Amdt_1_signed.pdf

DTFH61-13-R-00007

Amendment 1

REVISE the text of the RFP Sections cited below as follows. Deleted text is shown in strikethrough. Added text is underlined. If a Section or paragraph is not listed below, no text changes apply as a result of this Amendment 1.

SECTION J - LIST OF APPENDICES

9. Summary List of Questions and Answers - 6 pages

SECTION L - INSTRUCTIONS, CONDITIONS, AND NOTICES TO

OFFERORS

L.12 PROPOSAL FORMAT

3. Text shall be printed using a font size no less than 12 point. Figures, tables and associated captions may have a font size smaller than 12 point, i.e. 8 point or 10 point font.

L.15 VOLUME II - BUSINESS AND COST/PRICE PROPOSAL

PART III – Other Financial / Organizational Information

12. Provide your approach for completing the security plan and accreditation requirements in TAR clause 1252.239-70. See Section H, Paragraph H.3.

L.18 TAR 1252.239-71 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY SECURITY PLAN

AND ACCREDITATION (APR 2005)

All offers submitted in response to this solicitation must address the approach for completing the security plan and accreditation requirements in TAR clause 1252.239-70.

END OF AMENDMENT 1

http://www.dot.gov/ost/m60/tamtar/part1252.htm#1252.239-70

RFP No. DTFH61-13-R-00007 Attachment 9

Summary of Questions & Answers 5/21/2013

RFP Attachment 9 “Summary List of Questions and Answers”

Purpose: The purpose of this document is to summarize Questions & Answers regarding RFP DTFH61-13-R-00007 which were discussed during the Pre-proposal Conference and Site Visit held at Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center (TFHRC) on 5/16/2013 and/or questions received by FHWA outside of the conference.

Questions may have been paraphrased for clarity. FAR 52.215-8 Order of Precedence – Uniform Contract Format (OCT 1997) applies.

1. How does FHWA select research projects to be performed in the Human Factors Laboratory?

a. Generally, FHWA uses the Safety Strategic Plan (http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov;

Publication Number FHWA-SA-12-023) as a guide for selection of research topics. Also, partners (other FHWA offices, State DOTs, etc.) request and provide funding for the conduct of their selected research projects in the FHWA Human Factors Laboratory.

2. Are research projects (repeated) annually or cyclically?

a. It varies. FHWA uses the Strategic Plan to guide the selection of research projects and frequency of research projects.

3. How much of the research do you do onsite at the Human Factors Laboratory vs. offsite at a university or under separately awarded contracts?

a. It varies. This RFP is intended to support predominantly the onsite research but has the flexibility for offsite research projects as well.

4. Is FHWA currently performing any grade crossing research in the Human Factors

a. Not currently.

5. Does FHWA currently participate in Human Factors related working groups with other countries?

a. FHWA participates in various working groups. Currently, we do not have any formal collaboration with human factors groups outside of the U.S.

6. Can you share more information on the existing operating manuals and user guides relative to the Human Factors Laboratory operations and equipment?

a. The following table lists the documents and page counts. During the first month of the award (Transition Month), the Contractor will receive these documents and training from FHWA. However, FHWA has determined that release of the following documents is not necessary for bidding purposes relative to this RFP.

Document # of pages Acuity Scoring 7 Developed for FHWA NAS Turbo user’s manual (server backup system For mass data storage)

535 Commercial

IP Network Camera (ViewCommander) Manual 44 Commercial Field Research Vehicle (FRV) documentation 1228 Developed for FHWA MAPPS (video tutorials) (eye tracking data coding) Commercial MiniSim User’s Guide 92 Commercial ISAT User’s Guide (MiniSim scenario build) 166 Commercial Tile Mosaic Tool User’s Guide (MiniSim world build) 23 Commercial MediaLab Manual 111 Commercial DirectRT Manual 96 Commercial SignCAM Manual 35 Commercial SignSim Instructions 2 Developed for FHWA Research Assistant procedure manual 120 Developed for FHWA

7. Is the FHWA’s soil lab (onsite at TFHRC) included under this RFP?

a. No.

8. What will be the notification process for the CLINs 1 – 5 relative to the 3-month option periods?

a. See RFP Paragraph I.7 for required notification and option exercising timeframes.

9. Does FHWA anticipate that most Task Orders will be CPFF?

a. FHWA will evaluate each Task Order and determine the appropriate award type pursuant to FAR Part 16.

10. Is this planned contract a “performance-based” contract type?

a. No, the planned contract award does not have quantitative measures relative to performance.

11. Is FHWA currently conducting weather related research in the Human Factors Lab?

a. No, not currently.

12. Is FHWA currently researching accident scenarios and human factors responses?

a. No, not currently.

13. For typical research projects onsite at FHWA, how many participants are brought in?

a. It varies by project, study goal, and experimental design. Number of subjects could range from 20+ to more than 100.

14. Regarding the Field Research Vehicle, is there a short calibration time?

a. Yes.

15. Regarding the Field Research Vehicle, is there a magnetic head tracker?

16. Does FHWA currently publish with and/or work with automobile manufacturers in this Human Factors Laboratory?

a. Currently, there are no known published reports resulting from research conducted in partnership with automobile manufacturers. However, FHWA does distribute research results widely and communicate regularly with automobile manufacturers through various forums regarding research projects.

17. Is behavioral coding performed on the scientific computers in the Human Factors

18. Is there auditory feedback in the MiniSim TM Driving Simulator in the Human Factors

19. Is there auditory feedback in the Highway Driving Simulator in the Human Factors

20. Is the software on the MiniSim TM Driving Simulator in the Human Factors Laboratory open source or limited? What metrics are included?

a. The software in the MiniSim TM Driving Simulator was developed by the University of Iowa and therefore is limited. As needed, FHWA coordinates with the University of Iowa regarding the software and specific research project needs relative to the software.

21. Can the Past Performance Questionnaires relate to current ongoing work?

22. Can the proposal Volume I Part III “prior experience” and “past projects” describe experience and projects that are ongoing and not yet competed?

23. RFP Paragraph L.15 Part III Subitem 12 & RFP Paragraph L.18: Clarify the solicitation requirement to be addressed, as Paragraph H.3 appears to be in conflict with Paragraphs L.15 Part III Subitem 12 and Paragraph L.18 and associated TAR references? Would the Government please clarify if the security requirements in this CFR/TAR are to be in place prior to or after award?

a. The paragraphs L.15 and L.18 erroneously referenced a TAR clause that was not included in the RFP. See Amendment 1 for the deletion of text in L.15 and L.18.

The requirements of H.4 apply upon contract effective date. NOTE: The Human

Factors Laboratory is a stand-alone system that is not connected to the USDOT network and is not part of FHWA’s Common Operating Environment or FHWA server environments. Accordingly, the full text of TAR clause 1252.239-70 has not been included in the RFP. Amendment 1 corrects references to the clause since it’s not included in the RFP.

24. Does the Transportation Engineer need to be a Licensed Engineer in the State Of Virginia or any other state to perform work for the TFHRC or under this solicitation?

25. The www.FedBizOpps.gov synopsis cited a response/due date of May 30th 4PM ET.

However, RFP Form 33 block 9 and Attach 6 Form 17 both show a due date of June 4 2013 (6/4/13) 1PM ET. Please clarify the response due date/time as the FBO posting and solicitation documents appear to be in conflict?

a. The proposal due date appears on the RFP Page 1 Block 9. Due date is 6/4/2013 at 1 pm Eastern time. The synopsis notice provided an estimated date and stated, “See solicitation when released for actual proposal due date.”

26. RFP Paragraph L.1 regards submittal of proposals and the USDOT screening process/delivery lag time. We understand that the Government permits uniformed carrier delivery (FedEx/UPS) as well as US Postal Service. We understand that the US Postal Service mail is sent out of town for scanning and irradiation prior to delivery, which ‘can add several days to (your) mailing time’. We understand that FedEx/UPS delivery delays may take “a day or more”.

Q) Would the Government please clarify anticipated delays (in business days) using uniformed carrier delivery (FedEx/UPS) to ensure timely delivery, as ‘a day or more’ appears to be vague?

Q) Would the Government please clarify anticipated delays (in business days) using US Postal Service to ensure timely delivery, as ‘several days’ appears to be vague?

a. FHWA is unable to give exact timeframes resulting from security screening. See L.1 for details on delivery to the USDOT building in Washington, DC. Offerors are responsible for timely delivery pursuant to the RFP.

27. RFP Paragraph L.10 states the Offeror should indicate under Volume I of the proposal the name(s) and title(s) of the person(s) who actually wrote the proposal and his/her relationship to the offering company. Please clarify if the required names and titles of persons writing the proposal and associated relationships to the offering company are excluded from the 60 page technical limit?

a. No, that information has not been excluded from page limits. See paragraph L.13 for items excluded from the page limit for Volume I.

28. RFP L.12. Item 3 regards font size limitations (12 point font): Would the Government please consider changing the font size requirements for Figures, Tables and associated captions to a font size smaller than 12 point, i.e. 8 point or 10 point font?

a. Yes, see Amendment 1.

http://www.dot.gov/ost/m60/tamtar/part1252.htm#1252.239-70 http://www.fedbizopps.gov/

29. RFP M.2. If the Past Performance Questionnaires are not returned by the client will that result in a neutral rating during evaluation?

a. Per M.2, “The lack of a performance record may result in an unknown performance risk assessment, which will neither be used to the advantage or disadvantage of the Offeror…. Offerors who lack any relevant past performance information will be given a neutral rating under this Factor.”

30. RFP Paragraph L.15: Part III Item 10 requires submittal of a completed Standard Form

LLL. There does not appear to be a box to indicate if a contractor has not engaged in lobbying activities.

Q) If the contractor has not engaged in Lobbying Activities, would the SF LLL need to be submitted with the proposal response, or would a statement that the contractor has not engaged in Lobbying Activities be sufficient?

Q) If the SF LLL is required with the proposal response, would the Government please advise where non-engagement of lobbying activities would be indicated on this form?

a. Offerors may indicate “none” or “n/a” directly on the form as applicable.

31. RFP Paragraph L.14, Part II requires, “Copies of signed letters of intent to participate in this work from proposed partners.” Does a Teaming Agreement meet this requirement?

a. If the Teaming Agreement is a signed document showing the proposed partner’s intent to participate, then it will suffice.

32. RFP Paragraph L.14, Part III states, “Describe past projects, relevant to work described in the solicitation…” Further, RFP Paragraph L.15, Part IV requires inclusion of “a minimum of three Past Performance Questionnaires….” How do these past projects/performances relate to each other? Are they intended to be the same project(s)?

a. They can be the same projects but are not required to be.

33. RFP Paragraph L.15, Part II – Cost/Price Information: Subcontracting/Consultants:

a) What are the requirements for supporting information for a subcontractor on the Price

Proposal?

a. Answer: As stated in the RFP, provide hourly rates, hours proposed, indirect rates and fee/profit rates as applicable; or loaded rates only as applicable.

b) Do the proposed subcontractors have to submit a sealed package to the government including the proprietary information?

a. Answer: There is no requirement for subcontractors to submit sealed packages of cost information the Government. However, if a subcontractor wishes to do so, that is acceptable and standard practice.

c) If a subcontractor is on a Cost Reimburable CLIN does the subcontract have to be a cost reimbursable one to them?

a. Answer: The subcontract type shall be mutually agreed upon between the prime and the subcontractor.

34. The Level Of Effort described in the solicitation, is this the current Level Of Effort being delivered by SAIC against the current contract?

a. Offerors shall use the level of effort information provided in the RFP as directed by the RFP. Estimated technical needs are similar to past needs.

35. For this effort, can a subcontractor self-certify under a different NAICS code if the preponderance of work they specifically are doing relates to that NAICS code?

SECTION J - LIST OF APPENDICES