Attachment_O-FINAL_Q AS_20160630.pdf

AFCAA Cost Estimating Modeling Support Questions and Answers

QUESTION AND ANSWERS FROM RFP

SUBMITTED ON 30 JUNE 2016

The section “For Prospective Offerors” refers to

“Section M, paragraph 2.2.4, Cross-Referencing”. Is

2.2.4 the correct reference?

Reference: Attachment M

Updated Attachment M – Technical Cross Reference

Matrix. The information on this attachment is just an example and each Offeror will update accordingly to their proposal submission.

Should the following be added to Section B, ITEM

NO 002: “Task 7 - Product Finalization IAW PWS

3.4”? Section B, ITEM NO 0002, Task 3 and Task 6

Task 7 is utilized for the last year of the performance.

There will be the finalization of Tasks 3 to 6 that should be minimal and the remaining support will be to finalize the project(s) as indicated in PWS 3.4 –

Product Finalization. This was updated in the solicitation.

For Task 3, should the PWS reference be 3.1.3? For

Task 6, should the PWS reference be 3.3?

Section B, ITEM NO 0002

Yes. Updated in solicitation.

The POP for CLIN 0001 (Program Management) ends on 11-SEP-2017. The POP for all of the other

CLINs (0002-0007) end on 11-SEP-2021. Should the POP for CLIN 0001 also end of 11-SEP-2021 as

CLIN 0001 would reasonably continue for the duration of the contract?

Reference: Section F

Corrected. This is a performance of 5 years.

Does the Government intend to define how many hours comprise one Full Time Equivalent (FTE) for purposes of this proposal (e.g. 1860 hours, 1920 hours, etc.).

Reference: Section 4.4.4.1

This is a cost type contract and the Offeror is to propose the number of hours based on the areas of support IAW the PWS supported tasks. The

Government will not dictate the number of hours for a

FTE for this effort; it is up to the Offeror to propose the number of hours to meet this requirement. The number of hours that a company uses to determine a FTE is based on their own internal practices but it does not pertain to this requirement.

Reference found in 8.6.1 was removed to allow the

Offeror’s to propose the appropriate number of hours for the support throughout the performance of this contract.

Does the Government still intend to provide ODC and Travel NTE amounts as stated in response to

Question #34 from the pre-solicitation?

Reference: Section 4.4.4.1

The Offeror is not to price out CLIN 0003 (Data), CLIN 0004 (Travel) and CLIN 0005 (ODCs) on the pricing worksheet. These areas were grayed out and the Government will use a not to exceed or estimated amount for the award on the Travel and ODCs CLINS.

The fourth sentence in this paragraph refers to data to be included “within Appendix G, Small Business

Participation Plan Charts”. Please confirm there is no Appendix G, and this information should be provided as a table within the Offeror’s SBPP.

Reference: Section 4.3 Small Business Plan, Page 71

Item (3)

There is an Appendix G, but it is not a separate attachment; it was incorporated in the SBPP table.

Solicitation was updated and the Small Business

Participation Plan Chart is what is needed to be completed if the SSP applies to the prime offeror.

Surge support is not specifically addressed in the

PWS. Does the Government intend to provide a NTE amount for pricing purposes for CLIN 0006? If not, will the Government clarify what level of support and for which PWS tasks Surge support is anticipated?

Reference: Section B Supplies or Services ITEM

0006 CEM R&D Surge Support

These CLINS address a surge that covers all the task areas and should be proposed by the vendor. It is listed as a separate CLIN to be priced covering all task areas for support and if the Government needed the additional support it will be exercised.

The Government will not provide an NTE for CLIN

0006.The overall support for surge is not estimated to exceed 25% of the contract value. The solicitation and

Attachment I – Total Proposed Pricing Worksheet has been revised to show a range of percentages for surge support that will be priced by each Offeror.

Given the 15 page limit for Subfactor 4, may the signed NDAs instead be included with the resumes with an unlimited page count?

Reference: Section M Factor I Technical Approach

(6) (i) (b) – page 86 of 94: “(b) includes signed and dated non-disclosure agreements for each of its Key

Personnel in accordance with PWS Attachments D and E.”

Reference: Section M Factor I Technical Approach

(6) (i) (b) – page 86 of 94: “(b) includes signed and dated non-disclosure agreements for each of its Key

Personnel in accordance with PWS Attachments D and E.”

Yes the NDAs can be incorporated in with the submission of the resumes that will be Appendix A:

Key Personnel and is to be included in Volume I.

Appendix A: Key Personnel has no page limits.

Please confirm the required copies of enforceable agreements between the prime and small business teaming partners is NOT included in the 10-page limit, and may instead be included as an attachment to Volume III with an unlimited page count.

Reference: Section L 4.3 Volume III Small Business

Plan paragraph (5) page 71 of 94:

Correct. These teaming agreements maybe submitted as a separate attachment and will NOT be counted for the page limitation. Properly label the attachments as:

Teaming Partners Agreements

What is the reference to PWS 3.2.3 referring to?

Reference: ATTACHMENT M TECHNICAL

CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX

Reference: Section B, ITEM NO 0001

That was an example ONLY. Each Offeror is to complete that table based on their proposed solution and staffing (labor categories, hours) which will include the reference areas of the PWS so it maps back to the tasks per each proposed staff member. No pricing or rates are to be listed on this form. This form will be used to evaluate the proposed staff, hours and tasks that will be completed per the proposed staff.

Should the inputs for the column titled “Work Req or

Task #” and “Reference Area:” for CLINS 0001 and

0002 only address PWS 3.X or should they also address PWS 4.X?

Reference: ATTACHMENT M TECHNICAL

CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX

See #11.

Will the government remove the individual page limitations established for Volume I Subfactors 1 through 4, and instead allow the Offeror to allocate the 50 page combined page limit across each of the four Subfactors as it chooses?

SECTION L - 3.3.1 Page Limitations Table 1 Page

This table has been updated to give enough pages for the offeror’s responses. The 50 page limitation for

Subfactors 1 through 4 still applies.

Section L, Subfactor 4 – Management/Workforce:

There is no indication of what key resumes or how many are required. Please clarify. Section M states resumes are required for key personnel but are they required for each subcategory of the labor category, i.e. PWS para 4.3.1, 4.3.2? Can one resume be used for multiple sub labor categories?

The Government anticipates that each offeror will provide a point of contact (POC) or team lead for all commodity groups outlined in the PWS (Sections 4.2 to

4.6). Key personnel is addressed in PWS Section 4.7 and 4.7.1 which also states that “The contractor may combine one or more of these Commodity leader positions and submit the resumes/CVs accordingly”.

Are the data templates in the RFP (Attachment G) the actual and complete collection of templates with which the contractor will be working? If not, could the government provide the actual and complete set?

These attachments (G-1 to G-10) are the commodity templates that the Offeror will be completing once performance starts on this contract. These templates were provided as a reference of the information that will be collected for this type of support.

Section C, PWS para 8.3.3 states that “The

Contractor must have a Top Secret Facility Clearance

Level (FCL) at the time of receipt of proposals.” For teams comprising more than one contractor, to which contractors does this apply? Is it a requirement that every team member have a TS FCL, that the prime have one, or simply that at least one team member have one that is made available to all other team members?

The Prime contractor must have a final Top Secret

Facility Clearance Level (FCL) to be able to propose on this effort. Each teaming partner or subcontractor who supports this contract must have at least a Secret

Facility Clearance to handle the workload for this support. If the teaming partner or subcontractor does not have the proper FCL at the Top Secret level then all work must be done at the Prime facility which must hold a Top Secret Facility Clearance. There will be no exception to this; all TS work whether from the Prime of any subcontractor or teaming partner must be completed at a facility with a Top Secret Facility

Clearance and all subcontractors or teaming partners

MUST have at least the Secret FCL for all other work on this contract.

Section C, PWS para 3.1.1 Task 1 – Establish required NDAs states “The contractor must, within 6 months of contract award have all necessary NDAs to ensure full and open access at a minimum to all

Department of Defense (DoD) ACAT I program data, past and present, with no limitations.” The wording of this task describes a massive data set going back decades that the contractor must ensure access to, and appears unreasonable. Further, if an NDA is not needed until much later in execution, the 6-month deadline appears arbitrary. Could this requirement be re-worded to better reflect actual Program requirements that would be reasonably achievable by a qualified offeror?

The Government will take into account/consideration and will allow for good faith attempts to initiate the

NDAs and/or will allow the contractor to provide documentation (emails, letters, etc.) between the CEM contractor and the data source (Federal or commercial) that shows or indicates the process has been initiated and the delays or resistance to provide the information is on the other party or Government entity.

For this reason open communication between the awardee (Contractor) and the COR or Program

Manager is essential for mission success in all areas.

No other changes will be made to the PWS on the

NDAs. After contract award the meetings and open communication will be vital for this portion of the support.

Section L, para 2.8, Pg. 61 states offer must be good for 90 days. This conflicts with Section L, para 2.1.1

(d), pg. 58 stating a period of 270 days. Please clarify the requirement for validity of the offer.

Each Offeror’s proposal and pricing is to be validated

270 calendar days. Corrected in Para 2.8 Page 61.

Section L, para 2.12.1 States “Any objection to disclosure: Shall be provided in writing to the

Contracting Officer within 5 days of RFP issuance.”

This is not a reasonable amount of time to have received and made a determination on an objection.

Is it reasonable to submit the objection in concurrence with the submission of the proposal?

The final RFP states 5 days after RFP assurance. In the

Government’s opinion this was a reasonable amount of time to determine if there is any objection to the listed contractor support.

No additional time will be given.

Section C, PWS para 3.1.3 Task 3 – Data Collection and Normalization, states “The PM will identify the programs to be pursued given the time and resources available.” Is this intended to be the AFCAA PM or the Contractor?

This refers to the AFCAA PM – updated.

Section L, para 2.4, pg. 60, states proposal are due by

2:00 PM EDT on 18 July 2015 and para 2.4.1, pg. 60, states proposals are due by 2:00 pm EDT on 11 July

2016. Please clarify the due date of the proposal.

Proposals are due by 2:00 pm EDT on 18 July 2015.

Corrected in solicitation.

Section L, para 4.3 Volume III, are Small Businesses required to submit a Small Business Plan?

All vendors are to address Factor III Small Business

Plan. If the offeror is a small business in this NAICS code then they are to address it with a statement noting that it is not required for this effort to submit a Small

Business Plan; however, even if they are a small business they still must meet the 5% small business participation for Small Disadvantaged Businesses

(SDB) IAW 4.3.

If the offeror is a small business and is also a SDB then a statement validating that the 5% (that pertains to a

SDB workshare) is met and the offeror shall provide a copy of the SAM.Gov record showing the offeror is a small business in the NAICS code 541712.

See the Small Business Participation Chart on page 70 which clearly states that 5% of the workload is required to meet the small business participation. If the SB is a

SDB then that percentage is met; however, the vendor must address this in their proposal.

Providing a description similar to what is above will be acceptable for Factor III, Small Business Plan.

Section L, para 4.3 Volume III, FACTOR III Small

Business Plan states: “NOTE: The sum of all the percentages will equal 10% and that includes the 5% to a Small Disadvantaged Business.” This language should be changed to a minimum of the total contract value. Why is a small business who intends to prime limited to a 5% or 10% workshare?

All Offerors are to address and provide information of their company if they are a small business concern. See

#22 which fully explains the Government’s requirements for the Small Business Participation Plan.

Section L, para 3.3.6 states that cross referencing should not be required but para 4.1.2.1 requires a cross reference matrix in Volume I. Please clarify if a cross reference matrix is required or not.

Yes it is required: 3.4.6 States: Cross-Referencing:

The proposal volumes shall be written on a stand-alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross referencing to another volume.

Information required for proposal evaluation which is not found in its designated volume will be assumed to have been omitted from the proposal.

Cross Referencing is required for this submission.

Section L, para 4.1.2 states “NTE 82 pages” but the table on page 64 has a total of 60 pages. Are the remaining 22 pages for the Representative resumes required in the table? What ae the page limits for

4.1.2.1 Technical Risk and 4.1.2.1.1 Technical

Reference Matrix which are not included in the table on page 64?

Updated table. This includes the Technical Reference

Matrix which is limited to 10 pages.

As a follow-on question to #11 above, Section L, para 4.1 does not require resumes in this volume – please clarify the resume requirement.

Updated in table to read: Representative resumes or

CVs will be labeled: Appendix A: Key Personnel.

This appendix is to be included with Volume I and is unlimited page account.

Section L, Subfactor 4 – Management/Workforce:

There is no indication of what key resumes or how many are required. Please clarify. Section M states resumes are required for key personnel but are they required for each subcategory of the labor category, i.e. PWS para 4.3.1, 4.3.2? Can one resume be used for multiple sub labor categories?

See #9, #14 and #26 above concerning the key personnel.

Reference Section L: 3.3.1, Table on Page 64 states, “Representative Resumes or CVs will be labelled:

Appendix A: Key Personnel This appendix is to be included with Volume I”

Q: Please confirm that resumes are to be included in

Appendix A and that Appendix A is NOT included in the 82 page limit of the Technical approach as referenced in section L: 4.1.2.

See #9, #14 and #26 for answers concerning the key personnel. See also the updated table on page 64 of the solicitation for the page limitations.

Reference Section L: 4.4.1 Volume IV, Factor IV –

Price, Page 72 states ”The offeror and each subcontractor/team member shall provide the information described below for proposed direct labor rates for the solicitation specified labor”

The information included in a subcontractor’s “Basis of Price/Rate build-up information” requested in this section represent information that would typically be not be disclosed to the prime offeror but rather submitted directly to the government in a sealed package. Please provide additional instructions on how the government would like to receive this information from prime offerors and all subcontractors.

The teaming members or subcontractors shall submit their sealed package containing the “Basis of Price/Rate build-up information” through the Prime contractor with the formal RFP submission. The Government will not accept separated packages from the teaming members or subcontractors.

The Prime contractor must submit a final proposal that will include all subcontractor or teaming member pricing. The Prime must submit the inclusive total pricing to include all subcontractors and teaming members at the time specified in the solicitation or the proposal will be considered non-responsive and will not be evaluated.

Each subcontractor is to clearly mark the package/envelope with the name of the company, volume number and address it as follows:

AFDW/PKSB

Solicitation FA7014-16-R-5007

Attn: Mr. Bumjoon J. Pak/Ms. Cynthia I Harper 1500

West Perimeter Rd., Suite 2720

Joint Base Andrews, MD 20762

Is this information required at the time of submission or will it be requested and collected after source selection and award?

See #29

In section B, some CLINS show cost, fee and total, some show cost only, and then CLIN 0007 (Fixed

Fee) shows cost and fee. Please provide clarification on how the CLINs should be used, and if any are summary CLINs.

Corrected

CLIN descriptions for CLINS 0006 and 0007 on pricing template do not match Section B. Which is correct?

Corrected

What is the work scope included in CLIN 0007 labeled as “Fixed Fee – Base Period”?

The Offeror is to propose a fixed fee for all five years of support under CLIN 0007.

CLIN 0006 and CLIN 0007 from Attachment I Total

Proposed Pricing Worksheet are transposed from the solicitation document. Please correct.

Corrected

RFP Section 7.2 says that local travel within 30 miles of JB Andrews will not be reimbursed. RFP Section

10.2 says “Place of Performance: In accordance with the PWS, the Contractor shall perform the tasks identified in this task order at an off-site location provided by the Contractor. The contractor’s facility does not have to be physically located in the National

Capital Region (NCR).”

How will the government handle travel reimbursement for staff to meet with the customer if the contractor’s staff is not physically located in the

NCR? Will this travel be reimbursable?

The vendor will meet with the Government PM and

COR through telecom conferencing or VTC capabilities to include video chat and Microsoft Lync or Skype for

Business. If the Government PM and COR requires the vendor to attend a meeting at the Pentagon or JB

Andrews then the travel will be approved on a case by case basis and reimbursed as described in the PWS

Section 7.1 under the Travel section.

In Section F, CLIN 0001 only has a one year POP. Is that correct?

Corrected to show a five year POP

Section 2.1.1 (d) requires proposals remain valid for

270 days, whereas Section 2.8 requires proposals remain valid for 90 days. Please correct these conflicting statements.

Corrected in the solicitation

Section 4.4 requires Subcontractor’s to submit proprietary cost and pricing data. Therefore, please confirm subcontract pricing data may be submitted via sealed package.

See #29 above.

Section L: 4.4.3 Employee Compensation Plan requires contractors to provide fully burdened labor rates for each labor category proposed. Is it the

Government’s intent that the rates be shown in the

Compensation Plan, or is it anticipated that the fully burdened labor rates will be included in the price volume. The template for pricing information does not include the fully burdened labor rate for each category.

The fully burdened rates are to be included in

Attachment I – Total Proposed Pricing Worksheet

Table 4.4.4.1 does not include a row for fringe benefit expenses. Therefore, are contractors authorized to manipulate this template to accommodate our indirect rate structures?

Attachment I – Total Proposed Pricing Worksheet was updated to include a line for Fringe amounts.

Section 4.4.7 Section 2 – please remove the word

“certified.” As detailed in numerous other locations within the solicitation, certified cost or pricing data is not required.

Corrected

Section 4.4.7 Volume Organization says that Section

2 shall contain Certified cost and pricing data, to include estimating methodology, but section 4.4.5 says that certified cost and pricing data is not required provided there is ample competition. Please clarify.

At this time certified cost and pricing data is not required to be submitted. However, the Contracting

Officer reserves the right to request certified cost or pricing data IAW FAR 15.402l if needed to determine reasonable price or cost realism.

Updated solicitation on certified cost and pricing data.

Section L-Attachment L-4 references requirements for Major Subcontractors, but does not define Major or Minor Subcontractors. How should the prime determine which subs are Major and therefore subject to the requirements for Major subcontractors?

This is the discretion of the Offeror to determine who they will consider to be a major or minor subcontractor or teaming partner.

M0002 Evaluation Factors d. (8) states “evaluation shall be made on the basis of a separate comparison for each fiscal year of the contract…” but no breakout by fiscal year is requested in the pricing.

How does the government plan to evaluate with no breakout?

Corrected in solicitation to include breakout

M0002 Evaluation Factors d. (8) states: The offeror’s

Price Proposal will be evaluated for award purposes, based on the total price proposed for the core task requirements throughout the entire base period.

Nowhere in the RFP is the term “core tasks” defined.

How are the core tasks determined?

Corrected in solicitation to define core tasks

M0002 Evaluation Factors d. (8) states “Additionally the offeror shall complete the Total Proposed Price

Table with their fully burdened rates. – See

Attachment M (Total Proposed Price Table)”.

Attachment M provided with the Final RFP is titled

“Technical Cross Reference Matrix” and does not have a column for Fully Burdened Labor Rates.

Please confirm the correct template was referenced.

This reference was corrected in the solicitation. The only place for any pricing or rates is on Attachment I –

Total Proposed Pricing Worksheet.

Attachment M is for labor categories mapped to specific tasks and how many hours it is estimated for that labor category. This will be used to evaluate how the Offeror is addressing all of the task areas and providing enough man hours of support to handle all of the tasks. No rates or pricing is to be listed on

Attachment M.

The synopsis on fbo.gov states the Government anticipates award of “a single Cost Plus Fixed

Fee/Firm Fixed Priced hybrid type contract.” There are no other references Firm Fixed Price within the

Solicitation. Please clarify which portion of the work, if any, is anticipated as Firm Fixed Price.

Corrected. The FFP CLIN was removed.

Filename:

Attachment_B_CEM_Fee_Schedule_20160504:

Worksheet contained within this file identified as

Base Period however both worksheets within this file reflect a 2 year Base Period, a 2-year Option 1 period and a 1-year Option 2 period. Please confirm is this is accurate or if the worksheets should be updated to separate individual years for a total 5 year Base

Period.

Corrected to reflect total 5 year POP

Recommend delete reference to “Course Instructors outline in the PWS Section 4.5” Deleted this reference.

Question: Is there a page limit for each individual past performance reference?

Reference: Section L 3.3.1 (Table 1); Section L 4.2;

Attachment L-2

Yes, not to exceed forty (40) pages. Section L – 2 which is used as your Volume II Past Performance submission consists of the form which is 8 pages.

This will give enough pages for three (3) references of which two must be from the Prime contractor for the same scope and complexity as this effort.

Question: In Attachment L-2, may the offeror delete unused lines from the template? For example, under

“I. Key Individuals” there are 11 lines in the template but if only two lines are needed, may the offeror delete the unused lines?

Reference: Attachment L-2

Yes, this form can be adjusted based on the

Offeror’s information.

Reference: Attachment L-2

Question: In Attachment L-2, may the offeror delete the instructions from the template?

Yes

Reference: Section L 3.3.1 (Table 1) ; Question #43

Question: It appears the response to Question #43 has not been implemented in the Final RFP. Is that intentional?

This was not intentional and it was corrected in the solicitation.

Reference: Question #70; Section L 3.3.1 (Table 1)

Question: Should offerors submit resumes for all proposed personnel or for all proposed key personnel?

Only those individuals that the Offeror considers

Key Personnel. See #9, 14, 26 and #27 for further direction.

Reference: Section L 3.3.1 (Table 1); Section L 4.1.2

Question: The total number of pages for Volume I:

Technical Approach in Section L 3.3.1 (Table 1) is

62 (plus unlimited pages for resumes) and in Section

L 4.1.2 the instructions state that the volume is NTE

82 pages. Which is correct?

Volume I will have 82 pages that must meet the page limitations that are outlined in the solicitation on Page 64. Appendix A: Key Personnel will be part of Volume I as an additional attachment but will not count towards the page limitations.

Reference: PWS 4.3.3

Question: Does the AIS Commodity Leader require 7 years of missile/munitions in addition to 7 years of

AIS program cost analysis?

See PWS 4.3.3: Must have at least ten (10) years of technical cost analysis experience; of which, at least seven (7) years must be of progressive

DOD, e.g., Navy, Army, Missile Defense Agency, and other DOD organizations or AF ACAT I level missile/munitions acquisition, e.g., Navy, Army, Missile Defense Agency, and other DOD organizations or AF ACAT I level AIS program cost analysis experience.

Reference: Section L 4.2.1.1 (11th bullet)

Question: Where in the Past Performance template

(Attachment L-2) would you like offerors to address comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions (per L 4.2.1.1, 11th bullet)?

Section M of Attachment L-2 has been updated to have Offeror’s address areas that might not be addressed in prior areas of the form.

Reference: Section L 4.2.1.1 (12th bullet)

Question: Where in the Past Performance template

(Attachment L-2) would you like offerors to address comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with contract terms and conditions (per L 4.2.1.1, 12th bullet)?

Section M of Attachment L-2 has been updated to have Offeror’s address areas that might not be addressed in prior areas of the form.

Reference: Section L 4.2.1.1 (13th bullet)

Question: Where in the Past Performance template

(Attachment L-2) would you like offerors to include the past performance questionnaire log (per L 4.2.1.1, 13th bullet)?

Section M has been updated to have Offeror’s address areas that might not be addressed in prior areas of the form.

Reference: Section M Factor IV: Cost or Price

Factor d) 9. item 2) on page 94 which refers to an additional compensation plan requirement to populate Attachment M “Total Proposed Price Table” with fully burdened rates.

Question: Attachment M as posted on FBO consists of the PWS “Technical Cross Reference Matrix”.

Please clarify in which Attachment fully burdened rates are to be provided?

Updated in the solicitation. Attachment I – Total

Proposed Price Worksheet is where all fully burdened rates will be incorporated.

Reference: softcopy solicitation attachments as labeled on FBO:

Question: “Section_L-1_Cross_Reference_Matrix,” and “Section_M_-

_M0002_Pricing_Reference_Matrix” appear to be the same document. Is this in error?

Section M was changed to Attachment M

Technical Reference Matrix for this requirement.

Attachment M has been updated with the correct information.

Reference: Volume IV Section L 4.4.7 Volume

Organization on page 76

Question: In addition to completing Attachment I

Total Proposed Pricing Worksheet as specified in

Section L 4.4.4.1, is the Section 2 cost or pricing data to be provided at the same PWS task level utilized in

PWS Attachment M “Technical Cross Reference

Matrix” for traceability?

See questions 1, 11, 46, and 60 that addresses the use for Attachment M.

Reference: Section M d) Factor IV: Cost or Price

Factor item (8) page 93 which states proposals will be evaluated against factors including budgetary information in the solicitation

Question: In which section of the solicitation is this budgetary information available?

Section M was updated in the solicitation.

Reference: Section M c) Factor III Small Business

Participation Plan (SBPP) paragraph (1) page 91, the first sentence of this paragraph states the SBPP will be evaluated based on the extent of commitment to use small business as subcontractors. However, Section L and the Q&A’s clearly state that a small business prime can satisfy a portion of the SBPP 10% small business target.

Question: Please confirm that a small business offeror’s proposal meets the SBPP acceptable measure of merit if, for example, its proposal is comprised of at least 5% of the total contract value staffed by a SDB subcontractor, and the remaining

95% of the total contract value staffed by the small business prime offeror.

See responses to questions #22 and #23.

Reference: PWS Section 4.1.1 Overall Integrated

Technical Manager

Question: This paragraph states that administrative and clerical support under the contract shall not be considered a direct task or labor category. Does this mean an offeror may not propose hours and costs for its customary direct charge contracts and program control support in accordance with its CAS

Disclosure Statement when such support will be directly utilized in support of contract CDRLS to include NDA execution, monthly status reports, contract/subcontract administration, etc.?

The Government has identified the Integrated

Technical Manager in 4.1.2 to address these task areas; however, if the Offeror considers these areas as direct tasks and an additional labor category that is up to each individual Offeror to assign hours, rates and tasks to support this position and include it in the proposal.

Reference: Proposal Validity Period

Question: PWS Section 2.8 specifies validity period of 90 days, Section L specifies 270 days. Please confirm Section L specified 270 day validity period is correct.

Corrected to 270 days.

Reference: PWS Section 12 (b) Use of Non-

Government Advisor

Question: PWS states paragraph (b)(2) of the certification statement must be completed. In which volume is this certification to be included in the proposal?

The requirement of PWS 12(b) is if the Offeror objects to the use of either company listed that supports AFDW in contractual actions the Offeror was to submit an objection directly to the

Contracting Officer within 5 days of the RFP release (2.12.1). Submitting a proposal (2.12) constitutes acceptance of the statement found in

2.12.1 that there is consent by the Offeror to the

Government’s use of a Non-Government advisor.

The timeframe for any objection to the CO has lapsed and is now closed.

Reference: Section L Paragraph 2.11 Use of

Contractor Staff Supporting Requirement in Source

Selection

Question: Section L states submission of a proposal constitutes acceptance of the statement, which implies that no further certification is necessary unless an objection applies. Please confirm if submission of a signed certification at paragraph

2.12.2 is necessary if the offeror has no objection to the use of non-government advisors, and if so, in which volume is this certification to be submitted?

See #67

Reference: signed SF-33 and completed Schedule B

Question: Please confirm if this information should be included in Section 1 of Volume IV Price.

No, due to a glitch in the award system when preparing the solicitation this will be waived to complete this form.

Reference: Section L 3.3.2 Page Size and Format

Question: this section states “do not include foldout pages.” Will the government allow the use of foldout pages in Volume IV Price if needed for .xlsx pricing files?

Yes, use of legal size or foldout pages will be accepted in Volume IV Price.

Section L, para 4.2.2 Teaming Arrangement: Please provide a definition of “teaming arrangement.” Is a subcontractor considered a teaming arrangement?

Yes, based on FAR Subpart 9.6 -- Contractor Team

Arrangements:

9.601 -- Definition.

“Contractor team arrangement,” as used in this subpart, means an arrangement in which --

(1) Two or more companies form a partnership or joint venture to act as a potential prime contractor; or

(2) A potential prime contractor agrees with one or more other companies to have them act as its subcontractors under a specified Government contract or acquisition program.

9.602 -- General.

(a) Contractor team arrangements may be desirable from both a Government and industry standpoint in order to enable the companies involved to --

(1) Complement each other’s unique capabilities and

(2) Offer the Government the best combination of performance, cost, and delivery for the system or product being acquired.

(b) Contractor team arrangements may be particularly appropriate in complex research and development acquisitions, but may be used in other appropriate acquisitions, including production.

(c) The companies involved normally form a contractor team arrangement before submitting an offer. However, they may enter into an arrangement later in the acquisition process, including after contract award.

Questions received until 30 June 2016:

Attachment L AFCAA POA&M is not referenced in the RFP instructions: Is the content of attachment L the work plan that must be priced for year 1?

Is the technical proposal to address the content of attachment L?

Is proposing a detailed draft POA&M required by an evaluation criteria?

Yes – Each offeror is to complete Attachment L for the first year of support and it will be a detailed draft that will be evaluated. See Subfactor 2 – Develop a Plan of

Action & Milestones (POA&M)

See Attachment L AFCAA POA&M to complete for the first year of support – see Section M (4) Subfactor 2:

Plan of Action & Milestones (POA&M) for evaluation criteria.

This is a ‘living document’ and will be updated based on the guidance of the Government PM or COR after contract award when needed.

Are all the Studies listed in Attachment L considered

Task 6 studies or Surge requirements covered by

CLIN 6

CLIN 0002 is for all labor associated with Tasks 1 to 7 of the PWS for pricing.

The POA&M Attachment L covers Tasks 1 to 6. The

POA&M at this time will not address Task 7 for the

Product Finalization.

The surge support will not be addressed in the POA&M until it is needed for the mission and it will be directed by the Gov’t PM or COR to revise the POA&M since it is a ‘living document’ and will need to be adjusted based on the mission support.

In the worksheet “Total Proposed Price Table”, cell

A9 states “0006 Fixed Fee (CLINS 0001 to 0006)”.

Should this be labeled “0006 Fixed Fee (CLINS 0001 through 0005)”?

Corrected see Attachment I – Total Proposed Pricing

Worksheet

In the worksheet “Total Proposed Price Table”, blank cells exist for 0007a. – 0007d (cells B11, B13, B15 and B17). Should these cells be completed since they are not highlighted to reflect the proposed cost amounts based on the stated percentage ranges of

Surge?

Corrected see Attachment I – Total Proposed Pricing

Worksheet

If the response to question 3 is YES, should the proposed surge costs be calculated based on the percentages as stated or cumulative so that when added together they total 25% of the effort for

CLINS 0001 and 0002?

For example 7a. 0 – 10%; 7b. an additional 1 – 5%;

7c. an additional 1 – 5%; 7d. an additional 1 – 5%;

for a total 25%.

These are to be priced as stated. The Government wants these levels of surge (Covering all task areas of the PWS) priced and the fee that is associated with each level of surge. The surge support may not be needed during the performance of this contract; however, this surge support will give flexibility to the Government for any mission support changes at the levels outlined.

See an example provided on Tab 3 of Attachment I –

Total Proposed Pricing Worksheet.

In the worksheet “Total Proposed Price Table”, the

Total Proposed Price calculation in cell B21 only includes the Fixed Fee for CLIN 0007, not the Labor costs for that CLIN. Should the Labor Costs be included in this total?

B21 is for the Total Proposed Price of all CLINs.

In the worksheet “Cost Elements for Entire POP”, please clarify how CLIN 0007 (column H) should be completed? As stated in question 3, would 25% of the sum across the different cost element for CLINS

0001, 0002, and 0006 be correct? If not, please advise the proper way to calculate CLIN 0007.

This Tab (Cost Elements) will be used to breakdown the actual proposed cost based on the cost elements and

Column H should represent the total price across for each of the CLINS. This tab should also be the same total and match the Total Proposed Price Tab.

The revised version of Attachment B

(Attachment_B_CEM_Fee_Schedule_20160620)

Has been corrected to now reflect a single base period, but it now shows 8 “quarters” for a base period effort consisting of a total of 60 months.

Should this file show 20 quarters instead of just 8?

The Government intends to use the 8 quarters for the fee breakdown. This will be completed and incorporated with the award based on the proposed pricing of the awardee.

Regarding Amendment 0002 Section B CLIN 0007 and revised Pricing Worksheet elements for CLIN

0007a to 0007d:

Question: These items appear to require pricing only for the Fixed Fee associated with the specified surge levels I - IV, but does not require pricing for labor costs associated with these surge levels. Is this a correct interpretation?

Corrected on Attachment I. There is to be pricing for the labor support at each level and the fee associated with that level. The Total Proposed Price will be for all

CLINS. See the updated Attachment I – Total

Proposed Pricing Worksheet.

Regarding: Amendment 0003 Attachment I Pricing

Worksheet “PRICING EXAMPLE” for Surge CLIN

0007a to 0007d:

Question: Taking the Government’s example literally, the “Total Cost for All Surge Elements

CLIN 0007a to 0007d to include fee lines” amount of

$378,000.00 (Line 20) represents a cumulative 10% of the “Total of CLIN 0001 to 0005 including Fee” amount of $3,780,000.00 (Line 10). Is it the

Government’s intent that the Offeror’s proposed amount in Line 20 shall also equate to 10% of the

Offeror’s proposed amount in Line 10?

NO - The Government’s example was just that an example. The Government’s example does NOT provide any cumulative intent for the Offeror’s proposed amount to equate to any specific percentage of the Offeror’s proposed amount.

The Government anticipates that the offeror will provide their pricing and fee based on their strategy in support of this effort.

Please clarify the requirement for the past performance references for the prime. Section L

Table 1 and para 4.2.1 states the prime must submit at least two (2) part performance references. Para

4.2.1 also states “Offeror should consider subcontractor past performance submission if their proposal includes substantial subcontracting efforts.”

Can the prime submit 1 and two other references be from subcontractors?

No, At least two of the past performance must come from the Prime for this type of support. Section L 4.2.1 is very clear that the Prime must have at least 2 of the three past performance references.

“4.2 Volume II, FACTOR 2 – Past Performance:

(Section L-2 is to be used for this Volume II)

4.2.1 Recent and Relevant Contracts: Offeror shall

provide past performance information on no more than three (3) contracts/ work efforts which are considered relevant in similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities in accordance with the relevancy criteria stated within Section M, Evaluation Factors, Section M002 (b). The Prime must submit at least two (2) past performance references of the three (3) for this volume. “

Section M, Factor I Technical Approach, para (5)

Subfactor 3: For an offeror to “exceed” in the technical approach an offeror must show corporate experience doing very specific CADE efforts. This criteria provides an advantage to incumbents and co-mingles the technical approach and past performance volumes, resulting in past performance to be double counted.

The Government is not sure what the question is for this statement; however, there is a difference in corporate experience compared to past performance.

This type of criteria does not give advantage to the incumbent.

If the Offeror as a company has done this type of support, similar complexity and can demonstrate that as a company they have provided this type of support

IAW the PWS then that is shown as their corporate experience more so than past performance.

Example: Corporate experience for one company in construction is that they have done that type of work and that is the majority of their work base which would be more ‘corporate experience’. However, if that same company held a 10% workshare as a subcontract for example on an Information Technology (IT) requirement they can claim that as past performance;

however, their main experience as a company

(corporate experience) is in construction.

Section L, para 4.3: Is it required that the SDB have

5% of the initial (base year) TCV or can it be 5% of

TCV for base period?

This is a five (5) year period of performance for this contract so the 5% SDB will be for the Total Contract value proposed by each offeror.

Section L, para 1.0 states this will be a CPFF contract but also provides Attachment A and Attachment B

Incentive Fee Schedule. According to FAR 16.306

“A cost-plus-fixed-fee contract is a cost-reimbursement contract that provides for payment to the contractor of a negotiated fee that is fixed at the inception of the contract. The fixed fee does not vary with actual cost, but may be adjusted as a result of changes in the work to be performed under the contract.” Will this contract be CPFF or CPIF?

Please explain how it can be both if that is the case?

This is a Cost Plus Fixed Fee; however, the

Government to ensure meeting all contractual requirements on this type of support is utilizing the

Fixed Fee Clause:

52.216-8 -- Fixed Fee.

Fixed Fee (Jun 2011)

(a) The Government shall pay the Contractor for performing this contract the fixed fee specified in the

Schedule.

(b) Payment of the fixed fee shall be made as specified in the Schedule; provided that the Contracting Officer withholds a reserve not to exceed 15 percent of the total fixed fee or $100,000, whichever is less, to protect the

Government’s interest. The Contracting Officer shall release 75 percent of all fee withholds under this contract after receipt of an adequate certified final indirect cost rate proposal covering the year of physical completion of this contract, provided the Contractor has satisfied all other contract terms and conditions, including the submission of the final patent and royalty reports, and is not delinquent in submitting final vouchers on prior years’ settlements. The Contracting

Officer may release up to 90 percent of the fee withholds under this contract based on the Contractor’s past performance related to the submission and settlement of final indirect cost rate proposals.

(End of Clause)

The Government intends to use Attachment B Fee

Schedule to withhold $100,000 of the fixed fee over a period of eight (8) quarters. The Government will manage and release the fee withholds based on the clause outlined above.

IAW with PWS Section 8.4.3.1, dated 27 June 2016, it notes the following:

“If the teaming partner or subcontractor does not have the proper FCL at the Top Secret level then all work must be done at the Prime facility which must hold a Top Secret Facility Clearance. There will be no exception to this; all TS work whether from the

Prime of any subcontractor or teaming partner must be completed at a facility with a Top Secret Facility

Clearance and all subcontractors or teaming partners

MUST have at least the Secret FCL for all other work on this contract.”

Respectfully please clarify the following: Is it a requirement for Subcontractors (including

Consultants) who will be performing all work at a TS

FCL Prime Contractor facility that they must minimally have an active and approved SECRET

FCL of their own regardless where work is begin performed? Please note that DSS and the NISPOM

(Section 2.212) are very clear as it relates to their non-approval in granting Consultants FCLs of their own.

The Government is stating that the Prime must have the

Top Secret Facility Clearance in accordance with the

DD254 requirements. All subcontractors or teaming partners should have the Secret Facility clearance if they will be doing any of the work at their facility. The

Government has not stated anything concerning

Consultants in the PWS reference.

This contract is at a minimum Secret Clearance level for any work performed on this contract by the subcontractor or teaming partner. If the Offeror has

Consultants then all TS work must be done at a TS facility or on a Government installation, base or facility.

The PWS does not state that Consultants are to hold a facility clearance only that any TS work on this contract must be performed at the appropriate level facility.