HD_TATs_RFP_Compiled_QandA_11Dec12.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 42 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA8075-12-R-0002
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Amendment_3_HD_TATs_RFP_SF30.doc | DOC document | |
| Amendment_2_HD_TATs_RFP_SF30.doc | DOC document | |
| HD_TATs_RFP_Compiled_QandA_6Dec12.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Amendment_1_HD_TATs_RFP_SF30.doc | DOC document | |
| ESG_HD_TATs_RFP.doc | DOC document | |
| Pre-Solicitation_Notice.docx | DOCX document | |
| HD_TATs_Draft_RFP_Compiled_QandA_Final_08Oct12.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| DRAFT_HD_TAT_RFP.doc | DOC document | |
| Industry_Day_7Mar12_QA_Final.docx | DOCX document | |
| Industry Day Attendees 7Mar12.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| IAC Industry Day 7Mar2012 FINAL.ppt | PPT presentation | |
| Draft_HD_TATs_PWS.docx | DOCX document | |
| HD_TATs_Special_Notice.doc | DOC document |
Show all 13
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| HD TATs RFP Q&A, Solicitation No. FA8075-12-R-0002 | |||||
| # | Solicitation Section | Paragraph | Page(s) | Question/Comment | Response: As of 6 Dec. 2012 |
| 1 | Draft RFP Q&A | Question #93 Answer | HD_TATs_Draft_RFP_Compiled_QandA_Final_08Oct12 indicated that the final RFP would include the text “"Past performance information shall include a minimum of four (4) recent contracts performed by the prime contractor. Offerors with three (3) or more subcontractors on their team shall submit recent past performance references for at least three (3) different subcontractors. Offerors with less than three (3) subcontractors on their team shall submit at least one (1) recent past performance contract for each subcontractor.” The information pertaining to the number of past performance contracts for subcontractors was not included. Is it still the Government’s desire to receive past performance contracts as indicated here? | Yes. Amendment 2 will be posted and include this language | |
| 2 | Draft RFP Q&A | Question #95 Answer | RFP/Q&A Section: Q&A # 95 Answer: |
b. For Delivery/Task Orders under IDIQ type contracts where past performance is assessed at the Delivery/Task Order level or any other contract type: Very Relevant - Cost type contract(s) greater than $10M; Relevant – Cost type contract(s) greater than $2M and less than $10M; Any non-cost contract(s) greater than $6M; Somewhat Relevant – Cost type contract(s) less than $2M; Any non-cost contract(s) greater than $500K and less than $6M; and Not Relevant – Any non-cost contract(s) less than $500K."
Question (1): Given that 44% of CBRNIAC TATs are less than $2M and 68% are less than $5M as stated by the Government, would the Government consider lowering the value threshold on all cost type task order contracts and other contracts to $1.5M for a highly relevant contract to ensure that there is adequate competition? It appears that given the value relevancy criteria on the past performance citations at the TO level and other contracts is probably high since technical work for many of the focus areas is typically lower in contract value.
| When the Government answered the Draft RFP questions we made appropriate adjustments based on all the requirements and their respective relevancy. The Government will not adjust this area any further. All Offerors will be evaluated the same way. This requirement has eight focus areas and the CBRNIAC focus area is only one example of the eight areas. | ||||
| 3 | SF33 | Block 9 | 1 | SF 33 states “Sealed offers in original and 3 copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the Schedule will be received at the place specified in Item 8, or if handcarried, in the depository located in Bldg 40, Rm 164, Offutt AFB until 12:00 AM local time 18 Dec 2012.” |
Sub-section L1.2 states “Proposals are due no later than 4:00 PM on the date specified in paragraph L2.1…”
| Sub-section L2.1 Table states “Volume II shall be submitted not later than 4:00 PM Central Time on 10 December 2012. All other volumes shall be submitted not later than 4:00 PM Central Time on 18 December 2012.” There is a discrepancy between the SF 33 and Section L; therefore, please confirm that the times/dates for the proposal submissions and the number of copies noted in the Sub-section L2.1 Table are what the offerors are to adhere to. | IAW 52.215-8 the order of preference is the contract SF33 Form, Section A, called Solicitation/Contract Form is higher in preference. However, the Government will eliminate this inconsistency with amendment 2 that will reflect 4:00pm, Central Time, and change the date from 18 December 2012 to 21 December 2012. | |||||
| 4 | Section B | CLIN 0003 | 3 | The Contract Type of CLN 0003 in this Section B is identified as CPFF. The Contract Type of CLN 0003 in this Section B is identified as CPFF which differs from the contract type identified for this CLIN elsewhere (i.e. Section J-6 identifies the CLIN 0003 contract type as FFP). Can the Government clarify which contract type representation is correct? | Yes CLIN 0003 is listed as a CPFF. Please read the description for CLIN 0003 that states the following; "TATs will be priced separately and may be issued as CPFF, FFP, or FFP-LOE task orders." The representation in Section B is correct. The Government is requesting that you price CLIN 0003 A&AS related to RDT&E HD TATs as FFP for those labor categories listed in Section J - attachment 6. The proposed labor rates for each Firm Fixed Price (FFP) labor category will serve as the maximum allowable rates for CLIN 0003 (A&AS related to R&D) used for FFP Task Orders (TOs) throughout the life of this contract. | |
| 5 | Section B | 9 | When pricing CLIN X001, should bidder’s assume the IDIQ-Level Program Management Support will be conducted on Contractor Site? | See the answer to question No 8. Most likely most Offerors Program Management Support will be conducted on their site. Understand though that this CLIN is a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) CLIN. | ||
| 6 | Section B/J | CLIN 0003/Attachment J-6, HD TATs Cost/Price Table | 3 | Reference (RFP Section: Section B): Each Offeror shall fill in Table B-1 (RFP Section J, Attachment 6) with the proposed labor rates for each Firm Fixed Price (FFP) labor category and will serve as the maximum allowable rates for CLIN 0003 (A&AS related to R&D) used for Task Orders (TOs) throughout the life of this contract. Will the Government clarify the type of discounting that is anticipated to be required at the TAT level? Will the requirement be for a consistent, flat discount across all labor categories proposed for a specific TAT or will individual discounts on individual labor categories be permitted? | The Government will not require any awardee to discount their FFP labor category rate(s) at the Technical Area Task (TAT) level. Each awardee on a TAT by TAT basis will have to make a business decision on whether to discount their established FFP labor category rate(s) for any A&AS related to RDT&E HD TAT FFP TATs. | |
| 7 | Section B/J | CLIN 0004 and subCLINs/Attachment J-6, HD TATs Cost/Price Table | 3-6 | Section B states that CLIN 0004 covers “Conduct Extension of Services for IDIQ-Level Program Management Support for HD TATs in accordance with the Performance Work Statement.” Further, the sub-CLINs reflect that CLIN 0004 should cover 6 months of activity (6 one-month extensions). Attachment J-6 calculates the price of CLIN 0004 by applying 1,880 hours to all labor categories. |
a) Does CLIN 0004 represent the same type of services (i.e. IDIQ Level Program Management Support) as CLIN X001?
b) If CLIN 0004 reflects the same service as CLIN X001, then should Attachment J-6 be modified to reflect the bidder’s estimate to provide IDIQ Level Program Management Support, similar to how bidders will develop their pricing for CLIN X001?
| c) If Attachment J-6 should include hours for all labor categories, should the hours included on J-6 be based on a 6-month period (i.e. half of the 1,880)? | Yes CLIN 0004 represents the same type of services as CLIN X001 . The amendment will reflect a modified Section J attachment 6 HD TATs Cost Price Table. Yes the 6 Month Extension in TABs "Client (Gov't) Site" and "Contractor Site" that used to reflect CLIN 0004 will be modified to reflect CLIN 0003 and will be based on a 6-month period and be 940 hours for each labor category. Additionally the Section J attachment 6 HD TATs Cost Price Table has a modified "Grand Total" TAB that now includes CLIN 0004AA, 0004AB, 0004AC, 0004AD, 0004AE, and 0004AF to address the 6 Month Extension for IDIQ-Level Program Management Support. The Government in Section L paragraph 5.2 also changed the not exceed total of $30,000 to $33,000 and now includes all five years plus the 6 month extension of services. | |||||
| 8 | Section J | Attachment J-6, HD TATs Cost/Price Table | Pricing Spreadsheet, Attachment J-6. The 6-month extension period lists 1880 for the available hours. Please clarify if this should be 940 hours. Also, it appears the Grand Total tab is double counting each labor category from the Government Site and Contract Site | See Answer No. 11. The Grand Total TAB is not double counting. | ||
| 9 | Section B/J | CLIN 0004 and subCLINs/Attachment J-6, HD TATs Cost/Price Table | Section B states CLIN 0004 is firm fixed price IDIQ Level Program Management. Attachment J-6, tab “Client (Government) Site” includes hours in each labor category for this CLIN, as does the tab “Contractor Site”. It would appear that IDIQ Level Program Management would be performed at one location. Did the Government intend to request Firm Fixed Price IDIQ Level Program Management for both Government and Contractor site? | Please see answer to question No. 11 | ||
| 10 | Section C | Descriptions and Specifications, and C 1.4.2.1 | 11 and 16 | Performance Work Statement; Technical Focus Areas. The use of Homeland Defense & Security (HD&S) and Homeland Security & Defense (HS&D) is prevalent throughout the RFP. Is there an intentional distinction between the two or are they inter-changeable? | The terms are interchangeable. | |
| 11 | Section C/J | Section C 1.4.3.1/Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1 Paragraphs 2.0, 3.6, 4.9 and 8.0 | 18 | According to PWS 1.4.3.1, requirements that are stated in 1.4.3.1.2 are required on an individual TAT basis as a condition of award. Included in 1.4.3.1.2 is “All facilities shall hold active quality program certification (such as ISO 9000 or ISO 17025).” This is consistent with the requirements stated in Sample TAT 1 Sections 2.0 and 8.0, which state that “All facilities shall hold active quality program certification.” In Sample TAT 1 Section 3.6, it states that the contractor shall take the necessary steps to establish ISO 9000 certification. The deliverables stated related to this requirement (in section 4.9) are consistent with establishing certification (e.g., the language stating “….to prepare the lab to obtain industry certifications.”) This information appears contradictory. Please clarify the government’s requirements – is quality system certification required in order to be awarded this TAT? Or, is it required to be obtained during execution of this TAT? | No, there is no contradiction. The RFP PWS para. 1.4.3.1.2 lists facilities that offerors MAY be required to demonstrate proof of access to, as a condition of award of individual TATs. Sample TAT 1 paragraphs 2 and 8 list the facilities requirements the contractor would have to have access to, in order to be awarded and perform the TAT, and it lists all the applicable publications and references the contractor would have to adhere to. As stated in the Sample TAT PWS paragraph 8, the contractor's facility that it would use to perform the PWS would have to hold an active quality program certification. In contrast, the Sample TAT 1 PWS paragraph 3.6 quality certification requirements pertain to government laboratories obtaining quality certifications. Paragraph 3.6 is a task for the contractor to perform under the TAT and describes the Government's requirement for the contractor to provide analytical expertise to support the Government labs in the labs' efforts to obtain and maintain their own quality certifications. The RFP will be amended to clarify this - See Sample TAT 1 PWS, paragraph 2.0 Objective. | |
| 12 | Section C | 1.4.3.1.2 | 18 | Paragraph 1.4.3.1.2 of the PWS requires the Prime contractor to have access to a number of specialized facilities, some of which may only be met by teaming with a government organization as described in paragraph 1.4.3.3. However, not all government facilities meet the requirements of paragraph 1.4.3.2. For example, not all government facilities have ISO certifications and not all animal and life science facilities are accredited and the personnel certified to the standards identified. For the purposes of this RFP, would the government accept teaming with a government organization with a specific capability, for example an NTA facility, as meeting all requirements of paragraph 1.4.3.1.2? | No, per para. 1.4.3.3, there are numerous ways to demonstrate access and teaming with a Government organization is only one way and not necessarily the only way. An offeror could have relationships with numerous different entities that would enable it to meet all the access requirements at paragraph 1.4.3.1. Just having one agreement with a non-traditional agents (NTA) facility would not necessarily satisfy all RFP requirements. | |
| 13 | Section C | 1.4.3.1.2 | 19 | Section 1.4.3.1.2 of the PWS includes the requirement to have “Facilities and permits in place to conduct Man-In-Simulant Tests (MIST).” We are aware of two types of Man-in-Simulant Tests; one performed against a vapor challenge and one performed against an aerosol challenge. To meet the requirement of the RFP, do the Man-In-Simulant Tests (MIST) refer to testing against a vapor challenge, an aerosol challenge, or both? | Actual TATs could require access to either type of facility, however to meet the RFP requirements, offerors are only required to demonstrate access to any type of MIST facility. | |
| 14 | Section C | 1.4.3.1.2 | 19 | Under 1.4.3.1.2, the RFP states that one or more individual TATs may require the Contractor to provide proof of access to facilities operating under Good Laboratory Practices (GLP). Does this imply that the Contractor is required to provide proof of access to both GLP and non-GLP facilities? Does this also pertain to Good Manufacturing Practices (GMP) and non-GMP facilities? Regarding pre-clinical animal research, will work with both small and large animals be required? Will advanced clinical work be required, including human trials? | Requirements for proposal submission are as stated at paragraph L.3.4.5. Regarding contractor performance requirements, work with both small and large animals could be required, and advanced clinical work including human trials could also be required on a TAT. Such requirements would be detailed in the TAT PWS and proposal instructions. | |
| 15 | Section C | 1.4.3.3 | 19 | The RFP states that “Other acceptable Memorandum of Agreement/Memorandum of Understanding or Letter of Intent with a US Government Activity with certified surety facilities” is acceptable proof of access to the facilities identified in paragraph 1.4.3.1 (Laboratory and Surety Facility Access Requirements). Would the government consider a Letter of Intent as proof of access to facilities that are not Government activities and/or not certified surety facilities? For example, would the government accept a Letter of Intent as a contractor’s proof of access to a college or university where rapid prototyping capabilities exist? | No. Paragraph L.3.4.1 requires offerors to provide proof only of the facilities listed at PWS subparagraph 1.4.3.1.1, which is a subset of paragraph 1.4.3.1. Paragraph 1.4.3.1 has two subparagraphs, each with different proposal requirements. Offerors do not need to provide proof in their proposals of all the facilities listed at 1.4.3.1 as a condition for contract award, only those at 1.4.3.1.1. The permissible type of proof for facilities requiring proof is as stated at L.3.4.1, e.g., a letter included in the proposal from the cognizant authority which contains the information required at L.3.4.1. | |
| 16 | Section C | 1.5.2 | 21-23 | Reference (RFP Section: 1.5.2): For CDRLs 0001, 0002, 0004 and 0005, the information is required for both individual TATs as well as the overall contract. Can the government confirm that CDRL 0003 is required only at the IDIQ level? | Yes CDRL 0003 is only required at the IDIQ level. | |
| 17 | Section C | 1.5.2.1 | 21 | PWS 1.5.2.1 states in part: “…For CDRLs 0001, 0002, 0004 and 0005, the information is required for both individual TATs as well as the overall contract. The overall contract requirement is not to be viewed as a duplication of data reporting but a summation of data for all task order efforts under the HD TATs contract.” 1) CDRL A001 is the TAT Final Report. Please clarify what summary of data for all task order efforts is intended at the overall contract level. 2) CDRL A003, the Monthly Cost Tracking/Financial Report, is not listed as required at the contract level as would be expected. Should it be? OR, should the list in PWS 1.5.2.1 be corrected to list CDRLs 0002, 0003, 0004, and 0005? | The RFP will be amended to correct paragraph 1.5.2.1 and remove the reference to CDRL A001; this report is not required at the contract level. CDRL A003 is a monthly cost report and is a contract-level report. | |
| 18 | Section C | 1.5.2.1 | 21 | PWS 1.5.2.1 states in part: “…For CDRLs 0001, 0002, 0004 and 0005, the information is required for both individual TATs as well as the overall contract. The overall contract requirement is not to be viewed as a duplication of data reporting but a summation of data for all task order efforts under the HD TATs contract.” |
1) CDRL A001 is the TAT Final Report. Please clarify what summary of data for all task order efforts is intended at the overall contract level.
| 2) CDRL A003, the Monthly Cost Tracking/Financial Report, is not listed as required at the contract level as would be expected. Should it be? OR, should the list in PWS 1.5.2.1 be corrected to list CDRLs 0002, 0003, 0004, and 0005? | The RFP will be amended to correct paragraph 1.5.2.1 and remove the reference to CDRL A001; this report is not required at the contract level. CDRL A003 is a monthly cost report and is a contract-level report. | |||||
| 19 | Section F | 32 | RFP page 32 is blank. Would the Government confirm this is intentional? | Yes. | ||
| 20 | Section H | H.14 Insurance | 41 | For OCONUS work this section gives an example references Defense Base Act on AF Bases; Please confirm if DBA will be applicable at other service OCONUS installations. | FAR clause 52.228-3, Worker's Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act) and FAR clause 52.228-4, Worker's Compensation & War Hazard Insurance Overseas, are included in the RFP and are applicable to TATS whenever work is performed overseas outside the United States. | |
| 21 | Section H/M | H.7 Small Business Goals (For Other Than Small Business)/M 3.1.3 Subfactor 3 | 41 | H.7 SMALL BUSINESS GOALS [FOR OTHER THAN SMALL BUSINESSES ONLY] |
For large businesses in the Full and Open Competition Pool, the Contractor’s small business subcontracting plan shall demonstrate a minimum of 12% of the total obligated awarded contract value is subcontracted to small businesses. The level of participation can be obtained in any combination of vendor subcontracts, purchases, or other business arrangements. The DoD subcontracting program subcategory goals include Small Disadvantaged (5%), Women-Owned (5%), HUBZone (3%), Veteran owned (3%), and Service Disabled Veteran-Owned (3%). Successful Offerors’ Small Business Subcontracting Plans will be incorporated in each applicable Contractor’s HD TATs contract. Contractors will submit how they’ve performed compared to their goals every 6 months [or annually] via the Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS) and the Government will document performance accordingly.
M3.1.3 Subfactor 3- Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Large Businesses only).
1. For other than Small Businesses: The Offeror’s small business subcontracting plan will be evaluated. The requirement is met when the Offeror provides a small business subcontracting plan that:
| • Demonstrates an acceptable approach to meeting the small business participation goal of 12% (to be measured annually at the IDIQ contract level as a percentage of total dollars obligated on TATs awarded.) Question: Will Subcontracting Plan evaluation be on a semi-annual or annual basis?annual basis? | Section H.7 states that contractors will submit their goals every 6 months via eSRS and monthly via CDRL A003. Section M3.1.3 states the government will measure participation to meeting the goal annually at the IDIQ contract level. | ||||
| 22 | Section J | Attachment J-1, DD254 | Attachment J-1, DD254 states that TAT specific DD254s may be issued that define additional TAT level security requirements. In both Sample TATs 1 and 2, there is reference to TAT specific DD254s; however, none were provided with the RFP. Is this reference in error, or should there be TAT specific DD254s that we must account for in the development of our TAT responses? | The HD TATs contract level DD254 included in the RFP applies to the sample TATs with the following exceptions. For Sample TAT 1, the personnel, facility and safeguarding level applicable to Sample TAT 1 is Secret vs. Top Secret. For Sample TAT 2, the facility and safeguarding level applicable is Top Secret with personnel requiring a mixture of secret and top secret, as stated in the Sample TAT 2 PWS. See Amended RFP paragraph L.3.3.1. | |
| 23 | Section J | Attachment J-1, DD254 | The RFP requires offerors to possess a TS facility clearance or to detail steps taken to obtain that level facility clearance prior to award of the contract. While offerors can demonstrate the ability to obtain a TS Facility clearance by providing the requisite paperwork that DSS would evaluate to issue a Facility Clearance, offerer's cannot apply to DSS for a TS Facility Clearance until the Government has issued the requisite DD Form 254. |
| Will the Government modify the applicable solicitation verbiage to permit offerors the opportunity to receive the contract-level DD 254 and time to request/receive a TS Facility Clearance from DSS? In essence, offerors would be required to obtain a TS Facility Clearance prior to award of a TAT (which may or may not have a DD-254 and associated Facility Clearance requirement) vice at the award of the overarching contract. | No. The proposal requirements and evaluation factors regarding facility clearance requirements are as stated in the RFP paragraphs L.3.4.1 and M.3.1.2. The Government requires all offerors to demonstrate they will have a Top Secret facility clearance in place at the time of award of the contract as a condition for award. | ||||
| 24 | Section J | Attachment J-6, HD TATs Cost Price Tables | Please clarify the Government’s intent of the application of Level I, II and III to the labor categories contained in Attachment J-6. Specifically, Level I requires a high school diploma and 0-5 years experience. However, the pricing table requests Level I pricing for Subject Matter Expert, Program Analyst/Manager, and Project Manager. What should offerors utilize as the basis to price these categories as Level I (for example, how should offerors price a Subject Matter Expert with 0 – 5 years experience)? | The Government believes there are some disciplines that a Subject Matter Expert can have five years (or less) of experience to be considered an expert. | |
| 25 | Section J | Attachment J-6, HD TATs Cost Price Tables | Will the Government please provide equivalencies for degrees and years of experience for each of the labor category levels to allow for flexibility in staffing? We suggest the following equivalencies: |
Bachelor's Degree = 6 years of experience Master's Degree = 8 years of experience (Bachelor's + 2 years of experience)
| PhD = 10 years of experience (Bachelor's + 4 years of experience) | The Government will not provide equivalencies and the categories listed provide enough flexibility for each Offeror to make the appropriate business decisions to apply them to their labor pool. | ||||
| 26 | Section J | Attachment J-6, HD TATs Cost/Price Table | Reference J-6_HD_TATs_Cost_Price_Table, Benefit Summary Tab “Compensation Plan Submission” – please confirm what you are expecting in the “% of Salary” field, is this to be populated with the Fringe % utilized? | No. The % of Salary is what the Offeror contributes to a matching retirement plan. Changed the title of this line in the Compensation Plan of the Cost Price Table. | |
| 27 | Section J | Attachment J-6, HD TATs Cost/Price Table | Our interpretation of the government definition of Program Manager assumes that there can only be one on the contract and can serve in no other function. Since this does not lend itself to having three levels of Program Manager, we are suggesting the change below to the Program Manager and Program Analyst. Attachment J-6 HD_TAT_Cost_Price_Table; Tab Labor Cat Descriptions - HD TAT (Homeland Defense Technical Area Tasks) MAC Labor Category Descriptions: |
Program Manager-Level III- Serves as the contractor's single contract manager, and shall be the contractor's authorized interface with the Government Contracting Officer (CO), the contract level Contracting Officer's Representative (COR), government management personnel and customer agency representatives. Responsible for formulating and enforcing work standards, assigning contractor schedules, reviewing work discrepancies, supervising contractor personnel and communicating policies, purposes, and goals of the organization to subordinates. Shall be responsible for the overall contract performance and shall not serve in any other capacity under this contract.
| Program Analyst - Develops, analyses, evaluates, advises on, and/or improves the effectiveness of work methods and procedures, organizations, manpower utilization, distribution of work assignments, delegations of authority, management controls, information and documentation systems, and similar functions of management. | The Program Manager category, at any level, exists to permit this level/type of labor to be acquired on individual TATs. It is not intended to serve as a single, contract-level only category for the offeror to propose for its HD TATs contract PM. Read the last sentence in Section M paragraph L5.2. CLIN X001 is for IDIQ-Level Program Management Support and is a Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and the Government does not require a break down by labor category for this CLIN. See RFP Amendment 2 changes to the Section J-6 HD TATs Cost Price Table. Offerors must propose all levels listed, as required by the RFP. Take note of the fact that the labor categories are for CLIN 0003 A&AS related to R&D and for Firm Fixed Price TATs only. | |||||
| 28 | Section J | Attachment J-6, HD TATs Cost/Price Table | CLIN X001 Program Mgmt Support (FFP). Does the Government require resource and cost detail for the proposed CLIN X001 amounts? | Section L paragraph L5.2 specifies what is required. The only requirement for CLIN X001 is the RFP in section J attachment 6 HD TATs Cost Price Table TAB called "Grand Total". | ||
| 29 | Section J | Attachment J-8 Sample TAT 1, | The title of the TAT, “Environmental, Water, and Food Microbiology/Agent Detection”, the reference in 1.0 to the ECBC Microbiology Team (vs say USAMRIID), and references to several specific matrices throughout the TAT strongly indicate that the scope of this TAT is limited to environmental, water, and food matrices. However, personnel qualifications for tasks 3.3 through 3.5 require all staff have certifications relevant to working in a clinical laboratory. 1) Is the intent of this TAT to include method/assay development or other tasks linked to the clinical setting or is the scope limited to environment, water and food? 2) If some or all of the scope of this TAT is not linked to the clinical setting, can staff with alternative educational and professional experience be proposed for some or all of the proposed approach? | The scope of the sample TAT is limited to food, water and environmental lab work. The reference to clinical lab certification requirements was included in error. See amended RFP qualification requirements. | ||
| 30 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1, Paragraphs 3.1, 4.3 and 4.4 | 3 and 7 | Section 3.1; "…the IAC will provide the TPOC …", Section 4.3: “…shall be mutually agreed upon by the IAC and TPOC..”, Section 4.4: “…which the IAC will add to the DTIC unclassified database…”. Are we correct to assume the references to “the IAC” are really meant to be to “the TAT Contractor”? | In the references mentioned, the first two (para. 3.1 and 4.3) should be interpreted as referring to the HD TATs contractor. The third reference at para. 4.4 refers to the HD IAC BCO contractor. This will be corrected in the amended TAT PWS template. | |
| 31 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1, Paragraph 3.6 | 5 | Please identify the 25 reporting systems or the source material of the 25 reporting systems referenced in the Task 6 requirements? | This information cannot be provided and typically would not be known at the time of RFP issuance for a real-world TAT PWS either. The requirement is for the contractor to assist as-yet unknown government organizations in establishing quality system reporting capabilities. | |
| 32 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1, Paragraph 3.6 | 5 | “The contractor shall take the necessary steps to prepare the laboratory for certification for ISO 9000 (International Organization for Standardization), EPA QAPP (Environmental Protection Agency Quality Assurance Project Plans), and AOAC (Association of Analytical Communities) standards and quality assurance programs. It is anticipated that 25 reporting systems will be established and maintained by the contractor during the performance of this PWS.” We assume the successful bidder will support certification of 25 separate laboratories to three different standards and maintain the certification records for those labs. Is this correct? If not, will the Government please clarify the intent? | The figure of 25 refers to a grand total estimated number of reporting systems, for an as-yet unknown quantity of labs and quality systems. The estimate of 25 could play out under different scenarios. See amended Sample TAT 1 with the Government's clarified estimate for the number of labs and quality systems the contractor will support. | |
| 33 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1, Paragraph 3.7 | 5 | “The contractor shall establish a bioinformatics database on biologic agents. Data and sequence management software will be obtained and applied by the contractor to manage the information system. New data will be entered by the contractor into the system as it is released.” Will the government please clarify the requirements for the database so the contractor can properly scope this effort? |
a) Is there an existing database and how much data is in it?
b) How much new data will be provided to the contractor for entry?
c) Does the government have a preferred vendor, e.g., BC|Platforms’ BC|Sequence?
| d) Does the database have to be compatible with a current government system? | The RFP Sample TAT 1 will be amended to incorporate the following information, which offerors should assume when responding to the Sample TAT: 1) No current database exists. 2) The contractor will enter data once per month, with 20 records per instance of data entry. 3) There is no preferred provider. 4) There is no requirement for compatibility with existing systems. | |||||
| 34 | Section J | Attachment J-8 Sample TAT 1, Paragraph 3.4 | 4 - 5 | Under Task 3.4 Sample processing, the discussion is largely around development of sample processing methods. There is one reference to providing sampling methods. The Government anticipates 10 sampling methods shall be developed by the contractor during the performance of this PWS. Does the scope of this task include development of sampling methods and sample processing methods or only sample processing methods? | Only sample processing methods are required. The RFP Sample TAT 1 will be amended to clarify this. | |
| 35 | Section J | Attachment J-8 Sample TAT 1, Paragraph 3.6 | 5 | The deliverables for Task 6 Establish and Maintain National Laboratory Standards are listed are listed as 25 reporting systems. The steps necessary to achieve the requisite certifications are fully understood. What is unclear is what specifically is expected as the deliverable. Please define or clarify what is meant by “reporting systems”. | A reporting system is a tool or method a lab would use to comply with reporting requirements associated with obtaining and maintaining EPA QAPP and AOAC certification. Examples of some reports that these quality systems require are corrective action reports, internal audit reports, quality assurance project plans, certification applications, etc. A reporting system (tool or method) could be electronic, web-based, part of the lab's internal management information system, automatically generated by a database application, etc. See the amended Sample TAT 1 which clarifies and revises the quality certification description. | |
| 36 | Section J | Attachment J-8 Sample TAT 1, Paragraph 5.0 | 9 | Paragraph 5.0 – Government Furnished Equipment, Property and/or Data states that no Government –furnished equipment, facilities or supplies will be furnished to the contractor yet Task 5 (paragraph 3.5) – Comparison Studies requires the contractor to utilize specific equipment (ABI 7700, BAX, RAPID, SMARTCYCLER, etc.). If a contractor does not have this specific equipment, should we price the equipment as part of overall task cost estimate? Recommend that the government make this equipment GFE in order to provide a level playing field. Otherwise the government will see a spectrum of ODC costs for this equipment depending on what (if any) the contractor currently owns or what quotes the contractor receives for the purchase of the equipment. | No. Reference the paragraph L.3.3.1 TAT and L.5.0 proposal instructions. Sample TATs shall not be priced out and are not part of the HD TATs pre-award cost/price proposal evaluation. | |
| 37 | Section J | Attachment J-8, , Sample TAT 1, Paragraph 4.0 | 6 | Para 4.0 reads: |
Contract Level Deliverables: Required for all HD TATs
• Post-Award Orientation Conference PWS para 3.1
• Weekly Activity Report (WAR); refer to HD TATs Contract, Section C, Paragraph XX
• Monthly Metrics Report, refer to HD TATS Contract, Section C, Paragraph XX
• Quarterly STI Assessment Report; refer to HD TATS Contract, Section C, Paragraph XX
• Final Technical Report, refer to HD TATS Contract, Section C, Paragraph XX
• Redacted TAT, refer to HD TATS Contract, Section C, Paragraph XX
Should the XXs be filled in and what does the last bullet mean—redacted TAT? The RFP will be amended to include the correct cites as shown below. Redacted TATs are explained in PWS paragraph 1.5.2.8: • Post-Award Orientation Conference TAT PWS para 3.1
• Weekly Activity Report (WAR); refer to HD TATs Contract, Section C, Paragraph 1.5.2.5
• Monthly Metrics Report, refer to HD TATS Contract, Section C, Paragraph 1.5.2.3
• Quarterly STI Assessment Report; refer to HD TATS Contract, Section C, Paragraph 1.5.2.6
• Final Technical Report, refer to HD TATS Contract, Section C, Paragraph 1.5.2.2
• Redacted TAT, refer to HD TATS Contract, Section C, Paragraph 1.5.2.8.
| 38 | Section J | Attachment J-8, , Sample TAT 1, Paragraph 4.7 | 8 | Please confirm the Government meant “assays” vice “arrays.” | Yes, assays was intended. | |
| 39 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1 /Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2 | To allow the offeror to create an accurate response, will the Government provide the BCO STI for each of the Sample TATs? | No, the way the process works is that the Government furnishes the results of the pre-award STI literature search performed by the BCO to the TAT awardee upon award. So in a real-world TAT competition, offerors would not have the results of the BCO's STI literature search when proposing. Reference Sample TAT PWS 3.2 which explains this process. | ||
| 40 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1 Paragraph 3.2/Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2 Paragraph 3.2 | Will the level of interaction and processes between the BCO and the MAC(s) be comparable to that established between CSIAC and SNIM? | The level of interaction and processes between the CSIAC BCO and SNIM MAC TAT contractors are not necessarily indicative of what will transpire between the HD IAC BCO and HD TATs contractors. | ||
| 41 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1 Paragraph 3.2/Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2 Paragraph 3.2 | What is the detailed structure of the current and / or anticipated relationship between CSIAC and SNIM to include interactions, processes, and responsibilities defined by that relationship? | The relationship between CSIAC and the SNIM contractors has no bearing on HD TATs. The BCO for HD TATs will be the HDIAC BCO. The relationship, interactions, processes and responsibilities between the HDIAC BCO and HD TATs contractors is as described throughout the HD TATs PWS. Also see the reference to HD IAC BCO PWS in answer No. 42, which further describes the relationship and interactions throughout that PWS. | ||
| 42 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1 Paragraph 3.2/Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2 Paragraph 3.2 | To what extent and to what level of detail will information on ongoing BCO contacts, specific to inquiries and literature searches, be made available to MAC(s) when those activities are not in direct support of an STI Literature Search conducted during TAT PWS development? | The HD IAC BCO contractor will be responsible for compiling a listing of technical user inquiries on a monthly basis and making it available to the HD TATs prime contractors. The listing will include the question posed and the user's top level organization. Reference the HDIAC BCO PWS paragraph 1.4.4.1. The PWS is contained in the HDIAC BCO RFP posted at: https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=e4543ca1311f23dcdcb74fede03d01c2&tab=core&_cview=1. (Note: to search for the RFP, search for solicitation FA8075-12-R-0001 posted on 15 May 2012). | ||
| 43 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1 Paragraph 3.2/Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2 Paragraph 3.2 | Is it acceptable and/or expected that MAC organizations reach back to BCOs to support the STI Relevance Assessment and Gap Analysis? If not acceptable what are the primary issues prohibiting reach back to BCOs? | Expectations with respect to reach back and collaboration with the BCO contractor are as described throughout the HD TATs PWS. | ||
| 44 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1 Paragraph 3.2/Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2 Paragraph 3.2 | What is the detailed nature, content and extent of STI Literature Searches performed by the BCO during TAT PWS development? Will these searches include levels of narrative, gap assessment, and gap analysis or will they be limited to a literature search on relevant topics? | A copy of the legacy IAC TAT Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) is included in the RFP as Attachment J-4, "Technical Area TATs - Standard Operating Procedures". The appendices to that SOP were not included in the RFP, however, one of the appendices, Appendix F, Literature Search and Gap Analysis, provides more information on the nature, content and extent of STI Literature Searches performed by the legacy IAC contractors. These processes are anticipated to be very similar to how they will apply to MAC TAT contractors. A web link to Appendix F is contained in both Sample TAT PWS's at paragraph 3.1. | ||
| 45 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2 | The term, “Tabletop Seminars Games” is not described or defined in CJCSM 3500.03C (15 Jan 2011; See Annex A to Appendix B to Enclosure D) | The terms as used in the Sample TAT should be interpreted as synonymous with "exercise", "training event" or "game" as used in CJCSM 3500.03C. | ||
| 46 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Deliverables Box | 5 | Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration. The deliverable defined for PWS area 3.3.1 describes “Web-based ATDC”. Is it correct to assume that the Government intended “ATDC” to be “ACDT”? | Yes. | |
| 47 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Deliverables Box | 5 | Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration. As the ACTD program has been replaced by JCTDs, should offerors reference the ACTDs process and describe our approach to ACTDs or should they reference the JCTDs approach and processes? | Yes. The RFP Sample TAT 2 will be amended to replace ACTD with JCTD. | |
| 48 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Paragraph 10 | 13 | Travel. Section 10.0 states “Travel shall comply with Section H, Paragraph H.3.e.1 of the basic contract.” There is no Paragraph H.3.e.1 in Section H. Please confirm the correct paragraph reference should be H.1.f.1. Please clarify | The reference should say H.1.f.1. This will be corrected in the amended RFP. | |
| 49 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Paragraph 11 | 14 | Personnel Qualifications. Why is there a requirement that all staff members have an information technology and computer engineering experience if the ACTD demonstrations are focused on combat & biological assessments and individual & combat survivability? | Sample TAT 2 does not require all staff to have these qualifications -- only those performing Task 3- ACTDs. The requirement is as stated because technologies to be analyzed by the contractor and that could be the subject of the as-yet unknown ACTDs are anticipated to include automated systems. | |
| 50 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1, Paragraphs 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 | 4-5 | Sample TAT 1, Tasks 3.3 through 3.5 involve non-clinical, food or environmental sample analysis, however the personnel requirement for staff performing tasks 3.3 through 3.5 is that they have to hold certifications from the listed credentialing bodies in the clinical research arena. Is it the government’s intention to have food and environmental sample analysis done at a CRO/clinical research facility? This may pose a conflict of interest down the line when moving assays into the FDA licensure process since the same clinical research facilities will have the capabilities and possibly perform the clinical testing of the assays. | The qualification requirements have been amended to remove the requirement for clinical research certification and make other changes. See amended sample TAT 1. | |
| 51 | Section J | Attachment J-8, Sample TAT 1 Paragraphs 3.3, 3.4 and 3.5 and 11 | 4, 5, 12, and 13 | Sample TAT 1, paragraphs 3.3-3.5. and para 11.0. The Government will be paying a premium for personnel with the clinical certifications listed under Section 11.0 Personnel Requirements, especially considering that none of the tasks in this STAT require clinical research and as such a certification is not required to perform the tasks listed in the STAT. Is there a rationale for why personnel need to have these certifications? Would the Government considering removing the certification requirement or changing them to those that are more relevant to environmental and food sampling? | See answer No. 50. | |
| 52 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Paragraph 3.3-3.5 | 4-7 | Will the Government please confirm the correct numbering sequence to use when referencing Sample Task 2 Deliverables; the deliverable numbers provided in the table on Page 20 are not consistent with the referenced deliverables numbered in 3.3 through 3.5? | All deliverables listed in the Sample TAT 2 Deliverables Table are correct. However, Deliverable 3.5.4, "USPACOM EOC Template Validation Exercises" listed on page 7 was included in error and should be deleted , with subsequent deliverables after it renumbered. This will be corrected in the amended RFP. | |
| 53 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Paragraph 3.3 | 5 | Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration. The referenced PWS states: “Assess and report the progress of USPACOM sponsored combat and biological assessment ACTD's through the DOD approval process.’ Can the government clarify that the word “Combat” in the previous sentence should be replaced with the word “Chemical” to more clearly define the requirement? | No, the word combat is correct. It refers to biological combat assessments. | |
| 54 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Paragraph 3.3 | 5 | Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration. The referenced PWS states: “Coordinate and execute combat and biological assessment ACTD briefings and meetings.” Can the government clarify that the word “Combat” in the previous sentence should be replaced with the word “Chemical” to more clearly define the requirement? | See answer No. 53. | |
| 55 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Paragraph 3.3, Deliverable 3.3.1 | 5 | “3.3.1 Web-based ATDC information repository and electronic tracking system to track ACTD tasks, milestones, costs and deliverables.” How many ACTDs are anticipated on an annual basis? | Offerors should assume 1-2 ACTDs per year. This will be incorporated into the amended RFP. | |
| 56 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Paragraph 3.5, Deliverable 3.5.4. | 7 | “USPACOM EOC Template Validation Exercises” This deliverable appears in Section 3.5, but not in 4.0 either with a description of content or in the table showing number of deliverables and due dates. Does the government want the contractor to deliver USPACOM EOC Template Validation Exercises and, if so, what is the content, how many are required over the three year period, and on what dates? | See answer No. 52. | |
| 57 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2, Paragraph 6 | 12 | Security Requirements. Sample TAT 2 PWS states at least 2 personnel should have TS SCI clearance for Task 5. Will all activities under Task 5 require TS SCI or can a contractor have a mix of Secret and TS SCI personnel as long as the 2 TS SCI Minimum is met? | Not all activities require a top secret clearance. The offeror can propose a mix as stated in paragraph 6 of the PWS. | |
| 58 | Section J | Attachment J-9, Sample TAT 2. Paragraph 8.0 | 12 | Applicable Publications and References. “None of the reference documents in the Sample Task #2 instructions discuss DoD participation in ‘National Preparedness Goal’ and utilization of ‘National Planning Scenarios’ in exercise design. Both documents were published by the Department of Homeland Security. Please clarify.” | This is incorrect. The DoD references listed in the PWS paragraph 8 stipulate military organizations' responsibilities to adhere to applicable inter-agency federal homeland defense policies. One or more of the listed DoD publications specifically covers DoD's policies to ensure compliance with the Dept. of Homeland Security National Preparedness Program. | |
| 59 | Section L | 2.1 | 95 | Paragraph L.2.1 calls for offerors to submit a Subfactor 3 – Small Business Utilization Plan. However, paragraph L.3.5 states that offerors other than a small business should submit a Small Business Subcontracting Plan. From the perspective of a large business, please clarify exactly what is required and identify the requirement differences between the Small Business Utilization Plan vs. the Small Business Subcontracting Plan. | Amended this area. For Large Businesses the submission of your Subcontracting Plan Includes the requirements listed in Section L3.5.1 and what was L3.5.3 and is now called L3.5.2 STATUTORY SUBCATEGORY GOALS. | |
| 60 | Section L | 3.3 | 98 | RFP paragraph L3.3 requires the offeror to "identify programs worked, provide brief descriptions of the effort, the type of technical resources used, and any significant accomplishments." This requirement seems oriented more towards discussion of capabilities for the Experience/Capability section than the Sample TATs. Is it the government's intention that offeror's discuss in detail past performance in response to the Sample TAT's or are the detailed past performance information requirements stated in L3.3 intended for the Experience/Capability section only. | The proposal instructions are as stated: Paragraph L.3.3. requires offerors to address their capability to perform all the subject matter areas in the whole contract PWS. It does not ask for past performance information nor does it require offerors to address their ability to perform sample TATs. The proposal requirements that must be addressed for the sample TATs are as stated at L.3.3.1. | |
| 61 | Section L | 3.3 | 98-99 | Technical Capability Subfactor 1. The subsequent paragraph after L3.3.1 Sample TATs 1and 2 is paragraph L3.3.3 Experience/Capability. Is there a paragraph L3.3.2 that has been omitted from the RFP? | No. The Experience/Capability paragraph should have been numbered L.3.3.2. This will be corrected in the amended RFP. | |
| 62 | Section L | 3.3.1 | 98 | In paragraph L 3.3.1, it states that the projected labor hours for the entire period of performance for Sample Task 1 is estimated to be 20,000 hours. Per paragraph 12.1 of Sample Task 1, the period of performance for this task is 24 months. This means the level of effort for this effort equates to roughly 5 FTEs per year. This seems low given the requirements of paragraph 3.0 of Sample Task 1. Should the total projected labor hours be 20,000 hours per year and not the entire period of performance? | No, the labor hour estimate is correct as stated -- 20,000 hours for a two year period or 10,000 hours per year. | |
| 63 | Section L | 3.4.1 | 99 | L3.4.1 requires offerors to submit proof of access for Biosafety Level 3, chemical surety and biosurety laboratories, such as Letters of Authorization, Letters of Intent and/or Teaming Agreements. Will these proof of access documents count against page limitations? These documents, especially Teaming Agreements, can consist of multiple pages. | Reference paragraph L.2.2.1 which indicates the page limit exceptions. | |
| 64 | Section L | 3.4.1 | 99 | Within the Program Management Section we are required to address and provide proof of access for specific facilities. Section L.3.4.1. specifically states that copies of letters from cognizant organizations (for example DSS) be provided with the proposal. Further Section L.3.4.5 refers to the PWS paragraph 1.4.3.1.2 that indicates the offeror may be required to proof of access to a broader range of facilities which includes FDA GMP/GLP, FIFRA- EPA/GLP, TSCA GLP, AAALAC and AALAS certifications, NTAs, Radioactive Materials, etc. Will the government consider the “proof of access” materials to be included as Appendices to the Technical volume and not included in the overall page count? | See answer No. 63 | |
| 65 | Section L | 3.4.1 | 99 | If laboratory and surety facility subcontractors own and control their own facilities, are both a proposal letter stating the authorization and use AND a copy of the signed and dated teaming agreement required or just the signed and dated teaming agreement? | No, the Teaming Agreement meets the requirement for proof, as stated at paragraph L.3.4.1 | |
| 66 | Section L | 3.4.1 | 99 | Please provide additional details on what the government is seeking in a proposal letter? What is the content of a proposal letter? | The content requirement is as stated at L.3.4.1. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .