Geospatial - Vendor Questions 17 Mar 23.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Geospatial Support & Services (GS&S) 2. 0 - Draft Request for Proposal Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA800323R0003
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 18
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Draft RFP Vendor Questions
| Question | Document Name | Page # | Section | Description/Citation | Question | Answer |
| 1 | Is it still reasonable to anticipate RFP in March and then an award in January of 2024? | RFP is now projected to be issued in April 2023, with award prior to January 2024. | ||||
| 2 | Will this remain full and open going through SAM.gov? | This will be a partial small business set-aside (see, paragraph 1.3 of Addendum to FAR 52.212-1). The Government intends to award approximately ten (10) basic contracts. Five (5) awards will be set-aside for small business. | ||||
| 3 | What are the call volumes associated with the IT Help Desk at Tier 1 and Tier 2 Levels? | Please note: The helpdesk requirement would be specifically a Geospatial help desk that could receive calls related to geospatial support requests of many times (e.g., geospatial data editing, geospatial analysis request, geospatial IT system problem, etc.). |
Call volumes will vary by Task Order. Historically speaking, we believe that very few of the awarded task orders on Geospatial IDIQ 1.0 included this requirement and those that did include the help desk task had minimal calls which were likely addressed as part of the rest of the daily operations at the government site by the staff placed on-site to perform other portions of the task order (e.g., the geospatial web developer answered the phone, noted the issue, and made sure that the appropriate team member was informed of the trouble ticket.)
| 4 | What is the anticipated RFP release date? | RFP is now projected to be issued in April 2023, with award prior to January 2024. |
| 6 | Can the Government confirm that it would like to receive questions via email? If so, in what format (PDF, Excel, Word, etc.) would the Government like them to be submitted? | Intrested vendors can provide follow-up questions via email in the excel format provided in this response. Follow-up questions will be accepted until 2:00 p.m. EST 27 March 2023. |
| 7 | Is the government willing to accept licensed aerial imagery to satisfy requirements 1.2.5.2.1 and 1.2.5.2.2? | The specific technical requirements are owned at the Task Order level which would need to be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. Licensed imagery may be acceptable if the Task Order requirement owner is willing to accept licensed aerial imagery, it's acceptable to legal counsel, etc. |
| 8 | Will existing Commercial-off-the-Shelf aerial imagery be acceptable to satisfy requirements 1.2.5.2.1 and 1.2.5.2.2 or will they be required to be new collections? | The government often needs assistance Obtaining aerial Imagery. Often times, the government has access to other suitable imagery already obtained by other government entities for little or no cost. We look for the contractor to advise the government customer(s) on the alternatives to include options to avoid "acquisition", "purchase", etc. This is first and foremost a consulting support requirement before it turns into a contractor collection/creation effort. |
The acceptability of existing Commercial-off-the-shelf imagery depends on the requirement expressed by the task order PWS. These decisions are made at the Task Order Level
| 9 | Will the Small Business’s need to provide a subcontracting plan? | Small businesses are not required to provide a subcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 52.219-9, but they will be required to address the extent of small business performance (participation) in their proposals when the solicitation requires evaluation of small business participation. Small businesses will be required to submit a small business participation plan in accordance with Factor 2. (see, paragraph 5.4 of Addendum to FAR 52.212-1). | |||
| 10 | Will there be a Seed Task Order included with the final RFP? | A seed task order as used in the previous iteration of this requirement will not be issued. An initial task order will be issued for each awardee at the time of IDIQ award (see, AFFARS 5316.504(a)(2)). The TO will act as a guaranteed minimum of $3,000 will be awarded concurrently with the IDIQ contracts, which will provide for the attendance of the GS&S 2.0 Kick-off Meeting (see, paragraph 1.2 of Addendum to FAR 52.212-1). | |||
| 11 | Attachment 2 - PWS | 19 | 1.2.12.1 | Will the customer require the contractor to have an off-site location for weekly COOP testing/exercises? Additionally, will COOP testing/exercises be performed via VMware? | These decisions are not made at the IDIQ level. The specific technical requirements are owned at the Task Order level; not at the IDIQ level. |
Typically, DAF entity COOP requirements and activities are dictated by a DAF organization above/beyond the DAF's local geospatial program office. COOP locations are already pre-determined by the higher-level DAF organization. The contractor is expected to help their geospatial task order client perform IAW the existing COOP constructs, procedures, etc. It is important that the contractor understand DAF basic, common, standard operating procedures such as these prior to being issued a contract. Inexperience or a lack of understanding these standard constructs will be problematic. DAF COOP activities and sites are not unique to IT systems. Mission-critical DAF functions such as Command and Control have COOP sites (typically classified) to ensure the mission continues. These COOP sites have nothing to do with IT other than they need IT capabilities to support their activities.
