RFP_Comment_Resolution_Matrix.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Eglin Operations & Maintenance Services (Formerly Eglin Test & Training Complex Technical Services (ETTC-TS) Program) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA2486-16-R-0002
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 50
Eglin Operations & Maintenance Services (Formerly Eglin Test & Training Complex Technical Services (ETTC-TS) Program) has more files on GovTribe.
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Model Contract & Attchts E-OMS Model Contract and Attachments Government Responses to Offeror Questions
| # | Model Contract & Attachments Reference | Detailed Reference (paragraph, page, etc) | Offeror Comment | Offeror Question or Recommendation | Government Response | |
| 1 | Section A | SF33 | The use of the SF33 version in this RFP is not consistent with the current version contained in FAR 53.301-33, which states that previous editions are not usable. It appears there is an incorrect citation for the DPAS in Block 1. Based on the current FAR, the correct citation is 15 CFR 700 instead of the outdated 15 CFR 350. | We suggest the Government provide an updated SF33 based on the most current version of the FAR 53.301-33. | E-OMS is using Eglin's contract writing system. Block 1 cannot be manually changed. This will not affect the way E-OMS is awarded or administered. | |
| 2 | Section B | Pages 3, 10, 16, 22, 28, 34 | Section "B" CLINS 0004, 1004, 2004, 3004, 4004, and 5004 all include language that indicates the period of performance (POP) is for six months. | Would the Government please clarify, or remove the language stating “(if all six months are exercised)" for the POP that don't apply? | If all six months are exercised was inadvertantly included in the Descriptive Data of this CLINs. "If all six months are exercised" will be removed via RFP amendment. | |
| 3 | Section B | Page 3 | The descriptive data in CLIN 0004 states that overtime is included within the estimated cost provided. | As overtime is not fee-bearing, can you please disclose how much of this amount is fee-bearing labor and how much is non-fee-bearing overtime? | All hours, including overtime, on CLIN 0004 are fee-bearing. | |
| 4 | Section B | Pages 2-38 | There appears to be no mention of New Mexico Gross Receipts Tax (NMGRT), which is currently 6.75% of total New Mexico revenues, within CLINs X002, X006, X009, X012, X015, and X022. | Are we correct in assuming that we should include the 6.75% tax to the total fill in provided in X002 and that the Government provided values for the other CLINs include this tax? | NMGRT is included in the Gov provided values. Please include NMGRT in fill in (X002). | |
| 5 | Section B | Pages 2-38 | CLINs X018, X019, and X020 currently have no fill-in lines visible. | Should the offeror add fill-in lines to designate the estimated Award Fee and Award Fee percentages? | Yes. Use the fill lines in the upper right corner of the appropriate CLINs. | |
| 6 | Section B | Pages 2-38 | The RFP provided offerors a Government estimate amount for CLINs X004. Also included in these CLINs are a subset amount of estimated cost; however, no explanation is provided to the offeror in describing the nature of this subset estimate. | Can the Government explain the nature of its subset of estimated costs shown in CLINs X004? | The subset is the estimated costs for the most highly specialized positions IAW B01 Para (d)(2). This value is provided as a result of industry feedback during market research. | |
| 7 | Section B | Pages 4-38 | Please confirm that the RFP-provided estimated item amounts for CLINs X005 through X016 are burdened values, less award fee, when applicable. The assumption is that award fee is reported in CLINS X018, X019, and X020. | Will the Government please confirm? | The CPAF CLINS X005 through X016 are burdened values, less award fee, when applicable. | |
| 8 | Section B CLIN0021-0023 and Section J, Attachment 14 | Section B, Pages 8-9 | ||||
| Section J, Page 74 | Section B and Section J both reference a Transition Plan; however, Sections L and M only mention transition requirements at the subfactor discussion. | Will the Government please confirm that a separate Transition Plan is not required at this time – that the only response regarding transition will be provided in 2.6 Subfactor 3: Transition/Transition Risk? | The successful offeror's responses to L.2.6 a-d shall be incorporated into the contract at time of award as the offeror's transition plan. | |||
| 9 | Section B01 | Page 39, Subparagraph a | This paragraph, especially with the examples being used later on in B01, could be considered a cost-plus-percentage-of-cost (CPPC) contract type. | We suggest the Government change the calculation of the fixed fee so that it is not tied to actual costs and will not fluctuate based on costs incurred. | The contract type for the MGTF CLINs is CPFF. The Government does not intend to establish a CPPC contract type. CLINs 0004, 1004, 2004, 3004, 4004 and 5004 inadvertently included the phrase “Estimated Fee (if all six months are exercised)” instead of the words “Fixed Fee” in the CLINs’ Descriptive Data. The Government will correct this language via RFP amendment. |
The fixed fee is a fixed maximum dollar amount and is derived from the Contractor's proposed Fixed Fee % multiplied by the Estimated Cost for the applicable MGTF CLIN. The fixed fee shall not vary with actual cost, but may be adjusted as a result of changes in the work to be performed under the contract, and may be reduced IAW paragraphs (c) through (f) of Clause B01.
Fixed fee payment amounts are merely incremental payments of the fixed fee to the Contractor. The sum of the fixed fee payment amounts cannot exceed the fixed fee established in the CLIN’s Descriptive Data.
The Contract requires invoicing monthly for a fixed fee payment amount in proportion with the costs that the Contractor incurred. However, the sum of all fixed fee payment amounts shall equal the fixed fee established in the CLIN’s Descriptive Data minus any reductions applied under paragraphs (c) through (f) of Clause B01. For this reason, the final fixed fee payment amount under the CLIN may be less or more than the fixed fee percentage multiplied by the sum of the allowable direct and indirect costs that the Contractor incurs in the final month of the CLIN’s period of performance.
To make the payment of fixed fee clear, the Government will replace paragraph (a) of Clause B01 with the following language via RFP amendment:
(a) The fixed fee percentages for this contract are shown below and may be revised only by negotiation and modification of the contract for added or deleted work.
CLIN 0004______ % (filled in at time of award) CLIN 1004 ______ % (filled in at time of award) CLIN 2004 ______ % (filled in at time of award) CLIN 3004 ______ % (filled in at time of award) CLIN 4004 ______ % (filled in at time of award) CLIN 5004 ______ % (filled in at time of award)
Fixed fee payment amounts are calculated each month by multiplying the fixed fee percentage by the sum of the allowable direct and indirect costs that the Contractor actually earned during the entire month. The sum of all fixed fee payments cannot, however, exceed the fixed fee established in the CLIN’s Descriptive Data.
The Contractor shall invoice each month for the fixed fee payment earned during the previous month. Fixed fee will be paid as it is earned. The sum of all fixed fee payment amounts shall equal the fixed fee established in the CLIN’s Descriptive Data minus any reductions applied under paragraphs (c) through (f) of Clause B01 at any time during the CLIN’s period of performance.
10 Section B01 Page 40, Subparagraph f The Government is assessing a penalty for defective performance based on the month following the month of defective performance, which has the effect of increasing the penalty. Using the Government example, if the deficient performance month is March, our billings for March are reduced since there are no costs associated with the vacant position. By waiting until April, the base used for the penalty reduction is increased – assuming the vacant position is filled – and the penalty is, therefore, increased. The penalty being assessed should be done for the month of defective services being rendered, not for a subsequent month where acceptable services are provided. The Offeror is mischaracterizing fee reductions as penalties. The fee reduction language in Clause B01 has no impact on the Contractor's right and ability to invoice for its actual costs incurred during the contract period. Further, the fee reduction applied to a monthly invoice can never exceed the amount of the fee accrued during that month of a contract period.
The fixed fee amounts established in the Descriptive Data of the MGTF CLINs are not guaranteed payment amounts under this contract. Fixed fee is earned under this contract, and Clause B01 grants the Contracting Officer the ability to reduce the fixed fee payment amounts IAW paragraphs (c) through (f) of clause B01. Clause B01 does not, however, mandate that the Contracting Officer reduce fixed fee payment amounts.
The Government is greatly concerned that the Contractor will fail to timely fill vacancies within the MGTF with qualified individuals, which could lead to MGTF mission failure. Clause B01 establishes that the Contractor’s failure to timely fill vacancies with qualified individuals may result in the Contractor earning a reduced fee in one or more months of a CLIN’s period of performance.
The Government strongly considered establishing the MGTF CLINs as CPAF and including in the Award Fee / Term Plan a decrement to any award fee payment if, during an award fee period, the Contractor failed to timely fill MGTF positions with qualified individuals. After receiving industry feedback on the appropriateness of a CPFF contract type for the MGTF CLINs, the Government determined to establish the MGTF CLINs as CPFF and establish a mechanism for reducing fixed fee payments if the Contractor fails to timely fill vacancies with qualified individuals.
The Offeror also expresses concern that the fee reduction applies to the following month’s incurred costs, considering that the following month’s incurred costs could be greater than the previous month’s incurred costs. The Government considered this possibility when drafting Clause B01. The fee reduction calculation language within Clause B01 shall remain the same.
| 11 | Section B01 | Page 40, subparagraph (k) | Subparagraph (k), coupled with the requirements of subparagraph (d), provides that the Government is identifying the staffing requirement, including the hours by labor category (not an estimate of hours but actual hours to be worked by labor category). A more appropriate contract type would be either Fixed-price/Level of Effort or T&M. | We suggest the Government change the contract type for this CLIN to either Fixed-price/LOE or T&M. | The Government determined that CPFF LOE is most appropriate for this requirement. |
| 12 | Section H02 | Pages 55-56 | It appears this stand-down constitutes a Stop Work Order as contemplated by FAR 52.242-15 (Also note there is no Alternate A to this clause). | We suggest the Government remove this clause and rely on the FAR-based Stop Work Order clause to cover these situations. | The H02 Stand Down Clause will be removed via an RFP amendment. |
| 13 | Section J, Attachment 10 | Page 74 | EAFB/WPAFB GFP list spreadsheet mentions three spreadsheets but only contains two. There are also no WPAFB GFP items listed. | Please provide the missing spreadsheet and provide an updated spreadsheet that contains WPAFB GFP items. | The Government will amend Section J, Attachment 10 to read, "This workbook contains one of three GFP worksheets." The latter two GFP worksheets are contained in Section J, Attachments 11 and 12. The data referenced in Attachment 10 contains equipment from both EAFB and WPAFB. |
PWS
E-OMS PWS
| # | PWS Reference | Detailed Reference (paragraph, page, etc) | Offeror Comment | Offeror Question or Recommendation | Government Response |
| 1 | PWS 4.1.11 | PWS 4.1.11 | PWS 4.1.11 "I&M Support Services" is no longer included in the PWS but still referenced in the GSE. | Please clarify if PWS 4.1.11 "I&M Support Services" requirements are no longer incorporated into this contract. If they are not, please address the GSE of 3 personnel in this PWS element. | Paragraph 4.1.11 was relocated under paragraph 6.2.1.3. in order to encompass all Government investment programs, not just I&M. The requirement more closely aligns with directive requirements since directives will be used to initiatiate Governement investment work. The GSE will be updated to reflect the investment work is under PWS paragraph 6.2.1.3. |
| 2 | PWS 4.2.6 | 4.2.6.2.3, Page 17 | This document does not currently exist and it is unclear what facility maintenance process they want us to follow. | Please provide a copy of the Range E-OMS Facility Maintenance Process. | The Range E-OMS Facility Maintenance Process is a memo currently awaiting final signatures. The Government will post the draft memo for offerors to use when preparing their proposals. |
| 3 | |||||
| 4 | |||||
| 5 | |||||
| 6 | |||||
| 7 | |||||
| 8 | |||||
| 9 | |||||
| 10 | |||||
| 11 | |||||
| 12 | |||||
| 13 |
Section L E-OMS Section L
| # | Section L Reference | Detailed Reference (paragraph, page, etc) | Offeror Comment | Offeror Question or Recommendation | Government Response |
| 1 | 1.3 | 1.3.1, L-8 | This section states that the small business subcontracting plan is outside of page count. It seems the small business requirements are now moved to a volume with a 20 page limit. | Will the Government please eliminate the small business subcontracting plan from section 1.3.1 as being excluded from page count to eliminate confusion? | The Small Business Participation Volume is separate from the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. The Small Business Participation Volume is restricted to 20 pages. The Small Business Subcontracting Plan is exempt from the page limitations. The Small Business Participation Volume is required from all offerors regardless of size. |
| 2 | 1.3 | 1.3.2, L-8 | Tables, charts, graphs, and figures can use text that is five point rather than the 11 point for narrative text. It is unclear if the 1.5 line spacing applies to tables, charts, graphs, and figures. | Will the Government please clarify that single spacing can be used in tables, charts, graphs, and figures? | Adhere to the 1.5 line spacing in all documents. |
| 3 | 1.3 | 1.3.6, L-9 | The RFP states that the model contract is within Volume IV. However, Table L-1 shows contract documentation as Volume V. | Please update 1.3.6 to read as Volume V rather than Volume IV - which is now the Small Business Participation Volume. | Paragraph 1.3.6 will be udpated with the correct volume number. |
| 4 | 3.1 | 3.1(h), L-14 | The PPQ is "not to exceed three pages." However, the PPQ the Government provided in Attachment 5 is five pages. | Please confirm the three page limit refers to the list of recipients the Offeror provides in the proposal. | As indicated in the Past Performance Customer Questionnaire, responses returned to the Government are restricted to three pages. |
| 5 | 3.2 | 3.2.2, L-14 | The Government specifies a "relevancy matrix" in section 3.2.2. This was a previous attachment that is no longer required. | Will the Government please remove the reference of the Relevancy Matrix from 3.2.2. | Reference will be removed via RFP amendment. |
| 6 | Section L | Page L-18 | There is a requirement for subcontractors and Inter-divisional transfers to “submit estimates using the same formats and degree of rationale as those submitted by the Offeror.” | 1.) Are we correct in assuming that each subcontractor, regardless of dollar threshold, is to provide a separate Cost Narrative and separate Electronic Cost Model and that these submissions may be sent to the Government as sealed packages? | 1) All cost/price information will be rolled up into the TEP. Same format refers to the Government provided spreadsheets such as Section L Attachment 8, TEP, and Section L, EOMS Cost Element Summary. Subcontractors should roll their estimates up into these formats using their Basis of Estimates as supporting documentation. 2) Please refer to paragraph Section L 4.1. |
| 7 | Section L, Attachment 1 | Section B GSE | The total number of positions is stated as 148. The formula does not account for the last position in the column; therefore, the total should be 149. | 2.) May we recommend a reasonable threshold, say $3M in any year, by which you require these separate submissions? This will encourage diversity among small business partners that may not have as many resources available as a large Prime. | The total position count is 149. The GSE will be updated to reflect the proper number of positions. |
| 8 | L-18 | 4.4.2.5. Cost Summaries | The instructions in Section L, 4.4.2.5 state the ".....dollar values for the MGTF (excluding Fixed Fee), Contractor Acquired Property (CAP), Travel, Overtime, and Directive Manning CLINs will be provided by the Government. The Offeror shall not deviate from the Government provided values, .........." | How should the MGTF fixed fee be reflected on Attachment 8 (Total Evaluation Price TEP)? Should the offeror increase the government estimate for the MGTF CLIN to include fixed fee? Will fixed fee only be reflected in Section "B" CLINS 0004, 1004, 2004, 3004, 4004, and 5004 and not in the TEP? | A separate cost summary sheet shall be created for each CLIN in Attachment 7 which shall roll up into the TEP Attachment 8. |
| 9 | L-18 | 4.4.2.5. Cost Summaries | The instructions for completing cost summaries in 4.4.2.5 state ".......All costs proposed must be discretely identified by CLIN, Contract Year and PWS Major Mission Area……" | Should the offeror create a separate Cost Summary (Attachment 7) for each award fee CLIN or only include the award fee on the TEP spreadsheet (Attachment 8)? | A separate cost summary sheet shall be created for each CLIN in Attachment 7 which shall roll up into the TEP Attachment 8. |
| 10 | Section L, Attachment 7 | Sheet tabs CLIN 0001 CY2015 and CLIN 0001 CY 2016 | The attachment 7 Cost Summary excel spreadsheet contains two tabs: CLIN 0001 CY2015, when scrolling left, and CLIN 0001 CY 2016. Which CLIN spreadsheet is the contractor required to complete and submit with their proposal? | Please use CLIN 0001 CY2016 tab as the tailorable spreadsheet. Disregard CLIN 0001 CY2015. | |
| 11 | Section L, Attachment 7 | Cost Element Summary Form | Based upon our interpretation of Section L.4.4.2.5, a completed Cost Element Summary form is required for only the Cost Plus Award Fee (CPAF) CLINs. Section 4.4.2.5 also says that no Cost Element Summary form is required for MGTF, which is a Fixed Fee CLIN. | Please confirm that the amount proposed for fee in the E-OMS Cost Element Summary Form should represent our maximum award fee proposed, not fixed fee as shown in Row 10 of Section L, Attachment 7. | Award Fee should be shown on Award Fee Pool CLINs. Cost Element Summaries roll up into the TEP. Offerors shall follow instructions in Section L para. 4.1. The Cost Element Summary - Attachment 7 is provided to assist offerors in showing how they arrived at their TEP. The Cost Element Summary should roll up into the TEP. |
| 12 | Section L, Attachment 8 | Total Evaluated Price (TEP) form | Please clarify if the values to be entered into CLINs x004, MGTF, for the base and option periods should include only the Government's estimated cost or the Total Estimated Cost, including estimated fixed fee. | The TEP includes all costs plus fixed fee associated with the CLINs. This is the total price for the CLIN. (Total is Government provided cost plus proposed fixed fee.) | |
| 13 | Section L, Attachment 1 | Section A, LCDs | We have been unable to find the SCA Occupation Code 99610, Quality Control Inspector, in the Wage Determinations, Section J, Attachments 2 through 6. | Please identify the hourly wage that is associated with this labor category. | This position would require conformance since it is not an SCA position. The conformed labor rate would be $27.54 per hour, with an additional $4.27 of fringe benefits per hour. |
| 14 | Section L, RFP Section I | Paragraph 5.2.1, Table 1.3 | The language in Section L Small Business Subcontracting Goals Breakdown isn't consistent with the FAR Clause 52.219-09 requirement for the small buisness category goals to be expressed in the Small Business Plan, as a percentage of subcontracted awards rather than goals based on an "Offeror's Proposed Percentage of Total Contract Value". Reference FAR Clause 52.219-09 Small Business Subcontracting Plan - Alternate II incorporated by reference in Section L of the solicitation requries an offeror's subcontracting plan to include, "(1) Goals, expressed in terms of percentages of total planned subcontracting dollars, for the use of small business, veteran-owned small business, service-disabled veteran-owned small business, HUBZone small business, small disadvantaged business, and women-owned small business concerns as subcontractors." | Please consider revising this Table to ensure the small business sub-tier category goals are expressed as a percentage of subcontracted awards to make it consistent with the FAR 52.219-09 requirement for goals to be expressed in terms of subcontracted value | The "Offeror's Proposed Percentage of Total Contract Value" language in Table L3 is an unintended error. The Contract's goal for small business participation is 25% of the total contract value. The Contract's goal for SDB participation is 5% of subcontracted awards. The Contract's goal for WOSB participation is 5% of subcontracted awards. The Contract's goal for SDVOSB participation is 3% of subcontracted awards. The Contract's goal for HUBZone SB participation is 3% of subcontracted awards. |
The Government will replace "Offeror's Proposed Percentage of Total Contract Value" with "Offeror's Proposed Percentage of Total Planned Subcontracting Dollars" in Table L3. Additionally, Table L3 will only include rows for SDB, WOSB, SDVOSB and HUBZone SB.
The Government will also amend paragraph L.5.2 to include the following statement: "The Offeror’s Small Business Subcontracting Plan shall include a statement that the total dollars planned to be subcontracted to small business concerns is 25% of the total contract value."
Section M E-OMS Section M
| # | Section M Reference | Detailed Reference (paragraph, page, etc) | Offeror Comment | Offeror Question or Recommendation | Government Response |
| 1 | Section M | Paragraph 5.0 Item 2 | Considering that the Government may award without discussions, the small business participation factor could be scored unacceptable if the Government doesn't accept the offeror's rationale should they propose a realistic goal below those specified in Table L3. By making the sub-tier goals in Table L3 as a percentage of subcontracted value would align the RFP requirement with the provisions of FAR 52.219-09, and provide a more achievable target for all offerors. | Request the Government delete from Item 2 in Section M paragraph 5.0, the first portion of the sentence that states the offeror must meet or exceed the contract's goals for each category listed in Table L3. | Item 2 in Section M paragraph 5.0 shall remain the same. |
| 2 | L and M | L-11 and M-5 | Section L.2.4. Paragraph j states in part “If the Offeror’s proposed data service center is designed to operate external to the DoD Global Information Grid NIPRNet accreditation boundary then the description shall include a full and detailed technical explanation of their Information Assurance/ Cybersecurity Program.” Section M.2.0. states in part “The Government will evaluate whether the Offeror’s proposed management information system/data service center system operation has the necessary technical security rigor, compatibility, and flexibility to operate within the DoD Global Information Grid NIPRNet accreditation boundary.” | Should Section M be modified to allow proposing a management information system that is designed to operate external to the DoD GIG NIPRNet consistent with the Sec L instruction? | Yes, Section M will be revised via RFP amendment as follows: "Section L, Subsection 2.4.j: The Government will evaluate whether the Offeror’s proposed management information system/data service center system operation has the necessary technical security rigor, compatibility, and flexibility to operate within the DoD Global Information Grid NIPRNet accreditation boundary. If the Offeror proposes a MIS that is designed to operate external to the DoD GIG NIPRNet, then the Government will evaluate the MIS to ensure the interfaces and application complies with all Information Assurance/Cybersecurity Programs." |
| 3 | |||||
| 4 | |||||
| 5 | |||||
| 6 | |||||
| 7 | |||||
| 8 | |||||
| 9 | |||||
| 10 | |||||
| 11 | |||||
| 12 | |||||
| 13 |
Award Fee Plan E-OMS Award Fee Plan
| # | Award Fee Plan Reference | Detailed Reference (paragraph, page, etc) | Offeror Comment | Offeror Question or Recommendation | Government Response |
| 1 | NO OFFEROR QUESTIONS | ||||
| 2 | |||||
| 3 | |||||
| 4 | |||||
| 5 | |||||
| 6 | |||||
| 7 | |||||
| 8 | |||||
| 9 | |||||
| 10 | |||||
| 11 | |||||
| 12 | |||||
| 13 |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .