Response_to_A AS_III_Draft_RFP_-_Section_L_Questions.doc

Government Responses to Industry Comments

A&AS III Draft RFP, FA5613-13-R-0007 Section L Questions/Comments

1) Question: Section L-2, Paragraph 52.216-1. This paragraph does not include FFP Task Orders. Is this an omission or does the Government intend to only award FFP-LOE Task Orders?

Response: The provision language will read:

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a Firm Fixed Price, Firm Fixed Price Level of Effort and Cost Reimbursable contract resulting from this solicitation. (End of provision)

2) Question: The end of document FA5613-13-R-0007_DRAFT_RFP.docx, contains 3 pages from Section L and cites conflicting information with the more complete version of Section L, which is broken out under a separate file name (FA5613-13-R-0007_Section_L.docx). Items such as contract type and date for pre-bid/pre-proposal conference differ. Will the Government confirm these 3 pages were left appended to this file in error and also clarify the planned contract type and date for the pre-bid conference?

Response: The provision language will read:

52.216-1 TYPE OF CONTRACT (APR 1984)

The Government contemplates award of a Firm Fixed Price, Firm Fixed Price Level of Effort and Cost Reimbursable contract resulting from this solicitation. (End of provision)

Please note that FFP is the predominant contract type, and CR will be issued on a line item basis only.

Because both 6 Apr 13 and 30 Mar 13 fall on a Saturday, the dates will be revised. The Government anticipates a pre-proposal conference date of Friday, 5 Apr 13, with responses due 29 Mar 13. However, the dates are subject to change, and all potential offerors should continue to monitor FBO for release of the final solicitation.

3) Question: Reference Section L, Page 2 – Indicates Pre-Bid / Pre-Proposal on 5 Apr 2013 and Attendee list due on 29 Mar 2013, while the Draft Solicitation, Page 70 indicates these dates as 6 Apr 2013 and 30 Mar 2013 respectively. Please clarify?

Response: Because both 6 Apr 13 and 30 Mar 13 fall on a Saturday, the dates will be revised. The Government anticipates a pre-proposal conference date of Friday, 5 Apr 13, with responses due 29 Mar 13. However, the dates are subject to change, and all potential offerors should continue to monitor FBO for release of the final solicitation.

4) Question: Reference Section L-2 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS IN FULL TEXT, 5352.215.9001, paragraph a, page 2, states that a pre-proposal conference will be held 5 Apr 2013 at a TBD location and that names of attendees must be submitted by 29 Mar 2013. The provision language on page 70 of the Draft RFP states that the conference will be held in Germany on 6 Apr 2013 and that attendee names must be submitted by 30 Mar 2013. Can the government clarify the date of the pre-proposal conference, requirement for submission of attendees, and as much detail as is currently available on location?

Response: Because both 6 Apr 13 and 30 Mar 13 fall on a Saturday, the dates will be revised. The Government anticipates a pre-proposal conference date of Friday, 5 Apr 13, with responses due 29 Mar 13. The Government anticipates the pre-proposal conference will be held in the Kaiserslautern Military Community, Germany. The final solicitation will contain the firm dates and location. However, the dates and location are subject to change, and all potential offerors should continue to monitor FBO for release of the final solicitation.

5) Question: In Section L, D.3.c.iii, please clarify whether the requirement is to provide accreditation documentation for one, single employee related to the Sample Task, or documentation for one employee in each proposed labor category?

Response: The requirement is to provide documentation for one, single employee related to the sample task order.

6) Question: If one has no relevant past performance, would they submit N/A for Volume II? Would this mean their past performance would be considered “acceptable?”

Response: In accordance with Section L, paragraph L-3.E.1, “An offeror with no or sparse past performance should submit the past performance volume with an explanation that they have no recent or relevant performance.”

In accordance with Section M, paragraph M-2.B.1.d., “Offerors without a record of relevant past performance for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown past performance. In accordance with DoD Source Selection Procedures, ‘unknown’ shall be considered ‘acceptable.’”

7) Question: Section L says “Submission of proposals for the two awardable TOs is not required to be considered for a basic IDIQ award.” Besides not being eligible to be awarded the particular TOs, are there any negative evaluation considerations if one does not submit awardable TO proposals?

Response: No.

8) Question: Reference Section M, Page 3, Para A.3.a.ii – Documentation (also Section L, page 7, Para D.3.d.iii). Is the government expecting documentation for a real person, with all privacy act information hidden (e.g. written as “John XXXX, 1234 XXXX Lane” etc.), or can a fictitious person and associated documentation be submitted? Does the requirement to not image documents apply to documentation submitted for this item? For example, can a DD214 be scanned in and submitted as an image? Does this documentation count against the page count limit?

Response: There is no specific requirement for the data to be for a real person. If the documentation provided is for a real person, no Privacy Act data shall be included.

Yes, the requirement to not “image” the document if scanned into a PDF is still applicable. As outlined in Section L, paragraph L-3.B.5, “Always create PDF documents to enable textual search and copy functions.”

In accordance with Section L paragraph L.3.D.3.c.iii, “This documentation does not count towards the 15 page limit.”

9) Question: Reference Section L, Page 4, Para 4 –Binding and Labeling: Would the government prefer the unbound volume to be printed single sided or double sided?

Response: There is no criteria for double sided or single sided. The Government does not have a preference.

10) Question: Reference Section L, pages 6-7, Para D.3.b.iv: This sentence states that “It is important to note that the total subcontracted positions allowable is not per awardee, but is a cumulative total of subcontracted AS positions regardless of the prime.” The wording in this para seems to indicate the limit is cumulative against all contracts issued under this solicitation, not by prime contact. If the government were to award 2 prime contracts for USAFE A&AS 3, does this mean that company X and Y have to share information on how many total and subcontracted AS positions they have to manage? Assuming both companies receive a task order for 100 AS positions, does this mean that if company X were to use no subcontractors, company Y can have up to 30 FTE (15% of the 200 FTE total)? Do similar or unique restrictions exist in other countries covered by this acquisition?

Response: The interpretation of the wording is correct. It is a cumulative against all contracts issued under the solicitation, not by prime contract. Please note that unlike the example listed above, the number of allowable subcontracted AS positions is not a percentage of FTEs. This number is determined by DOCPER and the German government based on the number of FTEs employed under the contract at any given time. The Government does not intend to mandate a method for contractors to manage this requirement.

This requirement is only applicable for subcontracted AS positions performing work in Germany. According to DOCPER, similar subcontractor restrictions do not exist in Italy. To the Government’s knowledge, similar subcontractor restrictions do not exist in the United Kingdom.

11) Question/Comment: Reference Section L, Page 8, Para 2 – Confidentiality of Sources. The second sentence advises offerors that contacting or seeking out source(s) of past performance information are strictly prohibited. We understand that the intent is to eliminate any attempt to solicit favorable past performance ratings or obtain feedback from Government personnel on what ratings were provided to the Contracting Organization regarding that offeror. Is the intent also to prohibit bidders from contacting past performance sources to verify currency of contact information? Recommend that this section be modified to allow bidders to contact past performance sources solely for the purposes of verifying and ensuring accuracy of contact information.

Response: Your interpretation of the intent is correct. The government will take the recommendation into consideration for the final RFP.

12) Question: Reference Section L, pages 8-9, Para E.5: Does the 3 PPID limit apply to each major subcontractor or is it a total for all major subcontractors?

Response: Offerors are limited to a total of three PPIDs for all major subcontractors.

13) Question: Reference Section L, page 10-11, Para F.6. – Pricing Instruction: Various parts of the RFP indicate that the work may be split between government-provided facilities and contractor-provided facilities. This significantly affects bidder pricing, and normally bidders provide separate rates depending on whose facilities are used. Will work in contractor-provided facilities be required? If so, will the government allow a separate rate structure for that work?

Response: The OCONUS work will be performed at a government facility. The CONUS work will be performed at the Contractor’s facility. There is no specific contract requirement for the offeror to establish a facility CONUS or OCONUS.

Offerors should bid Zone 1 and Zone 2 rates consistent with performance in a Government facility. Offerors should bid Zone 3 rates consistent with performance of work in the Contractor’s facility.

14) Question: Reference Draft RFP, Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices, CONUS CLIN Zone 3 and Section L, Paragraph F, Volume III – Price, Subparagraph 6c, Zone III. Will the work performed CONUS be performed on a government facility with the government providing office space, furniture, phones and computers as it does in OCONUS locations? Should we provide contractor facility rates or government site rates for this CLIN?

Response: The CONUS work will be performed at the Contractor’s facility. There is no specific contract requirement for the offeror to establish a facility CONUS or OCONUS. Offerors should bid Zone 3 rates consistent with performance of work in the Contractor’s facility.

15) Comment: The CLIN description indicates G&A is not permitted for ODC. It is customary for a contractor to recoup actual costs associated with ODC. Section L does not indicate how the contractor will propose ODC so that these costs are addressed.

Response: The ODC CLIN will have two primary uses: 1) to provide logistical support funding depending on the customer’s budget and requirements and 2) to provide funding for over and above task order specific certification requirements. In both instances, the contractor is not anticipated to incur any additional administrative burden. Based on this, G&A is not appropriate for the ODC CLIN. If the contractor is required to propose ODCs, it will be outlined in the task order RFP.

16) Comment: The CLIN description indicates G&A and Profit is not permitted for reimbursement of government required training. It is customary for a contractor to recoup actual costs (not Profit) associated with ODC. Section L does not indicate how the contractor will propose ODC so that these costs (not Profit) are addressed.

Response: The government consider the application of G&A for the training CLIN. The ODC CLIN will have two primary uses: 1) to provide logistical support funding depending on the customer’s budget and requirements and 2) to provide funding for over and above task order specific certification requirements. In both instances, the contractor is not anticipated to incur any additional administrative burden. Based on this, G&A is not appropriate for the ODC CLIN. If the contractor is required to propose ODCs, it will be outlined in the task order RFP.