CS_TAT_Q A_Posted_FBO_15Aug14.xlsx

XLSX spreadsheet 29 KB Posted Aug 15, 2014

Attached to: AFICA IAC CS TATs
Solicitation number: FA8075-14-R-0001
Issued by: Department of the Air Force Air Combat Command

View the file

Other files

File	Type	Posted
J-6_CS_TAT_Cost_Price_Model_TAT2_Correct.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Oct 22, 2014
CS_TAT_RFP_FBO_21Oct14.doc	DOC document	Oct 21, 2014
CS_TAT_RFP_Q A.xlsx	XLSX spreadsheet	Oct 21, 2014
CS_TAT_Draft_RFP_FBO_Posting_3Jul14.doc	DOC document	Aug 19, 2014
DLA_Form_1818.pdf	PDF	May 5, 2014

On GovTribe

Work with this file

Download the original file
Contacts named in this file
Similar government files
Ask GovTribe AI about this file

Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Sheet1

CS TATs Draft RFP Questions and Answers Posted to FedBizOpps 15 August 2014
#	Solicitation Section	Contractor Questions/Comments	Government Responses
1	L5.4.1	Section L5.4.1. Reference is made to composite labor rates. This would indicate that the government intends to provide a labor category table. No labor category table is included nor listed as an attachment. Does the government intend to provide a labor category table in a future draft RFP release or with the final RFP?	The Government will not provide a labor category table. This acquisition will not have labor category rates for the life of the contract. You will propose pricing for the Sample TAT(s) and Mgmt Reporting CLIN.
2	L5.4.3	Section L.5.4.3 states that "profit or fee will not be allowed on the costs of any travel within a TAT requirement. Is that also true for materials? That is, is fee allowed to be placed on materials?	That applies to travel only. Changed RFP Section H to reflect specifically that Travel will not have any profit or fee bearing cost elements and that Material can.
3	M3.2.3.1	Section M3.2.3.1.a and b. Guidance for evaluating past performance relevancy is provided based on dollar size of IDIQ contracts and IDIQ Delivery/Task Orders. Are the dollar sizes provided based on the established dollar ceilings of IDIQs and Delivery/Task Orders or on the funded amount?	Relevancy will be evaluated based on overall ceiling value of IDIQ contract or IDIQ Delivery/Task Order.
4	M3.2.3.1	Section M3.2.3.1.a. Can two contracts, one being a follow-on to the original, be combined to meet the $100M "Very Relevant" relevancy criteria for IDIQ contracts?	No. Each referenced IDIQ contract or Task Order would have its own unique number, therefore they couldn't be combined. Per M3.2.3.1 Magnitude of effort (Cost & type of contract) is only one of the four (4) factors that is evaluated for "Relevancy".
5	C1.4.2.2	The last paragraph of this section identifies four specific Cyber Security STI subject areas. Item 3) identifies defensive cyber operations "including red teaming threat assessments." Is this intended to mean "red teaming and threat assessments"?	Yes. This will be clarified in the final RFP. Reference revised para. C.1.4.2.2.
6	C1.4.2.2	The last paragraph of this section identifies four specific Cyber Security STI subject areas. Area 4) identifies "cyber offensive and exploitative operations to include: cyber technology research, analysis and prototyping, cyber situational and mission awareness, cyber modeling, simulation and war gaming, integrating innovative cyber technologies to enable cyber superiority and the facilitation of technology transition." The list of topics following "to include:" could considered applicable to all four of the listed CS STI subject areas; not just to area 4. Is there a reason these four topics were listed only under cyber offensive and exploitative operations? Should they be considered to apply to all four areas?	They can apply to all four areas. This will be clarified in the final RFP. Reference revised para. C.1.4.2.2.
7	C1.4.2.3	The last paragraph refers to "supporting cross-domain coordination…" Is "cross-domain" intended to refer to functions spanning multiple warfighting domains (e.g. air, cyber) or to functions spanning multiple security domains (e.g. secret, top secret)?	This refers to functions spanning multiple warfighting domains and/or technical disciplines. However, it is noted that a TAT could require a contractor to perform tasks at different clearance levels on the same TAT or even under the same task.
8	C1.4.2.4	Please clarify the meaning of item 4) in the last paragraph. Does "in-process" mean "under development"? Does "social networking" refer to networking among analysts, or to analysis and exploitation of public social networking tools?	Yes, it means under development. Social networking refers to any type of social networking application.
9	C1.4.2.4	The list of STI subject areas in the last paragraph seems to emphasize tools, data and systems, and does not seem to include social, organizational, cognitive or human factors aspects of knowledge management. Is this a correct reading, and if so, is the omission of these areas intentional?	Cyber Security is one of the four technical focus area of the PWS -- reference para. C.1.4.2.2. Any of the Representative Tasks listed under C.1.4.1 could be required in any of the four Technical Focus Areas of the PWS, including Cyber Security.
10	L4.2.6	If an offerer submits past performance information from an umbrella ID/IQ where the only CPARs rating is at the ID/IQ level, can the offerer also submit past performance information from a task order under the same ID/IQ where no CPAR ratings are documented at the task level?	Not in this particular case, Offerors will have to choose between the ID/IQ level or task order(s).
11	L1.0 and Attachment L-5	In Section L1.0, the Government states that "Each small business Offeror may elect to compete in the Partial SB set-aside competition pool and the Unrestricted F&O competition pool." The government references Section L, Att. 5.

Section L, Att. 5, states, "Each small business Offeror may elect to compete in the Partial SB set-aside competition pool or in the Unrestricted F&O competition pool."

Can the Government please clarify if small business Offeror's can compete in both F&O and partial SB set-aside or if they are to choose one or the other?

Also, if small business Offerors are permitted to participate in both, would this require two separate proposals to respond to both sets of requirements?

Yes. Small Businesses may elect to perform in the "Partial SB set-aside pool" and/or the "Unrestricted F&O pool" by checking the appropriate block(s) on Attachment L5 and meet the specific requirements that are spelled out in the RFP. A Small Business could, but does not have to submit two fully separate proposals. Follow the requirements for both competition pools as stated, especially in the Request For Proposal (RFP) Sections L2.1, L3.1, and L4.2. For example for technical, if a Small Business submits bids for both competition pools they will have to submit a technical volume that separately covers both sample TATs. For past performance, the Unrestricted F&O pool you will provide 10 references for Past Performance that covers all the focus areas. For the Partial SB Set-aside you must separately submit 5 references that covers all the focus areas. For the Partial SB set-aside you can use the same references you used in the Unrestricted F&O pool or different references.
12	L3.2	The last sentence in Section L3.2 states that "Material presented in the Executive Summary will not be considered towards meeting the requirements for any portions of other volumes of the proposal,” but does not specify whether it will be considered in the evaluation of the volume in which it is included. Section M of the RFP does not address any evaluation criteria for the Executive Summary in Volume I.

Will the Executive summary be provided to evaluators of Volume I (to include Sub-factor 1-3 evaluators) and be considered as part of the evaluation of Volume I sub-factors? Can required contents of the Executive Summary (e.g. contract/management structures, organizational chart) be referenced from sub-factor’s within Volume I to assist with the evaluation of Volume I sub-factors?”

References to an Executive Summary have been removed from the RFP.
13	L.5.4.3	The RFP states no fee on travel. Is fee allowed on materials? Sample TAT 1 Subfactor 1a =- CLIN 0002, "Material: Include an amount of $300,000 for material costs. Offereors shall then apply their applicable burdens agianst this amount."	Yes fee is allowed on materials. Yes Offerors will apply their applicable burdens against the government provided $300K for Sample TAT 1 Subfactor 1a. Note: Offerors are not allowed profit or fee on the Government provided $400K travel. However for travel they can apply their applicable burdens (G&A, M&H).
14	Page 88, Section L.1.2 Proposal Due Date and Submission of Proposals	Please clarify the USG's definition of a timely proposal submission - Must the proposal be received by the USG, at Offutt AFB NE 68113, by the due date & time, or, must the proposal be post marked by the due date & time?	Proposals must be in the possession of the Contracting Officer by the due date and time. See the Standard Form 33 item 9 and L1.2.
15	Page 32, Section H.7 Small Business Requirement [For other than Small Businesses only]	Given, "…the Contractor's small business subcontracting plan shall demonstrate a minimum of 15% of the total obligated awarded contract value is subcontracted to small business." This statement of 15% does not match the 19% total articulated by the follow-on sentence that describes the DoD subcontracting program subcategory goals by category. Please clarify if the minimum subcontracting plan must be 15% or 19%?	Contractor's must demonstrate a minimum of 15% of the total obligated awarded contract value is subcontracted to small business. The other %'s merely represent DoD subcontracting goals in the respective social economic categories and you are not meant to add each category to a total %. In other words you could contract to a Small Business 20% of your work and they obligate 15% and that small business is classified in multiple social economic categories, then you will receive credit in each category but overall we are tracking your goal based on small business as a whole that is based on obligated dollars and that would be 15% in this scenario. Note: please see RFP Section L3.4.2.
16	Page 34 Section H.14 Insurance Requirements Page 20, Section 1.9 Period and Place of Performance	Given, "Task orders requiring performance OCONUS, e.g. at OCONUS Air Force Bases are subject to clause FAR 52.228-3, Workers compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act)," What portion of the task orders are anticipated to be at OCONUS locations?	Approximately 10%
17	L3.1 GENERAL	In this section it states "The sample TAT(s) will be used for technical evaluation against at least two (2) of the three (3) Technical SubFactors…)" Can the government elaborate on the statement. This is confusing as SubFactor 1 is the sample TAT and the other 2 subfactors are the Management plan and small business plan, which are evaluated as acceptable or unacceptable.	L3.1 has been revised for clarity.
18	C1.4.1 Representative Tasks	Since cyber security is a new term (not included in the SNIM PWS), we recommend including a CS-related task in the list of representative tasks to reassure cyber clients that this contract supports their mission.	Cyber Security is one of the four technical focus area of the PWS -- reference para. C.1.4.2.2. Any of the Representative Tasks listed under C.1.4.1 could be required in any of the four Technical Focus Areas of the PWS, including Cyber Security.
19	C1.4.2.1 Software Data & Analysis	Software development tasks are critical tasks for several prospective CS TAT clients. If actual software development will be allowed under this contract, will the government amend this section to clearly indicate that activity as falling within the CS TAT scope?	Yes, this will be clarified in the final RFP. Reference revised paragraph C.1.4.2.1.
20	H1.(b)4	This section implies that an effort under $3.5M does not necessarily need to have competition. Is it the intent of this section that an effort valued under $3.5M must have at least two SB primes indicate interest in bidding (and at least one must offer an acceptable proposal), or can a single small business prime bid on an effort and be awarded the task order?	Yes on a Task Order by Task Order basis if we receive only one bid and they meet all the requirements including their cost/price is determined fair and reasonable then yes they could be awarded a Task Order. Note: This particular question pertains to post-award. For this MAC ID/IQ solicitation, please see the last sentence of Section M1.0.
21	Section G - Contract Administration Data, Payment Instructions IAW (DFARS) PGI 204.7108 (d) (12) Other

d.2

	Please clarify that this section means that individual Delivery/Task Orders will have specific invoicing requirements for each particular effort. In other words, prime contractors should be prepared to have processes in place for various invoicing requirements across the contract.	This section is targeted for DFAS to invoice payments based on how a particular invoice has been submitted. There should not be any pre preparation or processes than normal for a contractor. Payment will be made based on contractor invoices at the Task Order level.
	22	M1.0	The Government has stated that the Partial SB set-aside contracts will be limited to requirements of $3.5 million or less. Is it correct that the $3.5 million is the life-cycle value of requirements set aside for small business?
We recommend that the $3.5 million value be an annual TAT value. Companies that are classified as ‘small’ in accordance with the 500 employee basis of the relevant NAICS code typically have sales ranging from $100 million to $200 million per year in total business. TATs with a life-cycle value at $10 million or more represent normal business operations and managing multiple TATs with such values is well within the capacities of these small businesses.	The partial SB set-aside dollar amount is $3.5M based on the Market Research performed and an approved small business strategy.
	23	H.3	In order to assist offerers in avoiding OCI situations, would DTIC publish a full list of all known BCO prime and subcontractors?	Yes the CSIAC BCO Contractor is Quanterion Solutions Incorporated, 811 Court St., Utica, NY 13502.

24	L.2.2.8	Will DTIC allow documents to be submitted in Microsoft Office 2007/2010 document formats (e.g., .docx and .xlsx) instead of the no longer supported MS Office version 2003 formats?	Yes, the formal CS TAT RFP will reflect that Microsoft Office documents shall be submitted in a 2010 version (e.g., .docx, .pptx, .xlxs) at a minimum.
25	J	Will the government please release draft Attachments 6, 8 and 9 that are not included in the Draft RFP.	All attachments listed in Section J will be provided when the formal CS TAT RFP is posted to FedBizOps.
26	L1.0 GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS AND INFORMATION	Please provide the Government's reasoning for limiting the value of requirements set aside for small business to $3.5 million or less.

Limiting small businesses only to requirements less than or equal to $3.5 million is a constraint that appears inequitable and not consistent with current DOD guidance regarding maximizing small business utilization on multiple award contracts as set forth in Office of the Undersecretary of Defense, Acquistion, Technology, & Logistics, Memorandum, "Maximimizing Small Business Utilization on Multiple Award Contracts", July 20, 2012.. This guidance recommends commiting to setting aside task orders unless there has been a determination prior to placing the order that there is not a reasonable expectation of obtaining offers from two or more responsible small business concerns that are competitive in terms of market prices, quality, and delivery (the "rule of two"). As a small business prime contractor qualified under NAICS 54172, we have successfuly competed for and won task orders requiring R&D and solution development literally an order of magnitude greater than the $3.5 million constraint imposed here. We strong urge the Government to reconsider this constraint and recommend the Government adopt either of the proposed alternatives.

Alternative 1: continue to set aside exclusively for small business orders with a value of $3.5 million, but permit small business contract holders to bid on orders with a value greater than $3.5 million. Can SB winners compete for TATs over $3.5M?

Alternative 2: continue to set aside exclusively for small business orders with a value of $3.5 million; for orders greater than $3.5 million, issue a request for informaton to determine whether or not small business prime contract holders can satisfy the requirements in accordance with the 'rule of two.'	The partial SB set-aside dollar amount is $3.5M based on the Market Research performed and an approved small business strategy. The partial SB set-aside dollar amount of $3.5M is consistent and more than equitable for setting aside this acquisition. This acquisition is a follow-on to the SNIM TAT Multiple award contract that is currently being accomplished by all large businesses. The Government has two competition pools and you can propose and compete against the specific requirements in the RFP for the Unrestricted Full & Open competition pool which basically is your Alternative 1.
	27	L3.1 GENERAL	If the Sample TAT 2 partial SB set-aside response addresses only three focus areas, how will the Government evaluate each SB prime's technical capabilities in the focus area not addressed in Sample TAT 2?	The Government at a minimum must evaluate the preponderance of the work. The Partial SB set-aside TAT will more than satisfy that requirement.
	28	L2.2.4 CROSS-REFERENCE MATRIX	L2.2.4 CROSS-REFERENCE MATRIX states that "Each volume shall be written on a stand alone basis so that its contents may be evaluated without cross-reference to other volumes of the proposal. Cross-referencing within a proposal volume is permitted where its use would conserve space without impairing clarity. The cross-reference matrix will not count against the page limitations for their respective volumes."

Please clarify the purpose that the Government envisions for the cross-reference matrix. Normally such a matrix would be used to illustrate where in the proposal volume specific solicitation requirements from the SOW and Sections L and M are addressed. Is this the purpose of the cross-reference matrix?	Depends. If your normal matrix also includes the requirements of Section L2.2.4 then yes you are correct. However, the matrix you address in your question only specifies where your volume lists the requirements of the PWS and Sections L and M with no mention of any cross-referencing within a proposal volume. If you cross reference items in a proposal to conserve space without impairing clarity and your Matrix specifies this along with your normal Matrix, while meeting the PWS and Section L and M requirements, then that is acceptable.
	29	L3.3.1 SAMPLE TAT 1 for Subfactor 1a and TAT 2 for Subfactor 1b	The guidance the Government has provided for the Sample TAT response makes no mention of resumes. Is our understanding correct that the Government does not require resumes for proposed personnel? If the Government does requires resumes, are resumes excluded from the page count for this Subfactor?	Resumes are not required anywhere in the RFP. Further they are not needed to meet the RFP Section M3.0 criteria.
	30	L5.6 LINE OF CREDIT	Please confirm that that the letter of credit (LOC) agreement itself is acceptable versus a letter issued by the offeror's bank. If the LOC agreement is acceptable it would save offerors the difficulty associated with requesting and obtaining from the offeror's bank a special letter issued soley for this purpose.	Per RFP Section M3.3.8 "The letter shall be issued by a bank or other financial institution providing the Offeror an available line of credit for a minimum of $2 million that will be in existence at the time of contract award." A letter of credit that complies with the above Section M requirement will be an acceptable form of proof for this requirement.
	31	ATTACHMENT L-1

SECTION L

PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION	The text in the required form provided in Attachment L-1 is in Times New Roman, 12 point font. We request that the Government permit offerors to reformat the text in the required table in accordance with the guidance provided in L2.2.3 TABLES, CHARTS, GRAPHS, AND FIGURES. L2.2.3 specifies that for tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than Times New Roman or Arial 8 point font.	The Government will allow for reformatting of information for L-1, so long as it is compliant with L2.2.3.
	32	L4.2.6 PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEETS	L4.2.6 states that "A Past Performance Information Sheet is required on the Prime Offeror and each subcontractor/teaming partner/joint venture partner that will perform major or critical aspects of this acquisition." Please clarify this requirement since it appears to be at variance with the requirement specified in L4.2.1 PARTIAL SMALL BUSINESS (SB) SET-ASIDE COMPETITION POOL. L4.2.1 identifies a requirement for 5 past performance references, with at least 2 of them being from the SB prime. L4.2.1 appears to establish a past performance requirement that's different from "each subcontractor/teaming partner/joint venture partner that will perform major or critical aspects of this acquisition."	In either the Unrestricted F&O Competition Pool or the Partial SB Set-Aside Competition Pool, a Past Performance Information Sheet is required for each past performance reference submitted by the Offeror. Each Past Performance Information Sheet shall not exceed 5 pages in length. Additionally it is not a variance. You would have at least three (3) opportunities to capture the L4.2.1 requirement especially considering the limitations on subcontracting for small businesses.
	33	L4.2.1 PARTIAL SMALL BUSINESS (SB) SET-ASIDE COMPETITION POOL	L4.2.1 states "The Government is seeking Past Performance information across all four (4) focus areas of 1) Software Data and Analysis, 2) Cyber Security, 3) Modeling and Simulation, and 4) Knowledge Management and Information Sharing." L4.2.6 PAST PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEETS states that "In the Partial SB set-aside competition pool Offerors shall submit information on contracts most relevant in demonstrating their ability to perform two (2) or more focus areas that make up the CS TAT Partial SB set-aside pool." Please clarify the requirement to demonstrate focus area past peformance.	L4.2.6 was corrected. However, please understand that although the Government is seeking past performance in all four (4) focus areas you could potentially per section M3.2 receive a "Substantial" rating if you have coverage in at least three (3) of the four (4) focus areas in the Partial SB set-aside competition pool.
	34	L4.2.7 PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE	L4.2.7 states "Although it will become part of the past performance content the completed Questionnaires shall not be submitted with the rest of the Past Performance Volume." L4.2.1 PARTIAL SMALL BUSINESS (SB) SET-ASIDE COMPETITION POOL states "The Offeror’s Past Performance Volume shall contain the following and be within the specified page constraints for the Partial SB set-aside competition pool." The "following" list includes the Past Performance Questionnaire. Please confirm that the list in L4.2.1 is incorrect and that the Past Performance Questionnaire is not to be included in Volume II.	L4.2.7 is correct, L4.2.1 is incorrect and will be reflected in the formal CS TAT RFP, Past Performance Questionnaires shall be submitted to the AFIKA/KD as identified in Attachment L-3.
	35	L5.4.1 DIRECT LABOR RATES	L5.4.1 states "For each labor category or job classification title proposed (e.g. “Senior Scientist”, Technician” or “Lead Engineer”) provide a narrative description of related qualifications, duties, and responsibilities within the Section J, J-6 CS TAT Cost/Price Table or as an attachment to the cost proposal." Please clarify that this set of labor categories is intended to address only the requirements of the Sample TAT and is not intended to be a comprehensive set of labor categories for proposing on any TAT RFPs that may be issued under the IDIQ contract.	Yes you are correct this is only intended to address the requirements of the Technical Sample TAT(s).
	36	Section I Contract Clauses	The DRFP invokes 52.219-14 Limitations On Subcontracting, NOV 2011. The DRFP is silent on how this clause will be applied to prime contrats awarded as small business set-asides. We recommend that the Government apply the clause at the contract level on an annual basis.	In accordance with 13 CFR 125.6(f) (June 2014) the Contracting Officer will use the base period and each subsequent option period of performance for evaluating limitations on subcontracting. This has been added to Section H.7
	37	M3.2.3.1 Relevancy	Please clarify the definition and application of the relevancy criteria to be applied in evaluating the past performance submitted by small businesses. These criteria set the standards for relevancy at dollar thresholds that see very high, given the $3.5 million limitation for TATs awarded under the small business IDIQ prime contract. Why, for example, is a past performance for a Delivery / Task Order deemed only 'relevant' if contract is a cost-type with a value greater than $2 million and less than $10 million? The Delivery / Task Order described in the past performance submittal might well exceed the $3.5 million TAT ceiling by a significant amount.	The Government understands this and is why there is a flexible dollar range for the Offerors to be able to receive a "Relevant" rating for Magnitude of effort (Cost & type of contract) in those ranges that represent efforts involved with similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. Please keep in mind that in your question you use "Relevant" as if the magnitude of effort (Cost & type of contract) is the only factor for "Relevancy." Per M3.2.3.1 Magnitude of effort (Cost & type of contract) is only one of the four (4) factors that is evaluated for "Relevancy".
	38	L.2.1 Organization, Copies, and Page Limit.	Request the government allow for a five page discussion for each of the focus areas separate from how they are discussed in the Sample TATs. Also, recommend the government make these discussions an evaluation SubFactor.	No. The Government has provided 25 pages for Sample TAT 1 and 15 Pages for Sample TAT 2 to evaluate the Section M criteria and 15 pages for Program Management.
	39	General	Can potential vendors reference successful bids on Defense System and Homeland Security TATs? This addresses the Gov’t’s efforts to minimize unnecessary duplication in research, etc.	Offerors may submit references that they believe meets past performance relevancy and recency criteria.
	40	C1.4.2.1	Does software data & analysis include Independent Verification and Validation (IV&V) of software?	Yes, as stated under para. C.1.4.2.1 the scope of this Technical Focus Area includes " validation and evaluation of new and existing software" and "verification and validation of solution sets and protocols". Also the Representative Tasks listed under the task "Evaluation" at para. C.1.4.1.2, encompass verification and validation analyses.
	41	M3.2.3.1	The affect of evaluation criteria M3.2.3.1 restricting past performance citations to R&D efforts only constrains competition. Is this the Governments intent?	The Government is not restricting/constraining competition. The preponderance of the requirements will be R&D efforts.
	42	L4.2.6.1	The title provided for the tab, "Aggregate CS TAT Past Performance Relevance Evaluation Matrix for PWS Scope", will not fit on the worksheet tab title because it exceeds the allowable number of characters. Will the government please provide a title that is 31 characters or less?	Updated, formal CS TAT RFP will identify a title fitting tab naming parameters. (Aggregate PP Relevance Matrix)
	43	M1.0	Paragraph M1.1 appears to be missing, will the government please confirm that this was an oversight? Or will the government please confirm that the first paragraph should be labeled M1.1?	Thanks. M1.1 will be in the formal CS TAT RFP.
	44	L3.3.1 Sample TAT	For the partial Small Business set-aside pool, will the Government provide a draft version of the sample technical task to allow adequate preparation time and the ability to ask questions prior to the final RFP being released?	No. Sample TATs for the Partial SB set-aside and Unrestricted F&O pools will be provided at time of formal CS TAT RFP release.
	45	M3.2.3.1 Relevancy Criteria	Will the Government use the same past performance dollar thresholds for both the unrestricted Full and Open (F&O) competition pool and a partial Small Business (SB) set-aside competition pool? For example, the recently awarded GSA OASIS IDIQ had annual relevant thresholds of $3M for the F&O and $750K for the SB competition pools. Following a similar structure, will allow the SB pool more flexibility in selecting relevant past performance citations and therefore increasing the overall competition. Therefore, Relevancy criteria provided does not make a distinction between past performance relevancy criteria for offerors in the F&O Pool and the Small Business Pool. Kindly suggest a separate distinction for evaluation.	No. The Government has determined that a separate distinction already exists by evaluating you against your own competition pool and the flexible dollar range for the Offerors to be able to receive a "Relevant" rating for Magnitude of effort (Cost & type of contract) is in those ranges that represent efforts involved with similar scope and magnitude of effort, and complexities this solicitation requires. Further, per M3.2.3.1 Magnitude of effort (Cost & type of contract) is only one of the four (4) factors that is evaluated for "Relevancy".
	46	M3.2.3.1 Relevancy Criteria	For the partial Small Business set-aside pool, will the Government consider weighting all contract types i.e. Firm Fixed Price, Time and Materials, equally? This will increase competition by allowing more SB companies to participate.	Time and Materials will not be allowed on CS TAT Task Orders.
	47	Section I - Contract Clauses	252.227-7020, Rights in Special Works applies to works first created, generated, or produced and required to be delivered under this contract. When a work is first produced, created, or generated under this contract, and such work is required to be delivered under this contract, the contractor must assign copyright in those works to the government.

