ARS Questions and Answers_7 June 24.pdf

Questions and Recommendations to Draft Documents released to industry on May 31, 2024

Question Number

RFP Reference Question Government Response

1 Appendix B, Tab 8, Column D

Some of the PWS references appear to be incorrect with the Draft RFP provided.

Can we assume that all PWS References for the Appendix are in work at this time and are awaiting final release?

Yes, reference will be complete upon PWS completion.

2 Appendix B, Tab 8 It appears that a critical workforce qualification would be for AN/FPS-117 Radar Technician but is either missing or not asked for in the template. Please consider adding the AN/FPS=117 Radar Technician as an evaluated position.

The focus for the evaluation is capability not a specific radar experience. At this time, we will not be adding the specific radar technician.

3 Section L, 2.5.1.9 Training Management

Is the Government expecting to see the full and entire set of training course materials as artifacts to substantiate the proof for this requirement? A specific training module for a course would be large and lengthy.

The government expects in house information to be provided sufficient enough to satisfy the threshold for points. The Government will consider revising wording to allow statement of facts in this area.

4 Section L, 2.5.1.9, Training Management

If a contractor is using a commercial on-line training course for a required subject and doesn’t have access to be able to deliver the full curriculum, what would be an appropriate work sample to demonstrate this training coverage?

Would this be a reasonable use of the Statement of Fact concept?

The Government will consider revising wording to allow statement of facts for all areas unless otherwise specified.

5 Section L, 2.5.1 Statement of Fact…

“The Offeror may elect to Provide a Statement of Fact (SOF) …. which can be used to validate the criteria in the following paragraphs of this Section L: 2.5.1.2 and 2.5.2.1 – 2.5.2.9 …” It appears the references within Section L are incorrect. Can the Government provide the correct references or confirm they will be updated with in the final RFP?

Yes, we will make all fixes.

RFP Reference Question Government Response

It appears the correct references would be “2.5.1.2 – 2.5.1.9”.

6 Section L, 2.5.1.8 Would the Government consider implementing the formula described in this instruction into the Appendix B Scoring Matrix to ensure consistency across offerors?

The Scoring Matrix has the formula built into it.

7 Section L, 2.5.1.8 Workforce Retention

Would the Government consider adding further breakdown of on-site personnel that includes retention of remote locations and local locations? This would provide the Government additional insight to the retention of staff within difficult assignments.

Austere site retention was added to the scoring matrix. Currently, the Government is looking at numbers only.

8 Section L, 2.5.2 Paragraph references to 2.5.2.1 – 2.5.2.7 (bottom of second paragraph) and 2.5.2.1 –

2.5.2.9 (bottom of fourth paragraph) appear to be incorrect and should read 2.5.1.1 – 2.5.1.7 and 2.5.1.1 – 2.5.1.9 respectively.

We will look and fix any errors.

9 Section L, 2.5.2 Self- Scoring Matrix

Paragraph starting with “The Offeror-Proposed Self-Score Points…” refers to a para 2.5.2.6 for description. Paragraph L2.5.2.6 does not exist in this version of the document. Please provide the correct paragraph number reference.

We will look and fix any errors.

10 Appendix E. TEP Proposal Format

Will the Government add a Travel and ODC tab to the workbook to outline the detail that rolls into the corresponding Travel and ODC rows on the Option Year Breakout tab?

A breakout of travel and ODC is not requested by the Government at this time, only the total overall to be charged to the appropriate in-direct rates (up to the offeror) and profit (not charged on travel).

Government considering adding language to specify purpose of additional pricing information and how it will be evaluated for clarity.

11 Section M, 6.4 How will the Government evaluate reasonableness and realism of the individual

The Government will be utilizing price analysis and realism, unless

RFP Reference Question Government Response non-labor cost elements (i.e. Travel and ODCs) if there is no ability to provide a rational or backup to the quoted price?

only one offeror is received, then the Government reserves the right to utilize cost realism IAW Section L&M.

12 App B, tab 8 How many resumes for site leads? 15 sites, do we need 15 resume or will 1 work to earn full points on the matrix. Apply to radar techs etc.

Gov will discuss further and consider updating this criterion in the self-score matrix.

13 Matrix Does the gov want the entire radar tech training docs or will a SOF work?

Will update artifacts that can be submitted including other artifacts

14 Appendix E: TEP Proposal Format.

There are two worksheets defining labor rate buildups: “Non- Exempt Labor Breakout” and “Exempt Labor Breakout.” The non-exempt labor worksheet is specifically designed for labor categories appearing in the CBA agreement, including specific line-item buildups for the various unique H&W fringe provisions that literally differ for each individual labor category. At the same time, WDs for two separate locations for SCA

Are we required to develop a set of custom fringe rates associated with each CBA labor category (as implied by the construction of the “Non-Exempt Labor Breakout” worksheet) or could we use our existing CBA FPRR rates if they afforded comparable benefit levels?

Offerors must follow the CBA rates for all fringe rates.

RFP Reference Question Government Response and DBA labor categories are also provided.

15 Same topic in #1 Since the “Non-Exempt Labor Breakout” worksheet is customized for the development of CBA-based labor + fringe rates, what mechanism would we use to define the labor + fringe rates associated with SCA and DBA labor categories (e.g., the “Exempt Labor Breakout” worksheet)?

All labor categories on the ARS contract are related to the CBA.

16 Same topic in #1 If we are required to develop custom labor + fringe rates for each CBA labor category, is there any restriction on the use of our existing FPRR fringe rates for SCA / DBA / Exempt labor categories?

Offerors must follow the CBA rates for all fringe rates.

17 Appendix E: TEP Proposal Format.

There is an inherent assumption based on the construction of the “Non-Exempt Labor Breakout” worksheet that all CBA labor hours for all labor categories will be flat across all time periods (since there is no provision for specifying contract periods).

Is this a logical assumption (particularly for the Phase-Out period)?

Labor rates must follow the last CBA in effect. This means utilizing the last set of labor rates and fringe. They must be the same for all years without any escalation.

Once the awardee negotiates a new CBA, they present that IAW the SCA clause and the wages can be adjusted.

18 Appendix E: TEP Proposal Format.

The construction of the “XX23 TPS Rate” worksheet does not explicitly allow for the specification of

Is the “XX23 TPS Rate” worksheet exclusively for specification of CBA rates (excluding SCA, DBA, and Exempt labor rates)?

All labor categories on the ARS contract are related to the CBA.

RFP Reference Question Government Response overhead / G&A rates that may differ by contract year such as an Offeror’s FPRR rates.

19 Same topic in #4 Since there is no obvious provision for overhead / G&A rates that may differ by contract year, should these rates be those associated with Contract Year 1 only?

All indirect rates are accounted for on the first tab. If there is a in-direct rate directly linked to labor, you would use that formula on the first page.

20 Appendix E: TEP Proposal Format.

On the “Option Year Breakout” worksheet, CLINs xx20-xx23 contain plug numbers.

Are these plug numbers intended to be transferred to the “TEP Roll-up” worksheet?

If so, is it the Government’s expectation that appropriate indirect rates are to be applied to these numbers?

These are numbers provided by the Government, will be the same on all TEP, and will be rolled-up in the total.