3ISQuestionsAnswers_7Apr09.xls
XLS spreadsheet 236 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Innovation, Integration, and Information (3IS) Support Contract Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA2550-08-R-8009(RFP)
About this file
3IS Questions/Answers - 7 Apr 09
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 33
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
Questions
| PWS Paragraph/RFP Section | QUESTION | ANSWER | |
| 1 | Sect L, Para 2.2.6 | RFP Section L 2.2.6 requires a glossary in each proposal volume. Typically the Government does not require glossaries in Cost/Price and Contract Documentation volumes (3IS Volumes III and IV). Is it acceptable for the offeror not to provide glossaries to these volumes? | Since the Cost/Price and Contract Documentation Volumes shouldn't contain acronyms or require definitions, a glossary for these volumes is not necessary. |
| 2 | Will the government furnish an OCI checklist to in order for Offeror’s to verify compliance prior to submittal? | The Government does not intend to furnish an OCI checklist. | |
| 3 | The reference states, “Proposals that envision compensation levels lower than those of predecessor contractors for the same work will be evaluated on the basis of maintaining program continuity, uninterrupted high quality work, and availability of required competent professional service employees.” Question: Will the Government provide the compensation standards against which the proposed compensation levels will be evaluated? | The Government will not provide compenstation standards. | |
| 4 | Atch L-3 | As long as we use the format provided, will our response be compliant if we include brief, bulleted rational/substantiation for each citation within the “PWS Reference” cell on the Relevancy Matrix? | The Government does not want offerors to provide an assessment of why they believe a contract is relevant in the Relevancy Matrix. The offeror may briefly describe relevancy in the Executive Summary, if desired. |
| 5 | PWS Para 1.4.3.2.1 | “The contractor shall support these efforts by their technical understanding of systems associated with paragraph 1.4.4 and associated subparagraphs. The contractor shall provide support by performing research on potential shortfalls of multiple systems associated with paragraph 1.4.4, associated subparagraphs and support AF TENCAP in identifying and evaluating current technologies for potential application against validated shortfalls/requirements.” Para 1.4.4 is SIDC – Integration Division. Within that paragraph and sub-paragraphs there is no mention of “associated systems” or “multiple systems.” Question: Is the reference to 1.4.4 mistaken? Could it possibly be referring to 1.4.3.1 “Technical Knowledge?” If it’s not a mistake, could the government provide a list of “associated systems?” | The reference to 1.4.4 is an error. It should reference 1.4.3 and has been updated in the PWS. |
| 6 | PWS Para 1.4.6.2 | The contractor shall present operationally focused advanced training courses in response to HQ AFSPC requirements and training, test and operations support to the SIDC. TRAINING SUPPORT includes the Advanced Space Operations Courses (50/yr), OT&E courses (6/yr), Instructors Principle course (12/yr), the Standardization and Evaluation course (6/yr), and Range and Tactics Orientation course (6/yr). Then the paragraph continues to discuss providing TEST TRAINING SUPPORT and OPERATIONS TRAINING SUPPORT. Questions: | |
| 6a | Does providing Test Training Support to the 595 SG Test & Evaluation squadrons …..and other organizations as determined by the SIDC/XR mean ONLY administering those courses listed in the first sentence, e.g., OT&E, Instructor Principles, STAN/EVAL, Range & Tactics (training support) to test & eval squadron (17th, 14th, & 576th) personnel? | Offeror's should propose to the number of courses listed in the PWS and the Bidders' Library. The organization/individuals to which the courses are taught is irrelevant. | |
| 6b | On this same note “Does providing Operations Training Support to the 595 SG, 25th SRS, and 3rd SES mean ONLY administering those courses listed in the first sentence (training support) to individuals assigned to those squadrons? | Operations Training Support is for the courses listed. | |
| 7 | Sect L, Para 2.2.5 | The reference states, “Use Times New Roman, with a font no smaller than 11 point…” Note: Some of the government recommended formats use 9 & 10 pt font. Question: Is the “Offeror” to assume responsibility for changing font sizes within the government formats (for compliance with Section L 2.2.5) or will the government allowing the use of varied font sizes (Times New Roman, 9 & 10 pt) within similar applications (i.e. tables, figures, graphs)? | Do not change the font size of headings in Government-provided templates. Offerors' proposals shall be submitted using a font size no smaller than Times New Roman 11 point. |
| 8 | Is the prime’s 8(a) status based on what they are on the date of submission and final acceptance of the proposal by the government or is the prime’s status as an 8(a) based on what they are on the award date? Additionally who has the authority to make this status determination, 50CONS or the SBA? | 13 CFR 124.507 states an 8(a)'s status is determined at the time of proposal sumbission. | |
| 9 | How does the “NONDISPLACEMENT OF QUALIFIED WORKERS UNDER SERVICE CONTRACTS” Executive Order impact this procurement, and will we have access to all of the incumbents after award? | The Executive Order applies to contracts covered by the Service Contract Act (SCA). Since the majority of the employees working on the 3IS contract would be considered "exempt," the SCA doesn't apply, and therefore, neither would the Executive Order. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .