Attachment_L.7_(Amendment_3).pdf

Attachment L.7

DTFT60‐13‐R‐00001

Triennial Review Program

Vendor Question Government Response 1 Is it possible to receive an extension of the submission date due to the upcoming Thanksgiving holiday?

An extension has been granted.

2 Is the Prime Contractor required to fulfill all 3 of the Key positions listed within the RFP, or will allowing subconsultants to fulfill one of those positions while still maintaining the required 51% of work by the Prime Contractor be acceptable to the FTA?

No. Subcontractor fulfillment of one of these positions is acceptable as long as the requirements for 51% of work by the prime is met.

3 We understand the Federal Transit Administration’s requirements preclude the FTA from responding to Past Performance Questionnaires. Is this requirement applicable to this submission?

No. Your understanding of this is entirely incorrect.

4 What is the correlation between the rates per labor category asked for in Attachment J‐4 and the prices requested in Attachment L3?

Labor rates bid in J‐4 will establish Labor Hour Rates for FFLH Clins and subsequent task awards; whereas L.3 is for price evaluation purposes and may be used to establish maximum NTE contract ceiling. L.3 should be bid with these rates in consideration.

5 If we propose an escalation on schedule J4, should the price in L.3 reflect the first year’s cost or the maximum cost over the 5 years?

L.3 assumes Contract Year One pricing.

6 C.5.7 Workshops (Page 22) – There is no mention of workshop logistics, such as registration of attendees, arranging for facilities, audio visuals, refreshments, etc. Will these costs be covered under CLIN 14 (ODC – Travel)

As needed, workshop logistics will be covered under C.5.9 Oversight Program Support and Special Assignments at the task order level.

Funding for cost may be from ODC's.

7 C.5.7 Workshops (Page 22) – The work statement mentions webinars, should the costs be the same for workshops as for webinars?

No. It is anticipated that webinar costs will be less than those for workshops due to lack of need for travel.

Triennial Review Program

8 C.5.7 Workshops (Page 22) ‐Under the Guide and Workshop Materials section it says Contractor shall deliver all final versions of the Guide(s) in MS Word format and in HTML format suitable for posting to FTA’s intranet and internet websites . Please explain what is meant by “HTML format suitable for posting to FTA’s intranet and internet websites”?

A file ending with a .htm extension meets the HTML requirement.

9 C.5.8 ‐ Monthly Program Reports (p. 23)…are these the same as the Contractor’s monthly progress reports, mentioned at the top of page 25 and in Section H.15 (p.45) monthly accounting status report. Or are monthly progress reports not separately priced.

One monthly progress report is required from each contractor and billing is for one report per month. This report must include monthly accounting status.

10 L.3.1 General (page 71) – states that files must be unlocked/unprotected, does this mean the offerer cannot/ should not send the technical and past performance volumes in Adobe pdf? We understand that you wish to see the formulas in Excel for the cost volume.

Adobe pdf format is acceptable for Technical and Past Performance.

Files should not have password protection.

11 L.4.1 on p.72. The table says only one electronic copy of Volume III is required. L.4.3 on p.73 suggests that there may be more electronic versions of Volume III required. Please advise.

One copy is required.

12 L.5 Submission Address (page 73)…states submissions can be hand‐ carried to Mr. Butner, will a receipt be provided, and are there specific times for hand carried submissions?

Email receipts will be provided to all submitting vendors. Mr.

Butner or Mr. Barry will be available from 9AM to 4PM on the day of submission.

13 L.7.3 Volume III Business /Cost Proposal (page 84) Under Other Business Factors offerers are to submit: Audited annual reports to stockholders for the last 3 fiscal years . Our firm does not have audited annual reports. We do prepare annual financial statements that have been submitted with other proposals including GSA proposals. Will these be acceptable?

Yes.

14 L.7.3 Volume III Business /Cost Proposal ( page 86)Should we include a screen shot of Annual Reps and certs from ORCA ?

Yes.

Triennial Review Program

15 Reference: RFP Section L, “L.5 Submission Address”, in page 73 of 94.

Question 1‐1: We plan to submit the proposal by hand‐carry on December 4 Tuesday. Should we make an appointment with Mr.

Matthew Butner in advance, to facilitate our submission?

Vendors may call ahead, however appointments are not necessary.

See response to number 12 above.

16 Question 1‐2: It looks as if the last paragraph in page 73 of 94 was cut‐ off by mistake. Please confirm and provide full instructions.

See Amendment #3.

17 Reference: RFP Section L, “L.7.2 Volume II – Past Performance Instructions”, “3. Subcontracts” in page 82 of 94. Due to the nature of this section, we think this section has little to do with Past Performance, but more like a part of Program Management or Corporate Capability. Please confirm. We suggest moving this section to Vol I Technical Proposal, under an appropriate evaluation factor.

The government agrees. Subcontracts should be addressed in Volume 1.

18 Reference: RFP Attachment_J‐7_COI_Matrix Could the FTA provide a detailed instruction on how to fill‐in the COI Matrix? There are two blank columns (‘Conflict” and “Interest”) in the matrix. Which column should we fill‐in? What symbol/mark should we use to illustrate that no COI exists? Also, does FTA intend that we submit this Attachment as a separate stand‐alone item since it is not clear that it be included into any of the three volumes? If it is required that we submit in volume I or II, will this count toward each page limitation?

This document will not be counted in the final page count. Please only mark conflicts with an "X" in the "Conflict" column, and give a very brief description of the conflict in the "Interest" column.

19 Reference: RFP Attachment_J‐7_COI_Matrix: Per nature of this section, we suggest to include the completed attachment J‐7 COI matrix in Vol III, Business/Cost Proposal, instead of Vol II Past Performance. If the Government requires the Attachment J‐7 to be filled‐out and included in Vol II, then will this attachment be counted towards the page limitation (10 pages) for this volume?

This may be included in Volume III. Amendment 3 changes it to an L attachment; meaning the COI will not be incorporated into the final contract.

Triennial Review Program

20 Reference: RFP Section L, ‘L.14 Other Requirements”, in page 85‐86. In which volume should “1252.237‐71 Certification of Data” be included?

We think it should be included in Vol III Business/Cost Proposal. Please confirm.

This may be included in Volume III.

21 In RFP Section L.7.3 Vol III Business/Price/Cost Proposal Instructions (Page 83 of 94), the name of this file is “Representative Task Quote (RTQ)”. Whereas the file name of Attachment L.3 and its content use the term “Representative Task Order”. We suggest changing either one for a uniform term.

Representative task quote. It is intended for evaluation purposes only.

22 The RFP Section L.7.3 Vol III Business/Price/Cost Proposal Instructions, (Page 83 of 94), in the third paragraph under this section, it is said “This RTQ is for the purposes of price evaluation and contract Maximum ceiling in any subsequent award.” Please clarify – will the Maximum Ceiling be a maximum value of all the separate Task Orders or a maximum value of the overall IDIQ contract for 5 years period, or a maximum value of the IDIQ contract in a specific year? This question is related to Question 5‐4 and 5‐5.

The RTQ is a representative task quote for Project Year 1 only.

23 As the RTQ is for a specific year, the Maximum ceiling established by it should be a ceiling value for a single year, instead of the overall contract ceiling. Does the Government realize that when calculating overall contract ceiling value, the escalation factor must be considered?

The government is aware. The RTQ is for one year only. Maximum allowable escalation rates are addressed in the RFP.

24 In attachment L.3, it is stated that “The estimated LOE Total is the TOTAL LOE required for the contract year.” Considering that this is a 5 years contract, which year’s price should we propose? It can be expected that offerors may propose different escalation rates for personnel rates during the 5 year period. In order to ensure an “apple to apple” comparison of offerors’ cost proposals including the escalation factor, would the FTA consider defining the RTQ as the fifth year’s Task Order quote?

The RTQ is a representative task order for contract year 1 only.

Triennial Review Program

25 Does the FTA require a cost breakdown of the RTQ? (exp., the detailed labor hours/rates breakdown for each of the CLIN to show how the price were built up) Please note that most of the CLINs would require more than one labor category to implement, therefore the mix of labor categories and the labor hour assignment must be considered in pricing each of the CLINs, which at the same time demonstrates the offeror’s personnel approach to implement the tasks.

Yes, a cost breakdown is required.

26 The RTQ does not specify the review area in Enhanced Review Modules (CLIN 6 – 8). However, per nature of Enhanced Review Modules, it may be involved with different labor categories (e.g., SME in Finance, SME in ADA, or SME in Procurement, etc.). As all the Labor Categories will have different labor rates, how does the FTA expect the offeror to fill‐in the price? Considering that one of the RTQ’s purposes is to establish the maximum ceiling of the contract, should the offerors use the highest labor rates (among SME labor categories) to price CLIN 6‐8?

Please clarify.

See revised Attachment L.3, Amendment 3. Specific modules have been given for evaluation purposes only.

27 Question 5‐8: The attachment L.3 RTQ is not consistent with RFP Section B.5 (Page 7‐8). There is CLIN 14A (Travel) in Attached L.3 RTQ, whereas “Travel” is combined with CLIN 14 in RFP Section B.5. We think the Attachment L.3 takes precedence. Please confirm.

See revised Attachment L.3, Amendment 3.

Triennial Review Program

28 6. Reference: RFP Attachment_J‐4_Pricing_Matrix, Attachment_L.3_ Representative Task Order. In the last paragraph of RFP Section L.4.3 Format, Page 73 of 94, it is stated that “One of the Volume III BUSINESS/COST Proposal disks shall be in read‐or‐write format with spreadsheets unlinked to any other spreadsheets or other files. The other copy may contain links, but only to documents and spreadsheets that have been submitted as part of the proposal.” In our understanding, the link might be between the completed J‐4 and L.3, as the labor rates in J‐4 will be needed when developing L.3. Is this correct? However, the FTA didn’t provide a spreadsheet for offerors to fill. The two provided cost‐related attachments are Microsoft WORD files, not EXCEL spreadsheet. Would the FTA provide an EXCEL version of the two attachments?

Tables in Microsoft word can be easily transcribed to Microsoft Excel for the purposes of evaluation.

29 In addition, in RFP Section L.7.3 Vol III Business/Price/Cost Proposal Instructions, the first paragraph in Page 8 of 94, Offerors are instructed to provide detailed build‐up for labor rate and burden rate. Would the FTA provide a template for Offerors to fill‐in? Or, should the Offerors provide this information in a format of the offerors’ discretion?

Offerors should provide a standard commercial rate buildup, including G&A, Overhead, Profit, Wrap Rate, etc. which will add up to the Firm Fixed Labor Rate.

30 Per above wording, it looks the FTA expects two electronic copies for Vol III. However, in the matrix on RFP Page 72, only one electronic copy is required for each proposal volume. Please clarify how many copies we should submit.

One copy is required.

Triennial Review Program

31 The DBE area of the TR asks the Contractor to verify that the grantee has uploaded its DBE uniform reports in TEAM electronically.

Contractors currently do not have access to that part/option in TEAM.

Contractors have had to constantly ask the RCRO to verify this fact and require response time from RCRO. Therefore, is FTA going to make the verification process in TEAM for the DBE uniform reports open so Contractors can finally see them? Else, we have to rely on the grantee to provide hard copies of the DBE uniform reports – which do not prove they have been uploaded into TEAM correctly.

Yes. FTA is working to secure direct contractor access to these reports in TEAM.

32 The procurement question number 2 on page 6 of the draft TR Workbook – Currently during the site visit to the grantee is when the Reviewer requests the procurement files to review on‐site. Later in the TR Workbook and RFP under "Enhanced Review Triggers", question number 7 on page 13 ‐ it asks if the grantee missed any federal clauses, etc., in any of the procurements. Reviewer is provided a list of procurements from grantee prior to site visit, but will not be able to determine if missed any federal clauses and either items until can view the procurement records which mainly are hard‐copy submissions from proposers to the grantee when on‐site. Will FTA now be requesting that grantees provide every single procurement file and history electronically during the Enhanced Review Trigger/Pre‐review Assessment stage? If not, then please explain how the Reviewer will be able to answer this question at this stage in the review process.

No, the grantee will not be requested to provide every procurement file and history electronically during the Enhanced Review Trigger/Pre‐review Assessment stage. Attachment J‐5 is a draft document, which will undergo edits prior to implementation.

The contractor will be expected to answer this question as fully as possible with the documents available absent access to full review while on‐site.

Triennial Review Program

33 Attachment J‐4 Labor Category and Price Matrix ‐ states: “When submitting a quotation or proposal for a task order under this contract, the Contractor must propose a fully burdened hourly labor rate that does not exceed the ceiling labor rate listed below for the corresponding labor category. The FTA may request that, and the Contractor may offer the FTA discounted labor rates from the rates listed below. However, the rates listed below may not be exceeded.

When preparing a quotation or proposal for a task order under this contract, the Contractor shall apply a rate not exceeding the ceiling fully burdened hourly labor rates associated with the period of the IDIQ contract during which the work will be performed.” How will FTA evaluate each quotation or proposal for a task order from each Contractor? If a level playing field or comparison is going to be performed, then shouldn’t the “discounted labor rates” be based on the actual loaded hourly rate of the individual(s) proposed in the proposal or task order quote? There is a risk that an hourly rate will be stated and then FTA will request a specific member of the Contractor’s Team and if that individual’s actual loaded rate is above the listed rate that the Contractor will be negatively impacted.

J‐4 Labor rates will establish a ceiling for each Labor Category.

These ceiling rates will be evaluated against other vendors.

Discounts may be sought on future task orders. Vendors are advised to propose realistic rates for the required staff experience needed to accomplish the work described in the SOW.

34 RFP Section L.4.1 Organization of Volumes, in Page 72 of 94, requires an Executive Summary to be included in proposal. However, there is no detailed instruction for this portion. What should be included in the Executive Summary?

The Executive Summary is limited to 2 pages and is in addition to Volumes I, I and III.

35 Reference: RFP Section L.4. Proposal Volume Requirements, in Page 72 of 94, states that “The first or title page shall be in accordance with FAR 52.215‐1, paragraph (c) (2).” Does this requirement apply only to the first page of the Cover Letter, or only to the title page of each volume of the proposal, or to both? Please clarify.

This requirement only applies to the first page of the vendors proposal.

Triennial Review Program

36 What does the FTA expect for the format of hardcopy submission? We plan to use binders for hardcopies submission. One binder will include Cover Letter, Executive Summary, Vol I and Vol II. The other binder will include only Vol III. As four (4) hardcopies are required for each volume, there will be a total of eight (8) binders for hardcopies submission. Is this acceptable? Please confirm.

Vendors should consider the environment, bulk and size of their proposals, however as long as proposals are within the page number restrictions described in the RFP, the government does not have a preference.

37 Section L.7.3 Volume III Business/Price/Cost Proposal Instructions.

Paragraph a. Financial Condition and Capability, subparagraph 1(b) requires “Audited annual reports to stockholders for the last 3 fiscal years.” We don’t have an audited annual report and for the last 2.75 years we only one shareholder. Should we just respond that this is not applicable? Should we submit unaudited financial statements or redacted tax returns to support financial capability?

Offerers are to submit what they have available with any explanation. Please note that the FTA does not want tax returns to support financial capacity.

Triennial Review Program

38 Section L.7.2 Volume II Past Performance Instructions. RFP states:

Offerors shall submit a list of all Government and Commercial contracts (prime and major subcontracts) in performance during the past 3 years, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Data concerning the prime offeror shall be first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in chronological order. In Paragraph 2, this Section further states: Offerors shall provide a specific narrative explanation of each contract listed. Later Paragraph 5 states: The offeror shall provide the Past Performance Questionnaire for each of the representative three (3) contracts cited. Does the offeror decide from the list created in Paragraph 1 and described in Paragraph 2 which 3 contracts should be contacted to provide the past performance questionnaire. The reference to 3 contracts “cited” is confusing as there was nowhere above that where 3 contracts were cited…3 YEARS of contract were requested, not 3 contracts. OR do you want past performance questionnaires from all contracts cited over the past 3 years?

Only 3 past contracts should be cited.

39 Part II – Contract Clauses, Section I: Clauses and Clauses Incorporated in Full Text. 1252.239‐70 Security Requirements for Unclassified Information Technology Resources. Because this SOW does not require the Contractor/Offeror to be “connected to a DOT network” and we are not developing or using a system “operated by the Contractor for DOT” or even accessing sensitive DOT information, QUESTION: Is this contract and the contractor’s IT system security subject to this clause?

If so, can you be specific in your expectations of IT Security for the information gathered and reported on under the Triennial Reviews?

This clause is required. Contractors will, in fact interface with the DOT network, including OTRAK and TEAM software.

Triennial Review Program

40 What specific information needs to be included for the proposed subcontractors and which of that information is to be included in the page limits set forth for the prime contractor. Specifically, if past performance is limited to 10 pages, is the last 3 years of contracts for each subcontractor supposed to be listed and included in the 10 page limit?

Question is unclear/ unanswerable.

41 Are the past performance questionnaires included in the 10 page limit? Past Performance questionnaires do not fall within the 10 page limitation.

42 BUSINESS/COST Proposal disks shall be in read‐or‐write format with spreadsheets unlinked to any other spreadsheets or other files. The other copy may contain links, but only to documents and spreadsheets that have been submitted as part of the proposal.” Question: Is there more than one electronic copy required for any of the volumes?

Per L.4.1 A: One electronic copy of each volume is required.

43 The solicitation is listed on the FedBizOpps website as a Sources Sought Notice; however, all related documents and instructions indicate that this is a full RFP.

This is an RFP. The FBO announcement erroneously stated "Sources Sought." An additional announcement is hereby created which states "Combined Synopsis/ Solicitation". Both announcements contain the same documents.

44 Under what professional standards (Yellow Book, AICPA) are these reviews to be performed? Although they are not audits, are they attestations that fall under this guidance?

These are not attestations that fall within Yellow Book or AICPA standards.

45 The document mentions that approximately 200 triennial reviews will occur each year, and that multiple contractors may be selected. Will selected contractors perform reviews primarily in their region (for us, the Mid‐Atlantic), or will it be a random nationwide assignment?

There are several factors which affect the dissemination of work among winning contractors, such as COI, task order bids/ awarded, etc. The selection is not random and not arbitrary.