As an example, a Task Order may require Task 6-aligned geospatial analysis support be provided to Command and Control leaders during a crisis from a C2 COOP location hundreds of miles away from the primary peacetime operating location. The contractor must have pre-existing understanding of these concepts to be effective at supporting Section 1.2.12.1 of the IDIQ PWS.
| 12 | Exhibit A | 3 | 3.2.2.1 | The Government stated the electronic copy of the proposal submission is to be submitted via DCAA CSP, however, section 3.2.2.1.3 stated proposal submission is to be completed via DoD SAFE. Can the Government clarify which system is to be used for proposal submission? | Offerors shall submit proposals in accordance with the Addendum to FAR 52.212-1. At this time the Government anticipates proposals will be submitted through DCAA CSP. In the event that this is not feasible by the time the RFP is release, the Government will transition back to DOD SAFE. The Government will address the DoD SAFE reference in the PWS. |
| 13 | Exhibit A | 3 | 3.2.2 | Can the Government confirm or provide the font size for graphics and tables, is it size 12 or smaller? | Offerors shall submit proposals in accordance with the Addendum to FAR 52.212-1. Graphic presentations, including tables, charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets are subject to the same font size and spacing requirements, and shall have spacing and text that is legible (see, paragraph 3.2.2 of Addendum to FAR 52.212-1). |
| 14 | Attachment 6 | 2 | D | There is no part 2 but parts 1 and 3, please advise. | Attachment 6 - Project Submission has been renumbered to reflect change. |
| 15 | Attachment 6 | 2 | D.3 | It states the Project’s scope includes 5 Key Areas but it only lists four areas: (1) Communication & Training; (2) Program Management; (3) Data & Technical Management; and (4) Rapid Response. Please provide the fifth key area. | Attachment 6 - Project Submission has been renumbered. Project's scope includes only four key areas: (1) Communication & Training; (2) Program Management; (3) Data & Technical Management; and (4) Rapid Response. |
| 16 | Attachment 2 - PWS | N/A | General | The scope of this effort is very broad and presents a challenge for small businesses to be able to fulfill the vast number of requirements. Would the Government consider breaking up portions of the task requirements specifically designed for small business set-aside? | Offerors and their team are expected to be capable of performing all tasks as outlined in the PWS. |
| 17 | Exhibit A | 9 | 5.2.9 | Can the Government provide clarifying guidance regarding the Cross-Reference Matrix? For example, is the Government requiring a clear delineation of the Tasks that will be performed by the Prime and those tasks that will be performed by the Subcontractors based on the past performance citations submitted by both Prime and Subcontractor and indicate which reference number aligns to which Task? | The Cross-Reference Matrix has been amended to require clear delineation of which of PWS tasks will be performed by the Prime and those tasks that will be performed by the Subcontractors based on the past performance citations submitted by both Prime and Subcontractor and indicate which reference number aligns to which task. |
| 18 | Exhibit A | 9 | 5.3.3 | Is there a page limit to each of the Project Submissions? | Attachment 6 - Project Submission should be completed in its entirety and will be limited to 5 pages per Project Submission. |
| 19 | Exhibit A | 12 | 5.3.8 | Will the Offeror be penalized for not having CPARS for some, if not all, of its contract citations? For work performed in the Intelligence Community, the Government, in most instances, do not complete CPARS due to the nature of the work. | No, CPARS will be looked at in an attempt to verify information provided by each offeror. In the event CPARS is not available the Government does not look at that in a favorable/unfavorable way. |
| 20 | Attachment 2 – PWS | 23 | 1.7.8 | Is the Government requiring the contractor to possess a SCIF in order to perform work in the contractor-operated location? | If a Task Order requires work be performed in a SCIF at a government location along with a COOP requirement aligned with that support, one will likely be required. |
| 21 | Per the Eval criteria Factor 2 is Small Business Participation, but if you bid as a small business how will Factor 2 be evaluated? | Small businesses are not required to provide a subcontracting plan in accoirdance with FAR 52.219-9, but they will be required to address the extent of small business performance (participation) in their proposals when the solicitation requires evaluation of small business participation. The contracting officer shall evaluate the extent to which offerors identify and commit to small business performance of the contract, whether as a joint venture, teaming arrangement, or subcontractor (See DFARS 215.304). | |||
| 22 | Is there an update to the acquisition strategy (i.e., timeline, vehicle, and small business status)? | At this time the acquisition strategy, timeline, vehicle, and small business requirements all remain the same. | |||
| 23 | What percentage of work will be OCONUS? | Its unpredictable at this current point and time what percent of work would be OCONUS. |
| 24 | At the TO level will there be multiple types of contract orders (i.e, FFP, T&M)? | The Government intends to allow a mixture of contract types (i.e., FFP, T&M, FP LOE) and tasks as outlined in the GS&S 2.0 PWS within a single task order. Contract type selection will be established at the task order level based on individual requirements. | ||||
| 25 | Is the contracting vehicle configurable? (e.g., Time/Material, Consulting, or another) Or is it dedicated to one style where we may need to add a partner firm to assist with handling accounting software etc.? | More information is needed to answer this question definitively. However, the Government intends to allow for the use of FFP, T&M, and FFP LOE as specified in RFP Exhibit C, contracts may be configured to use the appropriate contract type for Task 5, Task, 10, and Task 12 of the GS&S 2.0 PWS. In the event the contract construct does not meet the offeror's needs, a partner firm may be used to assure fulfillment of task order requirements. | ||||
| 26 | On partnering with other companies, is the USAF looking/preferring to work directly with contractors or looking for contractors to partner with others to offer services? | Offerors and their team are expected to be capable of performing all tasks as outlined in the PWS. It is the responsibility of Offerors to determine its appropriate team of subcontractors to assure the ability to fulfill all required tasks. Offerors are required to have each subcontractor sign RFP Attachment 13, Small Business Participation Commitment Document, confirming a subcontractor's partnership. The Government will not be working directly with subcontractors. | ||||
| 27 | If awarded to a small company, will the USAF be open to renegotiating tasks abilities as that small company increases its ability to offer other tasks listed in the RFP? | Offerors and their team are expected to be capable of performing all tasks as outlined in the PWS at the time of award, whether that be direct performance by the prime or through subcontracting. The Government will not renegotiate. | ||||
| 28 | What is the estimated timeline for the average contract start date if selected? | The Ordering Period associated with GS&S 2.0 is expected to be 22 Jan 2024 through 21 Jan 2029. | ||||
| 29 | Can the Government clarify the page limitations on each section clearly | See Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 Table 1. | ||||
| 30 | Exhibit A | Maximum pages for Project Submissions and Past Performance Information Sheets states ”5 Completed Project Submissions” and “5 Completed Past Performance Information Sheets”. What is the actual page limitation for each category? | See Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 Table 1. | |||
| 31 | PWS | 3 | 1.1.1 | "Support may include technical assistance at Headquarters Air Force, Centers, Field Operating Agencies, Numbered Air Forces (NAFs), Main Operating Bases (MOBs) and reachback support to forward deployed military personnel at Forward Operating Locations (FOLs) as well as a surge capability to quickly respond to wartime, contingencies and manmade or natural disasters." | Present verbiage excludes crucial USAF commands and Air National Guard Readiness Center (ANGRC). In addition to those listed, please confirm the contractor may be expected to support agencies such as Major Commands, Air Operations Centers, and ANGRC. If so, Axim recommends adding these agencies to the list in this paragraph. | The language in par 1.1.1 is not intended to be all-inclusive or limiting, however we would support amending this language slightly to encompass a broader potential customer base from across the USAF/USSF (DAF). MAJCOMs/ANGRC should certainly be added. |
| 32 | PWS | 4 | 1.2 | "All task orders are required to produce results consistent with the AFIMSC GIRA." | There are certain situations that will not require all aspects of GIRA during task order execution and complying with all GIRA approaches could cause TO scope to be bloated or potentially unachievable. As such, Axim recommends changing this sentence to read "All task orders are required, when applicable, to produce results consistent with the AFIMSC GIRA." | We could amending the language slightly to read… "All task orders are required, when applicable, to produce results consistent with the AFIMSC GIRA. Deviations are possible and will be considered but they shall be coordinated with HQ AFIMSC's Geospatial Information & Services Portfolio Management Office prior to deviations being implemented." |
| 33 | PWS | 9 | 1.2.3.2 | "The contractor shall support these requirements with at least one fully trained and certified Zachman or Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF) Enterprise Architect that is also trained and experienced in the use of DoDAF and Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) 2.02" | Limiting the certification pool reduces competition and adds unnecessary expense. Axim recommends removing specific Enterprise Architect certification requirements at the IDIQ level. The language could read, for example, "The contractor shall support these requirements with at least one fully trained and certified Enterprise Architecture Specialist." | It is important to AFIMSC that the future has an increased emphasis on architecture creation and sustainment IAW AFI 17-140, the DoD Architecture Framework (DoDAF), the Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework (FEAF), etc. AFIMSC's portfolio management success hinges on having strong architecture documentation that exposes gaps, unnecessary/expensive redundancies, etc. |
Not every Task Order will require architecture support or certified Enterprise Architects. It may even be a relatively rare occurrence. Bidders are welcomed to team with other consulting firms to bring the right talent at the right time.
34 PWS 18 1.2.12 "Task 12 – Contingency/Crisis/Surge Support" Many exercises serve as Flexible Deterrent Options (FDO) in lieu of "Contingency" operations. Amending the language will be inclusive of all relevant use cases. Axim recommends adding "Exercise Support" to the scope of Task 12 - Contingency/Crisis/Surge Support. Task 12 is intended only for Real World Emergency/Crisis situations which require expeditious award and rapid contractor engagement/support/response and afford minimal, if any, opportunity for preparation.
Exercises are pre-planned with extensive preparations made by personnel and teams to ensure effective execution of training objectives. Geospatial support for these requirements will generally be performed under tasks 1 thru 11 (Specifically Tasks 1, 5, 6, and 10) as appropriate.
If any FDO events arise that can be classified a Real World Emergency/Crisis situation, then they could be considered as Contingency/Crisis/Surge (Task 12).
| 35 | Exhibit A - (Draft) Addendums -1 and -2 | 26 & 13 | 4.3.2 & 5.4.2 | "The Government will evaluate an Offeror’s small business | |||
| subcontracting plan to assure small business participation of at minimum 32.25%" | Some task orders may be difficult to identify qualified SB partners, particularly the specialties listed. This could place performance at risk depending on the requirements. While the contractor will endeavor to identify and nurture SB participation on the task order, evaluating SB participation at the task order level could place unnecessary risk on individual task order execution. Can the government state if the SB participation will be evaluated at the IDIQ contract level or at the individual task order level? | Subcontracting overall at 32.25% of TOs .The overall performance of SB vendors will be evaluated at the IDIQ level. | |||||
| 36 | Exhibit A - (Draft) Addendums -1 and -2 | 16 | 2.2 | "A best value tradeoff decision will then be made based on an integrated assessment of Past Performance, and Price to determine which proposals represent the best value to the Government, as described above in Section 1.1." | Can the government provide tradeoff criteria for the integrated assessment of Past Performance and Price? | See Exhibit A - Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Paragraph 4.2 and Paragraph 4.4. | |
| 37 | Exhibit A - (Draft) Addendums -1 and -2 | 16 | 2.2 | "A best value tradeoff decision will then be made based on an integrated assessment of Past Performance, and Price to determine which proposals represent the best value to the Government, as described above in Section 1.1." | Will Past Performance take precedence over Price or will Price take precedence over Past Performance? | See Exhibit A - Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Paragraph 3.2. | |
| 38 | Exhibit A - (Draft) Addendums -1 and -2 | 16 | 2.2 | "A best value tradeoff decision will then be made based on an integrated assessment of Past Performance, and Price to determine which proposals represent the best value to the Government, as described above in Section 1.1." | Will Past Performance, when considered for tradeoff, use an aggregate score of all cited past performance and each evaluated category from the Table 4 GS&S Relevancy Matrix? | See Exhibit A - Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Paragraph 4.2. Specifically, Paragraph 4.2.2.3 and Paragraph 4.2.2.4. | |
| 39 | Attachment 4 & 5 | Can we modify Attachments 4&5 to accommodate the number of labor categories in Exhibit B (61 vs. 14)? | Changes will be made to Attachment 4 and Attachment 5 to accomodate the number of labor categories. | ||||
| 40 | Attachment 5 | In Attachment 5, the instructions end abruptly and appear to be missing at least the end of one sentence of instruction. | Attachment 5 has been modified to correct error in the instruction section. | ||||
| 41 | Solicitation, Page 79; Exhibit A, Page 1 | Page 79- 52.216-28 "Multiple Awards for Advisory and Assistance Services" states The Government intends to award multiple contracts for the same or similar advisory and assistance services to two or more sources under this solicitation unless the Government determines, after evaluation of offers, that only one offeror is capable of providing the services at the level of quality required. Exhibit A states "...award decision to award approximately ten (10) indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity (IDIQ) basic contracts..." Will the Government please clarify how many contracts they intend to award? | The Government intends to award approximately ten (10) basic contracts. Five (5) awards will be set-aside for small business. The Government is unable to edit FAR 52.216-28. | ||||
| 42 | General | N/A | N/A | Would the Government please provide the timeline between draft RFP and actual RFP? | RFP is now projected to be issued in April 2023, with award prior to January 2024. | ||
| 43 | General | N/A | N/A | Would the Government please provide the expected timeline for award? | Award will be made as soon as possible, but expected before January 2024. Ordering period is expected to be 22 Jan 2024 through 21 Jan 2029. | ||
| 44 | General | N/A | N/A | Would the Government please provide more more information about specific site locations for executing work? | The specific technical requirements are owned at the Task Order level and will be performed across CONUS. Potential work site locations will be different for each task order, possibly anywhere around the globe, and thus cannot be specificed at this time. | ||
| 45 | General | N/A | N/A | Are respondants permitted to submit proposals that do not include a respone to all task requirements? | Offerors and their team are expected to be capable of performing all tasks as outlined in the PWS. Any Offeror who submits an incomplete proposal package may be considered ineligible for award (see, paragraph 3.1 of Addendum to FAR 52.212-1). | ||
| 46 | General | N/A | N/A | Would the Government please provide more information on what type of past performance are you looking for? | See paragraph 4.2 regarding Factor 1 Past Performance evaluation, including recency and relevancy requirements. Table 4 provides further information regarding relevancy. | ||
| 47 | General | N/A | N/A | Will affiliate or foreign affilate/subcontractor past performance be acceptable? | It is permissible to provide past performance from a foreign affiliate/subcontractor provided that foreign affiliate is not from a prhibited source. For prohibited sources see FAR 25.7 and DFARS 225.7. |
48 General N/A N/A Will past performance for a foreign project / customer be acceptable? It is permissible to provide past performance from a foreign affiliate/subcontractor provided that foreign affiliate is not from a prhibited source. For prohibited sources see FAR 25.7 and DFARS 225.7.
| 49 | Attachment 2: PWS | 3 | 1.1.1 Mission | This ID/IQ contract vehicle is one of more than five devices HQ AFIMSC is using to execute this portfolio management vision. | Would the Government please provide additional information in regards to the relationship and goals of the entire portfolio management vision? Specifically around geospatial services/capabilities? | AFIMSC needs the broadest awareness of the AFIMSC GI&S portfolio management program. AFIMSC has a GI&S Portfolio Management website but it is .mil access only at this time. The site contains a significant amount of information as well as a few documents that are more easily shared via email or other electronic means. AFIMSC also hopes to have a kickoff meeting after award to set all awardees on this sort of background to ensure that all successful bidders deliver solutions IAW AFIMSC's overarching vision and goals. | |
| 50 | Attachment 2: PWS | 20 | 1.5 Quality Assurance | The Government will evaluate performance of the services listed in the SS to determine if they meet the performance thresholds. When the proper level of performance is not met, the CO will issue a written Corrective Action Request (CAR) to the contractor. CORs will follow the methods of surveillance specified in the Government’s Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP). Government personnel will record all surveillance observations. When an observation indicates defective performance, the COR will require the contractor TO manager or representative to initial the observation on the CAR. The initialing of the observation does not necessarily constitute concurrence with the observation, only acknowledgment that they have been made aware of the defective performance. | Request the Government provide the Government’s Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP). | The QASP is not available at this time, please refer to the Service Summary located in the GS&S 2.0 PWS. | |
| 51 | Attachment 2: PWS | ALL | ALL | Several sections with FFP and Cost type langauge | Can the Government clarify why the level of cost details being requested are needed under the cost requirements for this FAR Part 12 acquisition? | Other direct costs can be included in resulting Tos. However, the will need to be accomplished through a FFP CLIN structure as this is will be a commercial contract. T&M will only be available for Task 5, Task 10, and Task 12. | |
| 52 | Attachment 2: PWS | 19 | 1.2.12 | Contigency Crisis/Surge Support | Under 1.2.12 - References ODCs - Given that this is a Commercial acquisition, is the requirement for ODCs aligned with a FFP/FFP LOE/TM structure? | Other direct costs can be included in resulting Tos. However, the will need to be accomplished through a FFP CLIN structure as this is will be a commercial contract. T&M will only be available for Task 5, Task 10, and Task 12. | |
| 53 | Attachment 2: PWS | 22 | 1.6.2.3 | Purchasing | Under 1.6.2.3 - References ODCs - Given that this is a Commercial acquisition, is the requirement for ODCs aligned with a FFP/FFP LOE/TM structure? | Other direct costs can be included in resulting Tos. However, the will need to be accomplished through a FFP CLIN structure as this is will be a commercial contract. T&M will only be available for Task 5, Task 10, and Task 12. | |
| 54 | Attachment 2: PWS | 22 | 1.7.2 | Task Order Proposal | 1.7.2 states CO may issue a cost type task order. How can this be accomplished through a FAR Part 12 competitive acquistion? | Other direct costs can be included in resulting Tos. However, the will need to be accomplished through a FFP CLIN structure as this is will be a commercial contract. T&M will only be available for Task 5, Task 10, and Task 12. ODC CLINs can be accomplished through an FFP construct by using actuals to determined costs. | |
| 55 | Attachment 2: PWS | 28 | 1.12 | Other Direct Costs | 1.12 ODCs - should this be included under FAR Part 12 competitive acquisition? If this is an error, recommend issuing Option Clins or NTE CLINS to cover such items under a FFP or T&M Basis | Other direct costs can be included in resulting Tos. However, the will need to be accomplished through a FFP CLIN structure as this is will be a commercial contract. T&M will only be available for Task 5, Task 10, and Task 12. | |
| 56 | Draft Solicitiation / Attachment 2: PWS | 25 / 28 | D / 1.12 | ODCs | Page. 25 of solicitation contradicts Section 1.12 in the PWS. ODCs - See 52.212-4 Alternate I - (ii) Materials (D) Other Costs (1) Other Direct Costs: None and (2) Indirect Costs: None. | ||
| Please provide clarification on which one takes precedence for the solicitation? | Other direct costs can be included in resulting Tos. However, the will need to be accomplished through a FFP CLIN structure as this is will be a commercial contract. T&M will only be available for Task 5, Task 10, and Task 12. | ||||||
| 57 | Draft Solicitiation | 32 | 52.216-7 | 52.216-7 Allowable Cost and Payment. Aug 2018 | This clause is intended for cost reimbursement of a Time and material when a contract other than commercial is contemplated. This RFP appears to be issued using commercial competitve procedures, there are a lot of clauses that conflict the use of the requirements in the SOW or clauses intended to purchase non-commercial items. Please provide clarification as to whether the USG intends to award using Commercial or Non Commercial items From FAR? |
| (a) (1) The contracting officer shall insert the clause at 52.216-7, Allowable Cost and Payment, in solicitations and contracts when a cost-reimbursement contract or a time-and-materials contract (other than a contract for a commercial product or commercial service) is contemplated. | The Contracting Officer has verified that FAR 52.216-7 is not applicable and will be removed from the Solicitation. In accordance with Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Para 1.2, one source selection will be conducted under FAR Part 12, Acquisition of Commercial Items, in conjunction with selected procedures from FAR Part 15, Contracting by Negotiation. | ||||||
| 58 | Draft Solicitiation | 36 | 52.216-4 | 52.216-24 Limitation of Government Liability. Apr 1984 | Limitation of Government Liability Apr. 1984 - Per 16.603-4 (b) (2) - This clause is intended to be used for letter contracts (Undefinitized). Is the USG intending to issue a letter contract versus a traditional FFP/IDIQ? | The Contracting Officer has verified that FAR 52.216-24 is not applicable and will be removed from the Solicitation. | |
| 59 | Draft Solicitiation | 37 | 52.217-8 | 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services. Nov 1999 | Option to Extend Services - Recommend changing 10 days to 30 days given the magnitude and complexity of this requirement. 10 days before expiration does not allow a contractor to demobilize personnel and extend offers past the expiration period. | FAR 52.217-8 extend the ordering period of the IDIQ up to 6-months. The clause applies to the basic IDIQ. Terms and conditions will be tailored specific to each task order. Mobilization and demobilization applies only at the task order level. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .