Questions Responses - Amendment 1.doc

Questions & Answers

1. Question: At one-on-one meetings, you indicated the past performance volume would be due two weeks earlier than the rest of the proposal. Has that now changed?

Answer: All proposal submission volumes are due no later than 3:00 pm local Colorado time on 14 October 2009.

2. Question: Request clarification on Section L-8, relative to Team Relevancy Matrix and Past Performance Information forms. L-8.B requires the offeror to provide “at least one citation for each subcontractor/team member proposed to perform work on the overall contract.” L-8.C.2 requires that the offeror complete the matrix “summarizing past performance citations of the company, joint venture partner (including any teaming partner, or partnership arrangements) and/or proposed team members (i.e., subcontractor) for work they are proposed to perform on this effort. Do not include any citations in the matrix if the offeror is not proposed to accomplish that portion of the effort.” L-8.C.6.a requires that the offeror “submit Past Performance Information sheets (Attachment L-6) on all examples included in Team Relevancy Matrix (Attachment L-5). Offerors should only identify subcontractors/team members past performance in areas on which these subcontractors/team members proposed to perform at least 10 percent of the work on the overall contract.” Does “10 percent of the work on the overall contract” mean 10 percent of the total value of the total contract or does it mean 10 percent of the value of the work performed in that particular functional area (i.e., PPBE and POM activities, acquisition process and program life cycle, exercises, nuclear force, global positioning systems, range capabilities, etc.)?

Answer: See correction in RFP at L-8C.6.a.

3. Question: If this means 10 percent of the total value of the total contract, then it would seem that a offeror could include past performance citations on the relevancy matrix from no more than four subcontractors (as the small business prime, the prime contractor must perform at least 50% of the work). If we can include only subcontractors who are expected to perform at least 10% of the total value of the contract we could only include four additional contractors for the remaining less than 50%.) If an offeror’s teaming approach included niche contractors in order to best address some of the functional areas who will not be performing 10% of the work, the offeror could conceivably have holes in its team relevancy matrix which, in truth, are covered by these niche companies. If this means 10 percent of the value of the work performed in that particular functional area (i.e., PPBE and POM activities, acquisition process and program life cycle, exercises, nuclear force, global positioning systems, range capabilities, etc.), and given this is an IDIQ, multi-award contract and there is no certainty to the quantity of work that will be competed for, much less won, in a particular functional area, how is this 10 percent to be derived?

Answer: (See correction in RFP at L-8C.6.a.) The chart provided at Attachment L-5, Team Relevancy Matrix, was never intended to limit the number of past performance citations. It is provided as a format only. The RFP does not limit the number of citations; the only limitation on past performance citations is the page limitation for Volume IV, 75 pages (see RFP Section L-3).

4. Question: L-8.B. requires a citation for each subcontractor/team member. What if a subcontractor/team member was selected for niche capabilities but we do not expect them to perform either 10 percent of the total value of the total contract or 10 percent of the work performed in a particular functional area (however that is derived), do we include their Past Performance Information form but not include them on the Team Relevancy Matrix?

Answer: (See correction in RFP at L-8C.6.a.) Offerors should provide at least one citation for each subcontractor/team member proposed to perform work on the overall contract. Do not include any citations in the matrix if the offeror is not proposed to accomplish that portion of the effort.

5. Question: Can you tell me why the late change (27 Aug 09) in the relevancy requirements? This will severely limit small business participation and competition. Previously the criteria stated, “In determining relevancy for individual submissions, consideration will only be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror or subcontractor, teammate and/or joint venture partner if they are identified to perform that effort for the Team Relevancy Matrix. The following relevancy criteria will be applied to each offeror (or subcontractor, teammate and/or joint venture partner, and key personnel if applicable):” The change on 27 Aug 09 provides, “The following relevancy criteria will be applied to citations for proposed primes only (includes Partnership, Populated JV, any Member(s) of an Unpopulated JV, and a Mentor or Protégé of the SBA Mentor Protégé Program).” Specifically, why is Staffing/Integrated Security applied to the proposed prime only?

Answer: The prime is responsible for overall contract management and ensuring requirements are met. Staffing is a primary concern for the Government.