20151218__ATEPS_SBSA_SECOND_Draft_RFP_Q A.pdf

Solicitation DTRT5715R20015 [SECOND DRAFT] Air Traffic Engineering and Program Support (ATEPS) Small Business Set-Aside (SBSA)

Government Responses to Industry Questions Received as of: 18 Dec 2015

IMPORTANT INFORMATION: This document serves as a running tally of questions received from industry regarding subject SECOND DRAFT solicitation (Request for Proposal - RFP) [POSTED 4 Dec 2015], and the Government responses. These answers are provided here on a non-attribution basis to all interested parties via Federal Business Opportunities (www.fbo.gov). A separate Government Responses to Industry Questions document will be created for the final solicitation, should one be issued. After posting answers to questions received from industry by the deadline for question on the SECOND DRAFT RFP, no further updates to this document are anticipated, however, the contracting officer reserves the right to address questions prior to the release of any solicitation if deemed in the best interest of the Government.

Question 1:

[Our understanding is] that Volpe will be the contracting shop and FAA Program Management Organization will be the customer/"end-user," but what will the roles of both Volpe and PMO be for this program? Who will ultimately be the managing party?

Response: ATEPS is a Volpe Center procurement managed by a Volpe Center Contracting Officer within the Office of Acquisitions. Upon award, the assigned Volpe Center Contracting Officer’s Representative, (COR) and Volpe Center Project Manager (PM) are responsible for the overall scope, technical direction, and oversight of the contractor’s effort. The Volpe Center’s COR and PM will work with our project sponsor, the FAA’s PMO, in providing day-to-day work requirements direction within-scope tasks under issued Task Orders. All deliverables are provided to the Volpe Center COR/PM Manager for review and technical acceptance.

Question 2: Section/Para H.1.5, Pg. 50. Will the requirement for a Top Secret Facilities Clearance be sufficient justification for the government to sponsor a company for this level of clearance if they have not previously required a clearance at this level?

Response: There is a possibility that Task Orders may require Contractor personnel to possess Secret or Top Secret clearances as stated in Section C. Facilities clearances are not anticipated under this effort.

The clause at H.1.5 will be modified accordingly in the Final RFP.

Question 3: Section/Para H.1.5, Pg. 51. The RFP says “The contractor must possess the clearance at the time of the task order award.” Since it may be possible to receive an award without a facility clearance, yet need one by the time the task is awarded, will the government sponsor the prime contractor awardee for the appropriate level of security clearance based on master contract award?

Response: See response to Question 2.

Question 4: Section/Para H.1.9, Pg. 59. Subcontractor is required to follow specific FAR procedures when requesting to add new subcontractors. What if any request or requirement is needed to identify initial subcontractors for approval?

Solicitation DTRT5715R20015 [DRAFT] - Government Responses to Industry Questions Received as of: 16 Oct 2015

Response: The Paragraph referenced should be H.1.19. It is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor to gain Subcontract Consent for a subcontractor at any level. Procedure to be followed are included/referenced in paragraphs H.1.19 and L.4.VIII (the reference to paragraph H.1.18 will be corrected to reference H.1.19 in the final RFP).

Question 5: C.I.2.B.1 Task 1, Pg. 16. What technology or technologies is the ATS RIO Management DB built on?

Response: Active Risk Manager. General information may be found at http://www.sword-activerisk.com/products/active-risk-manager-arm/

Question 6: C.I.2.C.1, Pg. 16. Can we assume that the Government will guarantee access to the incumbent staff, guarantee their availability during the transition phase, and guarantee their participation in transition activities?

Response: The Government will coordinate with the current TMIS prime contractors to gain access to personnel currently performing the work to facilitate a smooth transition.

Question 7: C.I.2.C.1, Pg. 16. Can we assume that if the incumbent is unwilling to participate in transition activities then the transition period of performance will be extended?

Response: In the event that there are issues with the transition due to availability of personnel presently performing the work, the Government will take reasonable and appropriate contractual action to address any delay that is determined to be beyond the awardee’s control.

Question 8: C.I.3.1, Pg. 17. Can we assume that the Government will allow us to also have other Contractor employees available 24/7?

Response: The RFP states the Government’s requirement for 24/7 availability. The Offeror may propose additional 24/7 availability at its discretion.

Question 9: C.I.4, Pg. 17. Can we assume that a Facility Clearance will not be an evaluation factor for contract award?

Response: Facility Clearance is not an evaluation factor.

Question 10: C.II.7, Pg. 19. How many days after the revised draft transition plan is submitted does the Government have to respond with comments?

Response: The Government has fourteen (14) days for review and comment. This will be stated in the Final RFP.

Question 11: C.II.7, Pg. 19. How many days after the final draft transition plan is submitted does the Government have to accept as final?

Response: The Government has fourteen (14) days for review and comment (if required). This will be stated in the Final RFP.

Question 12: L.5.IV, Pg. 89. Statement: Each Offeror must submit one original and two copies of the Cost and Business Proposal (Volume I) and one original and six copies of each of the Technical Proposal volume (Volume II).

Question: How many copies of Volume III does the Government require?

Response: One original and six copies (the same as Volume II). This will be clarified in the Final RFP.

Question 13: L.5.IV, Pg. 89. Statement: The Cost and Business Proposal Schedules must also be submitted on a virus-free CD in Microsoft Excel 2010 (or compatible format) and any narrative must be submitted in Microsoft Word 2010 (or compatible format) ONLY.

Question: What format does the Government want Volume III in?

Response: Any narratives (for all volumes) must be submitted in Microsoft Word 2010 (or compatible format), and Oral Presentation slides in Microsoft PowerPoint in 2010 (or compatible format) ONLY.

This will be clarified in the Final RFP.

Question 14: B.I.3.A, Pg. 8. This is the first reference to 'Senior Technician and Technician'. Will you be providing descriptions and qualifications for these positions?

Response: Senior Technician and Technician were included in section C in error. They will be removed for the final RFP.

Question 15: C.I.3.2, Pg. 17. The solicitation states that approximately 10% of the effort will be performed at a Government location. Does the Government expect that Offerors will use Government-site and Contractor-site overhead rates for 10% and 90% of the effort, respectively?

Response: Offeror’s should propose appropriate overhead based upon its accounting system in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles and FAR Part 31. If the Offeror has different overhead rates for on-site and off-site work, it may include those rates in its proposal, showing all calculations for both in its cost/price proposal support.

Question 16: L.6.II.2, Pg. 93. Statement: The cost proposal will include a section "Master Contract Information Other Than Cost and Pricing Data." There is no corresponding section for the Task Order.

Does the Government expect that the direct labor and indirect rates will be identical for both pricing exercises?

Response: There are really two issues in this in this question: 1) consistency between the Master Contract and Initial Task Order cost/price proposals, and 2) Information Other Than Cost and Pricing Data for the Initial Task Order.

The Government would expect consistency between rates and costs in the Offeror’s Master Contract and Initial Task Order proposal. Offerors are cautioned in the RFP that all costs must be supported and all calculations must be shown, therefor any departures at the Initial Task Order level from rates proposed in the Master Contract must be supported and explained. Rates proposed for subsequent task orders are subject to the rates accepted in the Master Contract and any departures may not be approved. This will be clarified in the Final RFP.

A place will be added for Information Other Than Cost and Pricing Data for the Initial Task Order in the Final RFP.

Question 17: In Section L.7.III.B (Page 113), the first sentence of the last paragraph states "Each Offeror's proposed Contract Manager… will deliver a 20 minute oral presentation.” We are assuming this is actually intended to be the Program Manager, rather than the Contract Manager. Is this correct?

Response: Yes, it should be Program Manager. This will be changed in the final RFP.