AMS II RFP QA Matrix 1 Mar 23 FA7022-23-R-0001.pdf

Responses to Offeror Questions

FA7022‐23‐R‐0001

1 March 2023

Number REFERENCE PG NO. PARA. NO ISSUE/COMMENT QUESTION GOVERNMENT RESPONSE

1 Attachment 5 L‐M 12 L.5.1 and L.5.2.4

As currently written, the Volume III ‐ Technical requires offerors provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology they would use to satisfy requirements as the only measure for the offerors ability to accomplish the PWS.

However, the current proposal organization Table L.2.2 and Subfactors do not require the offeror to demonstrate any knowledge of the PWS.

Will the gov't increase page count and clarify where in the proposal offerors are required to provide their narrative explicitly showing that the offeror understands the AMS 2 Mission and has the capability to hire the right kind of workforce to perform the requirements of PWS? Without the offerors requirement to meet this technical requirement there is no way to ensure offerors pricing is built on a sound, informed strategy.

Paragraph L.5.1 will be updated in Solicitation Amendment 01 to avoid any confusion. Offerors only need to provide information required by paragraph L.5.2.4. NOTE: Please see para L.6.3 regarding relevance of Past Performance. This is where the offeror is required to provide past performance information for the prime and teaming partners/critical subcontractors "demonstrating their ability to perform the proposed effort". Also see Question 13 regarding page count.

2 Attachment 5 L‐M 12 L.5.1 and L.5.2.4

As currently written, the Volume III ‐ Technical requires offerors provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology they would use to satisfy requirements.

However, the current proposal organization Table L.2.2 and Subfactors do not require the offeror to demonstrate any knowledge of the PWS.

Will the govt increase the Technical Volume page count to 25 pages to allow offerors to respond to requirements L.5.1 and L.5.2.4? Consider adding a subfactor to state how the L.5.1 requirement to describe the actual methodology will be evaluated. A possible additional subfactor is as follows: Subfactor 3: The offeror will detail how performance will be accomplished in each of the areas of process, procedures, and planning as required to implement, maintain and support the requirements of the PWS.

The offeror must provide specific and detailed examples, prior experience, and evidence to support their proposal and the offeror’s capability to provide nuclear and physical science technical services.

Please see response to Question 1.

3 Attachment 5 L‐M 12 L.5.1 and L.5.2

L.5.1 states "provide as specifically as possible the actual methodology you would use to satisfy the requirement.

L.5.2 does not allow the narrative to provide.

Please increase the page length to 25 and require Volume II to include the information in L.5.1

Please see response to Question 1.

AMS II RFP Q&A MATRIX ‐ FA7022‐23‐R‐0001

1 March 2023

4 Attachment 5 L‐M 12 L.5.1 and L.5.2.6

The Technical Volume does not require the offeror to demonstrate any knowledge of the PWS. This work is highly technical, and an offeror needs to demonstrate more than qualified people with TS/SCI.

Will the govt add a new subfactor and associated evaluation criteria that focuses on the evaluation of technical solution L.5.2.4 and actual methodology L.5.1. This will allow the govt to evaluate if an offeror is able to perform all the requirements specified in the

PWS.

Please see response to Question 1.

5 Attachment 5 L‐M 12 L.5.2.4 Factor 1;

Subfactor 2

Subfactor 2 requires the submission of a Small Business Participation Plan.

Since this is a small business set aside, why is this a sub factor? Will the government remove this subfactor and release a new one related to the technical details of the PWS?

Although the Small Business Participation Plan is not required for a SB Set aside, the Government will use this factor to evaluate compliance with FAR 52.219‐14, Limitations on Subcontracting.

The Government has removed the requirement to include a minimum percentage for Small Disadvantaged Business so offerors will not be required to subcontract to SDBs. Paragraph L.5.2.4, subparagraph 2. Subfactor Two and M2.2 Step II, Technical Subfactor 2 will be revised in Solicitation Amendment 01 accordingly.

Attachment 5 L‐M and RFP Attachment

L.4.2.2 Section 2:(e) and Attachment 7, Column D

Attachment 7 AMS II PCM requires the offeror to fill in Column D which is the FTE Proposed by LCAT.

Is the offeror supposed to use the FY 23 Hours in the Attachment 6 AMS II TEP worksheet as the FTE for each LCAT listed in Attachment 7 AMS II PCM? If not, please clarify how offerors are to determine the LCAT FTEs?

Yes, offerors shall utilize the FY 23 hours in Solicitation Attachment 6 to determine the Labor Category Full‐Time Equivalent values for the purposes of a Professional Compensation Matrix evaluation.

7 Attachment 5 L‐M 10 L.4.2.2 Section 2: (3)

A Professional Employee Compensation Plan is required in the Cost Volume. FAR 52.222‐46 ‐ Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees. Jan 1993 is not part of the solicitation.

Will the government add FAR 52.222‐46 to the RFP so the PECP can be evaluated?

Thank you for pointing out this oversight. The Government will add 52.222‐46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees in Solicitation Amendment 01.

1 March 2023

8 Attachment 5 L‐M 18 M2.2 Step II

STEP II‐ Technical Proposal Evaluation appears to be missing the description of how the government will evaluate the proposed actual methodologies for accomplishing the PWS requirements.

What is the measure of acceptability for the Technical Volume? What is the requirement for an offeror to obtain and Acceptable rating? What is the measure for an offeror to receive an unacceptable? Please describe how the responses will be evaluated.

Offerors will be evaluated in accordance with Section M in the Solicitation Amendment 01.

Paragraph M2.2 Step II clearly states "The technical factor will receive one (1) overall rating of either an “Acceptable” or “Unacceptable” based on the evaluation of Subfactor 1 and Subfactor 2. To receive an “Acceptable” rating, both subfactors will have to have received an “Acceptable” rating” on their respective evaluation below." Also, please see response to Question 1.

9 Att 5 L‐M 12 L.5.2.4.1 Subfactor

One (1)

Subfactor 1 requires proof of employees with TS/SCI to meet PWS . This is an IDIQ with Task Orders awarded after the IDIQ is awarded.

Please clarify for which positions offerors are to provide evidence the offeror can meet the PWS requirements as of contract award since there are no draft Task Orders included with the

RFP?

Solicitation Amendment 01 has updated language to require offerors have an acceptable plan to ensure they have employee personnel proposed for this contract with appropriate TS/SCI clearances to meet PWS requirements as of contract award. Offerors will be required to provide employees with appropriate clearances for any TOs issued against this IDIQ. To assist offerors ensure they have employees with the proper clearances, the Government intends to provide a DRAFT of AMS II Task Order 01 documents to all offerors who submitted proposals per para M.3.0, Notice to Offerors.

10 Solicitation 40 of 63 252.217‐7027 (d) This clause is not filled in with the type of contract and the not to exceend amount.

Will the government fill in the blanks of the clause?

This clause is removed via Solicitation Amendment 01 as the Government does not anticipate any unpriced actions on this contract.

In the event an unpriced task order becomes necessary, the Government will include this clause in the applicable task order and will complete all fill‐ins as appropriate.

1 March 2023

11 Att 5 L‐M 9, 10 L4.2.2.Section 2 c) The offeror is allowed to propose their own LCATS.

If we propose our own LCATS, how will the government fill in ATCH 6 AMS II TEP since our proposed LCATs may not map exactly to those in the TEP sheet?

Please see L.4.2.2, Professional Comp Matrix Instructions. Offerors are instructed to "map proposed labor categories (to include Subcontractors) to the corresponding Government labor category if they deviate from the Government’s labor category." The offeror shall utilize the same LCATs for Atch 4 Labor rates and Atch 6 TEP as in the PCM. The Government has included an XLS version of Atch 6 TEP to accomodate. Under no circumstance shall offeror's edited Atch 6 TEP reduce total workload hours to less than 43,245 per FY. For example, if Atch 6 shows a total of 3000 hours total for a junior and a senior level of a particular labor category, the offeror may choose to include an intermediate level for that category, but the total hours for that LCAT shall not be less than 3000 hours, including the junior, intermediate, and senior level. If the offeror makes any changes to Atch 6 TEP and Atch 4, they shall include a full explanation that aligns with the mapping on the PCM and should address any changes in hours for those LCATs.

The Header (row 4) is titled " Full Time Equivalent Proposed by Labor Category" which is unclear if the gov't is looking for a Y/N, Hours or Percentage of FTE

13 Att 5 L‐M 4 L.2.2.2.1 The required page size is 8 x 10 with 10 point font (Arial or Times Roman).

Can the offeror use an 11 x 17 page for a personnel table which shows the proposed personnel for this acquisition?

Will the government exempt all Tables in the proposal from page count limitations?

The Government has expanded the page count for Volume III Technical to 10 pages to accommodate a list of personnel for Subfactor 1.

Font sizes are unchanged.

Att 7 PCM 1 Column D Please clarify the type of response the gov't is looking for in this column.

Column D shall list the number of Full Time Equivalents for each Labor Category. Please also see Question 6.

1 March 2023

14 Att 5 L‐M 4 L.5.2.4.1

The RFP requires "offerors proposal provide verifiable proof/evidence they have employee personnel proposed for this contract with appropriate TS/SCI clearances.

In order to protect Personally Identifiable Information (PII) will the government accept personnel name, clearance and eligibility level and last 4 of personnel social security numbers as evidence of personnel proposed to support this program having verifiable TS/SCI? A separate communication cold be provided for offerors to give the gov't the full social security number and ends in the last four of SSN provided during proposal.

Yes, this is acceptable. In the event the Government will require full social security numbers, we will request that be sent separately via encrypted means.

15 Att 5 L‐M 5 L.3.2.2

L.3.2.2 Government Offices.

Provide the mailing address, telephone, e‐mail address (if known), and facility codes for the cognizant Contract Administration Office and DCAA for the prime contractor and critical subcontractors.

Also, provide the name, e‐mail, and telephone for the Administrative Contracting Officer (ACO).

Please clarify which ACO contact information you are requesting as the ACO is associated with a contract and not assigned to a company headquarters location

The Government requests POC contact information (ACO) at the congnizant DCMA/DCAA offices.

1 March 2023

RFP Attch 8 AMS II ‐ PP Sheet

Instructions

The table on the last page under paragraph L requires the offeror to clearly and concisely demonstrate key personnel performance for three of our most recent and relevant contracts under which such key personnel performed the same role currently being proposed on the instant acquisition. The offeror must also indicate their contractual roles for both acquisitions and and any supporting documents which demonstrates the offerors' ability to provide the same level of support for this effort. The offeror is to indicate on the chart Key Personnel for OSEE 2.

Does the offeror complete this same table for the Attachment 8 that is submitted for each of the Past Performance Informations Sheets? Or, does the offeror complete this table once? There are no Key Personnel designated in the AMS II PWS so is the offeror to determine the personnel they consider to be Key? Can the offeror modify this table to show the peron's contractual role on the Past Performance acquisition and the proposed role on the AMS II acquisition?

Paragraph L has been removed. See REV 1 of Atch 8 included with Solicitation Amendment 01

RFP Attch 8 AMS II ‐ PP Sheet

Instructions

The table on the first page requires certified information containing contract contacts for applicable past or present contracts.

Does the offeror complete this same table for the Attachment 8 that is submitted for each of the 3‐5 Past Performance Informations Sheets? Or, does the offeror complete this table once and then start each Attachment 3 with Section B which is the start of the distinct Past Performance citation?

The table only has to be completed once. The information in paragraph A, however, should reflect the offeror performing the work referenced in paragraph B. For instance, if a subcontractor performed the work referenced in paragraph B, paragraph A should list that information.

18 Att 5 L‐M 5 L.3.2.3 This section requires the offeror to provide their "labor surplus area designation".

Please elaborate on the requirement to state the "labor surplus area designation" that the offeror is required to provide? This is not information typically provided and there is not one assigned to the geographical location of performance.

Paragraph L.3.2.3 has been changed to remove this requirement. See Solicitation Amendment 01

19 Att 5 L‐M 2 L.2.1.1

Questions regarding this RFP are encouraged to be submitted as soon as possible but no later than 4:00PM EST on 24 February 2023.

As the government has not yet provided any answers to questions provided by industry will the government consider an extension of two weeks from the date the answers are released? The answers to the submitted questions may have a signficant impact on offerors proposals.

The respnse date will be extended to 23 March.

Please see Solicitation Amendment 01 for details.