting requirements specified in F.4(c).

35. What are the conditions in which the optional quantities identified in CLIN 2 a, b and c will be exercised?

These CLINS will only be used if the USPTO determines that additional hours are needed during that specific contract term.

36. Can you please provide the expected funding level of this effort? This information will help in developing our teaming strategy efforts.

That information is not currently available.

37. On Page 60, Section K.1, the RFP states that “The full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es): http://www.arnet.gov/.” This website is currently inaccessible. Is this information incorrect? If so, can you provide the appropriate URL? If this is the appropriate URL and the website is inaccessible, can you provide the appropriate documents?

http://www.acquisition.gov/

Attachment 1

# QUESTION ANSWER

38. On Page 69, Section L.1, the RFP states that “The full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address(es): http://www.arnet.gov/.” This website is currently inaccessible. Is this information incorrect? If so, can you provide the appropriate URL? If this is the appropriate URL and the website is inaccessible, can you provide the appropriate documents?

See answer to question #37.

39. How many contracts do you anticipate awarding for DOC52PAPT1300015? One or more.

40. Attachment 11 - The Pricing Template Attachment 11 does not have columns or worksheets for Option Years 1-4. (Q) Are contractors to edit Attachment 11 to account for the option years’ labor rates?

Yes. Pricing for all years are required using Attachment 11.

41. Reference Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices/Costs, pp 2-4. Since 2016 is a leap year, please consider changing the End Date of Option Period 1 for all CLINS under the contract to February 29, 2016.

Noted. Any such changes will be negotiated prior to contract award.

42. Reference Section L.6.1, Note 2, page 78. “One (1) CD/DVD electronic copy of the Offeror's price proposal is required in a format compatible with (or translatable by) Microsoft Office Excel 2010”. Please clarify that this statement refers only to Attachment 11, Labor Categories and Rates, and that other parts of the Price Proposal (for, example, the Small Business Subcontracting Plan), can be submitted in Microsoft Word 2010, as appropriate.

That is correct.