QUESTIONS_FOR_RELEASE_05_APRIL_2013.pdf

Questions on Draft RFP and Draft PWS

For PACAF DMO IPASS

April 05, 2013

Question #1

Reference: Page 112, Section L-9, Para 5.0

Given the Executive Branch, OSD, and AF emphasis on small business subcontracting, will the government define minimum goals for small business participation?

Answer #1

Currently, the percentage will be at least 25% of the entire effort.

Question #2

Will the government require a Small Business Participation Plan with the solicitation response?

Answer #2

Yes.

Question #3

Will the Government evaluate small business participation as a separate evaluation factor, or subfactor under the technical factor, or within one of the technical subfactors?

Answer #3

Currently, small business participation will be a separate factor.

Question #4

Reference: Page 50, PWS, Para 1.7 and Appendix 4

Since the government requires the contractor to develop, maintain and present academic training (para 1.7) IAW AF, Command, Wing, OG and Squadron guidance then it is necessary for the contractor to have access to applicable standards such as the syllabi to accurately calculate the workload (Appendix 4).

Given that the contractor must follow AF training procedures such as to conduct training IAW the syllabus, the contractor’s own expertise and expertise is moot. Without mutual access to the syllabi and other related AF training guidance, a defective specification or superior knowledge may exist.

Answer #4

The contractor's own expertise and experience is not moot. The standards are provided for reference in Appendix 5. An update to the amount of 'new' courseware will be included in Appendix 4 to identify the requirement for new courseware development. As a potential offeror, contractor must make determination as to the workload based on historic and relevant experience on the individual weapons systems.

Question #5

Reference: Page 3-5, Section B, Para 0001-0007

The industry day brief, slide 22, indicates that LVC events are “Special Projects,” however, LVC is included in the Supplies/Services description for CLINS 0001-0006. Please clarify.

Answer# 5

Final RFP will be revised.

Question #6

Reference: Page 7, Section B, Para 0010

Please confirm the intent of this item is for Phase-in or for Phase-out or for both.

Answer #6

Final RFP for that CLIN will be revised.

Question #7

Reference: Page 34, Section H-3, Para (f)

Please define “QAS”

Answer #7

The clause will be updated to state COR (contracting officer representative).

Question #8

Reference: Page 47, Section H-24, Para (a)

Will a contractor be able to meet the thirty day notification requirements given the Government’s projected award and transition schedule?

Answer #8

It is the intent to allow at least 30 days transition phase.

Question #9

Reference: Page 49, Section H-29, Para (c)

Recommend “Use vs “Sue” as written.

Answer #9

Agreed, corrected.

Question #10

Reference: Page 103, Section L-8, Para D

Please correct the reference solicitation to read FA5215-13-R-7004

Answer #10

Corrected.

Question #11

Reference: Page 108, Section L-9, Para 2.2.3.1.B

Please clarify the requirement; what does the Government mean that “The offeror shall provide experience with…”? It appears that the technical volume is asking for information within the past performance volume.

Answer #11

Currently, experience, not past performance, is required for the technical volume/response.

Question #12

Reference: Page 109, Section L-9, Para 2.2.3.2.D

Please clarify the requirement; what does the Government mean that “Offeror provided experience with…”?

Answer # 12

Currently, the Government would like to see the Offeror’s experience as indicated in the RFP.

Question #13

Reference: Page 109, Section L-9, Para 2.2.3.2.D

Recommend this evaluation factor be included in the Past Performance evaluation because it evaluates and measure the offerors performance in similar contracts (scope, complexity, and magnitude)

Answer #13

Noted.

Question #14

Reference: Page 109, Section L-9, Para 3.0

Is it the intent of the Government to perform a cost realism analysis to support the Government’s Overseas performance quality concerns and to ensure that the offeror fully understands the unique requirements of O’CONUS contract operations?

Answer #14

Currently, the Government reserves the right to perform price reasonableness, realism and completeness analysis.

Question #15

Reference: Page 111, Section L-9, Para 4.2

Given that the Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR) is an official record of offer’s performance, in recognition of the additional burden a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) levies on Government officials, and in light of the sequestration impacts and potential Government furloughs, the requirement for a PPQ should be waived if a Government CPAR exists. Recommend the following: If an offer submits a past performance record that includes a CPAR or similar Government evaluation, a PPQ is not required. Offerors without formal, Government documented CPAR shall send a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) to each performance reference cited.

Answer #15

Question #16

Reference: Page 6, Section M-1, If the lowest priced offer is rated technically acceptable and has a substantial past performance confidence rating, will the Government consider the next higher priced offer for an award in a trade-off scenario?

Answer #16

The evaluation will be conducted IAW section M of the RFP.

Question #17

Reference: Page 6, Section M-1

Does the Government intend to us a Sources Selection Advisory Council (SSAC) for this acquisition?

Answer #17

No.

Question #18

Reference: Page 116, Section M-1, Para C(1)

Will the Government evaluate all technically acceptable offers for price realism and for price reasonableness?

Answer #18

The Government will evaluate proposals IAW section M of the RFP.

Question #19

Reference: Page 9, PWS, Para 1.3.6

Will the Government require an ITAR & TAA with foreign Governments?

Answer #19

Currently, there is no known ITAR/TAA reporting required for this contract. All students will be US citizens or vetted for US access via Foreign Exchange Pilot Program.

Question #20

Reference: Page 9, PWS, Para 1.7.3

Will the Government be able to quantify the number of locally derived topics on an annual or quarterly basis to ensure a comparable level of performance?

Answer #20

Workload estimate revised to reflect estimate for 'new' courseware.

Question #21

Reference: Page 20, PWS, Para 3.2.7, Please define “all other housekeeping and custodial services…” that the contractor is responsible for to ensure a comparable level of contractor service.

Answer #21

Contractor will maintain the facilities/working order in a clean and neat condition for Contractor's work areas. Personnel are required to clean up after themselves and ensure the facility doesn't become filthy or a potential health hazard.

Question #22

Reference: Page 27, PWS, Para 4.10

Does the Government anticipate a need for associate contractor agreements with non-governmental organizations? If so, with who?

Answer #22

Government expects the contractor to develop agreements/memorandum of understanding or agreement with any entity required to perform IPASS core tasks.

Question #23

Reference: Page 41, Section H-19, Para (a)

Does the current contract operate under SOFA Article XIV status in Japan or does it operate under SOFA Article I(b)?

Answer #23

Each contractor is responsible for applying for SOFA status and status approved may vary from one contractor to another. See Section H-19 clause for POC information with 5 AF/JA.

Question #24

Reference: Page 40-41, Section I

Special Provision H-1 (Wage Determination) incorporates SCA Area Wage Determinations 05-2017 Rev 16 and 05-2153 Rev 16 for Alaska and Hawaii respectively. Since the contract, at least as to the Alaska and Hawaii locations, falls under the Service Contract Act, both FAR 52.222-41 (Service Contract Act of 1965) and 52.222-43 (Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Act – Price Adjustment (Multiple Year and Option)) will need to be incorporated into Section I of the solicitation and ensuing contract.

Will these two FAR clauses be incorporated into the solicitation.

Answer #24

Yes.

Question #25

Reference: Page 123, Section L-9, Para 2.2.3.1.A.iv

Reference is made to a sample scenario in M-1(1)(a). That reference doesn’t appear to exist; does the Government appear to exist; does the government mean to reference M-1.B(3)(ii)(b) instead? There appears to be a place holder for a scenario to be added in this section.

Answer #25

Currently, the scenario will be removed.

Question #26

Reference: Page 65, Section Appendix 5, Para A5.2.2

With submittal of the phase-in plan required as part of the proposal, does it count against the 40 page limit of Volume I, Technical?

Answer #26

The submittal requirements and evaluation factors will be updated for the final RFP.

Question #27

Reference: Page 123, Section L-9, Para 2.2.3.2

Subparagraphs include A, B, D, E, F. Is there a missing 2.2.3.2.C?

Answer #27

The final RFP will be updated accordingly.

Question #28

Reference: Page 123, Section L-9, Para 4.3.1

The referenced section 4.3.1 requires the offeror to provide “…a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encounter on prior contracts as well as past efforts…” But there is no applicable section on the” Section L attachment, Past Performance information to provide such information. Is the Government looking for a separate section in Vol III for a discussion of problems encountered and their resolution?

Answer #28

That section states “may” provide. What is provided is your business decision to provide what you deem is necessary. The section L attachment will be updated to provide a place for that information, if you deem it necessary.

Question #29

Reference: Page 70, Section I, Para 52.232-99

It is our understanding that subject clause was rescinded by the Director of Defense Procurement and Acquisition Policy on 21 Feb 2013. Please clarify.

Answer #29

Federal Register, Vol. 78, No. 37, dated Monday, February 25, 2013 provided notice that DoD has discontinued temporary practice of providing accelerated payments to all contractors. The clause will be removed.

Question #30

Reference: Page 40, Section H, Para H-19

The draft RFP references FAR and DFARS clauses pertaining to SOFA exempt status relating to foreign taxes by a company and their employees. Please clarify that if for any reason the company or their employees are not granted this exemption that the government shall consider an equitable adjustment for the taxes and any incidental compliance expenses.

Answer #30

In order to obtain SOFA article status, a Contractor shall comply with the procedures identified in H-19.

Failure to comply, may affect a company obtaining SOFA status. The Government and Contractor shall comply with FAR clause 52.229-6, Taxes -- Foreign Fixed-Price Contracts (Feb 2013), with regards to equitable adjustments for taxes.

Question #31

We believe it would be in the best interest of the Government and industry to provide a contract wide Small Business participation percentage up to 20% and allow the large prime offerors to determine how best to subcontract to meet this requirement.

Answer #31