DTRT5716R20001_DRAFT_RFP_Questions_and_Answers.pdf

DTRT5716R20001 DRAFT RFP Questions and Answers

IMPORTANT INFORMATION: This document serves as a running tally of questions received from industry regarding subject DRAFT solicitation (Request for Proposal - RFP) [POSTED December 11, 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 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:

On Page 117 of the Draft RFP under section heading “PART B - PAST PERFORMANCE (VOLUME II)”, it states that, “Offerors shall submit their past performance information as a separate part of their proposal for both the Offeror and major (over 20 percent of the hours in the Cost and Business Proposal) proposed subcontractor(s).” We understand this to mean that a Past Performance citation is required for the prime and all major subcontractors (over 20% work share); however, could the government please clarify if this requirement also means that a Prime Contractor is prohibited from using a past performance citation from a subcontractor that is proposed at a workshare less than 20%?

Response:

A Prime Contractor should not use a past performance citation from a subcontractor that is proposed at a workshare less than 20 percent of the hours in the Cost and Business Proposal.

Question 2:

Section L, Paragraph L.4.A (Page 92) provides a total of 165,625 labor hours for Year 1;

however, it does not provide hours by labor category. Will the government provide hours by labor category with the final RFP?

Response:

Yes, hours by labor category will be provided with the final RFP.

Question 3:

Section L, Paragraph L.4.A (Page 92) indicates the Year 1 period of performance to be December 1, 2015 to November 30, 2016. Please provide a revised period of performance.

Revised period of performance will be provided in final RFP.

Question 4:

Given the Organizational Conflict of Interest concerns highlighted in Sections H.19, H.24, and H.25, does the Government anticipate any OCI issues between TMSEDS and other Volpe Center procurement activities, such as ATEPS?

Response:

There will be no prohibition on offerors submitting offers who currently hold contracts with the Volpe Center. Offerors could still have OCI issues depending on other concerns such as outlined in the Section H clauses.

Question 5:

Could the Government please confirm that 2087 hours is the correct number of hours allocated for a full time equivalent position? (Reference Page 93 L.4.D Section II)

The correct number of hours is 2087.

Question 6:

Does the government intend on releasing a Sample Task Order for evaluation? If so, will the Task Order be awarded to one of the ID/IQ winners? Will the offeror be required to respond to a task order during orals?

No, the Government does not intend on releasing a Sample Task Order for evaluation on this procurement.

Question 7:

What additional evaluation criteria will be used (beyond the labor category criteria) to evaluate the Task Area lead candidates/ resumes? [Reference: Page 94, Exhibit A: Resume Checklist, Task Areas Leads are identified. It is stated elsewhere in the Draft RFP that these are Roles and each of the candidates will fit into a labor category as defined in the Draft RFP.]

Response:

As stated in Section L.3.B Proposal Presentation, “Task Area Managers are a role, not a labor category. As such, the Program Manager and the Task Area Managers may come from any labor category.” Task Area Managers will be evaluated in accordance with the criteria set forth in Section L and Section M.

Question 8:

Sections in the Statement of Work go from C.3.1 to C.3.1.2, seeming to skip over a section C.3.1.1. Question: is this simply a numbering issue or is there a section missing from the SOW?

This will be resolved in the final RFP.

Question 9:

The table on page 113 indicates that the offeror has 30 minutes to present the Technical Understanding portion of the oral presentation. However, in the text immediately below the table, it states that the offeror will have up to “60 uninterrupted minutes.” Question: will the offeror have 30 or 60 minutes to present Technical Understanding?

Question 10:

The table on page 113 indicates that the offeror has 15 minutes to present the Management Approach portion of the oral presentation. However, in the text on page 114, it states that the offeror will have up to “30 uninterrupted minutes.” Question: will the offeror have 15 or 30 minutes to present Management Approach?

Question 11:

Please clarify the number of pages allowed for the five most relevant contracts. [Reference: Page 120 states “Offeror’s five most relevant contracts is 10 pages”; but on page 112, it is 15 pages.]

Response:

The number of pages allowed for the five most relevant contracts is 10; this will be resolved in the final RFP.

Question 12:

How should the offeror provide information related to classified contracts which are restricted to individuals with appropriate security clearance levels?

Response:

Offerors should provide past performance examples that are available on PPIRS or are unrestricted in nature.

Question 13:

Are the hours per labor category described in Schedule 7 the hours to be bid? [Reference:

Section L.4.A Schedule 7]

The hours to be proposed will be provided in the final RFP.

Question 14:

How many copies of the Oral Presentation should Contractors bring with them to the presentation as handouts for the Government evaluators? [Reference: Section L.5.C Process p 112]

The number of copies of the Oral Presentations will be provided in the final RFP.

Question 15:

Does the 5 page narrative include the required Staffing Matrix (which has a maximum of 4 pages)? [Reference: Section L.5.B Page Limits Staffing Matrix p 112 and 117]

The 5 page Staffing Narrative does not include the Staffing Matrix. This will be clear in the final

RFP.

Question 16:

Please clarify if the major subcontractor(s) to Offeror are required to provide a list of its active contracts? [Reference: Section L.5.D Parts of the Technical Proposal Part B Past Performance (Volume II) p 117]

Only the offeror (prime contractor) is required to provide a list of its active contracts.

Question 17:

Please clarify in the referenced sections that the offeror is to provide staff qualifications for all personnel bid or those staff bid as key personnel with resumes provided?

“…and (3) the depth and breadth of technical staff relative to the SOW, including experience, qualifications and education of staff. The Offeror shall include a staffing matrix showing the number of staff by discipline and education level (i.e. BS, MS, Ph.D.)….” [Reference: Section L.5.D Parts of the Technical Proposal – Part A Staffing (Volume II)]

“…shall provide a matrix of technical staff that maps functions identified in the SOW to specific technical staff, including the person’s name, title, company affiliation, degree(s), professional license(s) or certification(s), years of relevant experience, intended geographic locations, and planned use for SOW task areas in order to determine the depth and breadth of technical staff relevant to the requirements of the SOW….” [Reference: Section L. Section L.5.D Parts of the Technical Proposal – Staffing Matrix]

“…..the depth and breadth of technical staff relative to the SOW, including experience, qualifications, and education of staff….” [Reference: Section M.2.B Factors for Evaluation – Task Staffing pgs 115 117 123]

Response:

As stated in Section L.5.D under Part A Task Staffing, Proposed Technical Staff: “In addition to the resumes of the proposed Program Manager and Task Area Managers Offerors shall submit resumes that are representative of the following labor categories as defined in Attachment No.

J.3 - LABOR CATEGORY QUALIFICATIONS.” The total number of resumes required is 16.

Question 18:

Please clarify the operational definition of “functions” in Section L. On page 8 of the SOW C.2.15 skill requirements are listed – Are these considered functions? On page 9 of the SOW paragraph C.3.1 functions are referred to as both airborne and ground based but other paragraphs do not use the same terminology.

“…shall provide a matrix of technical staff that maps functions identified in the SOW…”

Section L. Section L.5.D Parts of the Technical Proposal – Staffing Matrix 117

Response:

The use of the word “function” in section C is in a technical capacity as it relates to the Task Area and is not related to the use of the word “functions” in Section L. The use of the word “functions” Section L.5.D means the skill-sets identified in the SOW.

Question 19:

Are there any restrictions, aside from OCI mitigation, regarding teaming with regard to the ATEPS and TMSEDS full and open competitions? For example, can a contractor act as the Prime contractor on both the ATEPS and TMSEDS full and open competitions with same team, a mix, or an entirely different team makeup?

Reference: (1) Original Synopsis posted to the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) website on October 19, 2015: “The TMSEDS contracts will be one of the successor contracts to the Traffic Management Infrastructure Systems (TMIS) Support contracts awarded by the Volpe Center in 2011.”

(2) ATEPS FO Draft RFP Industry Questions and Government Responses.pdf posted October 20, 2015, Question 14: Paragraph L.4.I specifies the following:

“Contractors may not act as both a Prime contractor and a Subcontractor under this solicitation. Proposals involving such teaming arrangements will be excluded from consideration.” Question: Can a Large bidder, for example Sub on ATEPS or ATEPS SBSA yet Prime under TMSEDS or vice versa Prime ATEPS Large and sub ATEPS SBSA or future TMSEDS? Response: Yes, provided that prime offerors and proposed subcontractor do not have an OCI, are unable to mitigate an actual or potential OCI, or there is exclusion language in an existing contract.

Response:

Aside from OCI mitigation, there are no restrictions regarding teaming with regard to ATEPS and TMSEDS full and open competition. The TMSEDS and ATEPS will be evaluated independently as they are two separate procurements.

Question 20:

For planning purposes, please confirm the timeframe for proposal due date as approximately 81 calendar days following the issuance of the solicitation (e.g., if the final RFP were released on February 1, 2016, proposals would be due April 21, 2016).

Response:

The proposal due date is approximately 81 calendar days following issuance of the solicitation.

The government reserves the right to change the due date as 81 days is an approximation.

Question 21:

(a) Please verify that (1) “Contract Program Manager” in clause I-5 is the Program Manager identified in L.5.D, Part A-Staffing, Program Manager, and that the reason for referring to the Program Manager as the “Contract Program Manager” in clause I-5 is to distinguish the overall IDIQ contract-level Program Manager from future task order Program Managers.

(b) Please clarify which positions are considered key personnel at the IDIQ contract level, and therefore key personnel for proposal purposes. Referenced L.4.D and L.5.D paragraphs imply that all resumed staff are key personnel; however, our interpretation is that the key personnel at the IDIQ contract level are the Program Manager (referenced in clause I-5 as the Contract Program Manager), and the Task Order Managers identified by resume in the proposal. Please confirm or clarify which positions should be considered key personnel at the IDIQ contract level, and therefore key personnel for proposal purposes

Reference: (1) Attachment DTRT5716R20001_RFP_Draft.pdf, clause I-5, TAR 1252.237-73

KEY PERSONNEL, p. 66: “The Key Personnel under this Contract are:

(1) Contract Program Manager – (To be completed at the time of contract award)

(2) Task Area Managers (To be completed at the time of contract award)

(3) To be specified under individual task orders”

(2) Attachment DTRT5716R20001_RFP_Draft.pdf, L.5.D, PART A – STAFFING (VOLUME II), Program Manager, p 115: “The Offeror must identify the individual who will serve as the overall Program Manager for this contract and who will be identified under the Key Personnel clause in Section I, Paragraph I.5 - KEY PERSONNEL. The individual’s resume shall be submitted in accordance with the requirements outlined below. The Program Manager is a role, not a labor category. As such, the Program Manager may come from any labor category.”

(3) L.4.D. SECTION II – INFORMATION OTHER THAN COST AND

PRICING DATA, Resumes and Cost Realism, EXHIBIT A: RESUME CHECKLIST, p. 94: “Labor rates proposed on Schedule 5 must be consistent with the salaries of the persons whose resumes are submitted. Schedule 6 requires the Offeror to justify the realism of the labor cost by providing the unburdened labor rate of the resumed key person being proposed.”

(4) L.5.D., PART A – STAFFING (VOLUME II), Proposed Technical Staff, p.

116: Labor rates proposed on Schedule 5 must be consistent with the salaries of the persons whose resumes are submitted. Schedule 6 requires the Offeror to justify the realism of the labor cost by providing the unburdened labor rate of the resumed key person being proposed.

Response:

(a) This will be clarified in the final RFP.

(b) As stated in I.5 TAR 1252.237-73 KEY PERSONNEL, the key personnel at the IDIQ contract level are the Program Manager and Task Area Managers.

Question 22:

Can the Government clarify whether they want non-relevant references in the contract listing if they are not to be included in the evaluation?

Reference: Attachment DTRT5716R20001_RFP_Draft.pdf, L.5.D, Part B - Past Performance (Volume II), page 117 & M.2.B, Factors for Evaluation, Past Performance, page

123. In L.5.D, Part B, page 117 it states: “The Offeror must make a good faith effort to ensure that the list includes all Prime contracts with a value over $1,000,000 with the Federal Government.” There is no stipulation explicitly addressing relevance. In Section M.2.B, page 123, it states “Only relevant Past Performance history will be considered.”

Provide only relevant references; this will be clear in the final RFP.

Question 23:

Many Federal Government contracting activity customers do not comply with federal requirements to use CPARS to enter past performance information in a timely manner. They may not have processes in place and their Government personnel may not have the training or system access established to do so. Supporting contractors are not in a position to persuade them to comply. We request that Volpe Center permit substitution of the Past Performance Questionnaire found in Attachment No. J.2 if there are no CPARS in PPIRS for one or more of the five most relevant Federal Government contracts cited in PART B - PAST PERFORMANCE (VOLUME

II).

Reference: Attachment DTRT5716R20001_RFP_Draft.pdf, Section L.5.D, Part B - Past Performance (Volume II), page 118. Referenced Section states “Copies of the final or most current past performance report must be submitted for the five most relevant contracts... The Offeror is responsible for making all reasonable efforts to ensure that a completed evaluation report is provided for each of the five cited contracts by no later than the due date for receipt of proposals. If the contracting activity has completed a Contractor evaluation report and provided a copy to the Offeror, particularly those completed in accordance with Subpart 42.15 of the FAR, a copy of this report is sufficient. The Volpe Center uses the Contractor Performance Assessment Report System (CPARS) as its only method to enter past performance information. The Volpe Center can obtain completed performance evaluations in Past Performance Information Retrieval System (PPIRS). All contracting activities must use CPARS to enter past performance information. If the completed evaluation report cannot be found in PPIRS, the Offeror should provide a copy of this report in its proposal.”

Response:

If the completed evaluation report cannot be found in PPIRS, Attachment No. J.2 will be an acceptable substitute. This will be clear in the final RFP.

Question 24:

Paragraph L.2.D estimates 165,625 labor hours for about 1 year of effort. Does the Government expect a similar level of effort for each year of the contract?

Response:

The number of hours listed in L.2.D are in accordance with the hours listed in the Instruction for Cost and Business Proposals, Section L.4.A. As stated in Section L.4.A “The 165,625 labor hours represents the total, estimated, annual requirement; therefore, no single Offeror is likely to provide that LOE.”

Question 25:

Can the Government clarify the definition of “major proposed subcontractor(s)?” Paragraph L.5.D, Part B defines a major proposed subcontractor as “over 20% of the hours in the Cost and Business Proposal.” Does that equate to 20% of 165,625 labor hours x 5 years?

The Cost and Business proposal instructions require that labor be priced out for evaluation purposes assuming a period of performance for only 1 year. Therefore, 20% of the hours equates to 20% of the 165,625 labor hours.

Question 26:

Is there a minimum number of past performance citations that must come from the Prime?

Response:

As stated in Section L.3.B Proposal Presentation, Volume II Technical Proposal Part B “Past Performance of this volume must include the required list of the Offeror’s current contracts, copies of past performance reports or explanations of efforts to obtain them, and summary descriptions of the five most relevant contracts in the past 5 years.”