As a small business we are concerned with the restriction this clause may impose on our reuse of work produced and delivered under the contract, such as the content, methods, techniques, or tools we may develop. If this clause means that we are prohibited from such reuse in future engagements, this prohibition could act as a brake on our ability to grow. We request that the Government remove the clause or include a less restrictive clause to permit small business IDIQ contract holders the right appropriately to reuse work produced and delivered under the contract.	The Government is not going to change this for the overall contract and for this source selection. However, please keep in mind that each Task Order will have its unique requirements and challenges that will be addressed at the Task Order level. Please see RFP Section H.1(d.).
	48	L4.2.1 & M1.4	Section L states for SM Business Pool the Prime shall have 2 Past Performance from the Prime, Section M States that 5 Past Performances shall be from the prime? Will the government Please Clarify this requirement	The reference in M1.4 should read 2 from the Prime. This section is now M1.1 in the formal CS TAT RFP.
	49	L4.2.7	Are PPQ's required for the specific citation, if CPARS are available on the specific contracts/delivery orders cited and are available?	Yes Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) shall be submitted for each past performance reference. The Government may seek additional resources as stated in M3.2.1. If you want to submit CPARS in your Past Performance volume, it will not count against your page count (Added CPARS to the items that will not be counted in the RFP Section L2.2.1). The selection of references from which to request PPQ's is determined by each Offeror, regardless of whether a CPARS record is available or not.
	50	L5.2	How will the Management Reporting Price be evaluated? Is it the $3600 minimum order guarantee for all offerors, or can offerrors provide other higher pricing (ie.$150K or larger annually) that more appropriately supports this type of reporting tasking?	The $3,600 is the minimum order guarantee for all awardees and the first task order under the CS TAT contract will be for management reporting requirements under CLIN 0001 and will satisfy the $3,600 minimum order guarantee. Per Section L5.2 you can't exceed a total of $19,800 ($300 a month) for all five years including the 6 month extension. The provided minimum order guarantee and the don't exceed dollar amount are more than adequate to satisfy the Management Reporting requirements in CDRL A001 and A004.
	51	M3.2.3.1	For IDIQ type contracts, does the $ value indicate the actual exercised IDIQ contract value for the IDIQ contract ceiling?	For relevancy magnitude of effort (Cost & type of contract) evaluation will be based on overall ceiling value of IDIQ contract or IDIQ Delivery/Task Order.
	52	1.7.2 and 1.9	What security level and size is required for classified storage?	This will vary by TAT. As stated on the DD254, block 13, "for each task, an individual DD254 will be issued specific to the requirement" and TATs "may vary in classification from unclassified to TS/SCI". Therefore, individual TATs may require the contractor to have a TS/SCI vault, restricted area or closed area established at its cleared facility in order to adhere to the DD254-designated classified storage requirements specific to that TAT.
	53	1.9	Will any task order require on site support at a government facility and if so, is the location in the National Capital Region?	As stated in the PWS paragraph 1.4, TATs "may be performed at multiple locations (to include performance outside the Continental United States)", and as indicated in PWS paragraph 1.9, TAT performance may be required at both contractor and government facility locations.
	54	L3.1	The proposal instructions in L2.0 for Sample TAT 2 (partial SB Set aside) provides direction to cover three of the four focus areas. Please clarify if only two of the SubFactors will be evaluated, as written in L3.1 above, and if the Offeror can specify which two are evaluated.	Corrected. Subfactor 1b, Sample TAT 2 will cover three of the four focus areas. The Offeror will not select the three. Offerors in the Partial SB Set-aside competition pool will have to respond by submitting a technical proposal for Subfactor 1b, Sample TAT 2 that will be provided in Section J of the formal RFP once it is released.
	55	L4.2.1	The direction to the Offeror is to only address three focus areas in Subfactor 1b (Page 93) but Past Performance is requested for all four (4) focus areas. It seems that the Past Performance should be tied to the 3(3) focus areas required in the Technical Capability write-up.	To meet the agencies needs, Offerors in the Partial SB Set-aside pool will be evaluated for technical based on the focus areas that will be stated in the final RFP in Subfactor 1b, Sample TAT 2. The Government is seeking past performance coverage for all four (4) focus areas. Although for the Partial SB Set-aside pool the Government is seeking all four (4) focus areas but could still evaluate and rate an Offerors past performance confidence assessment as "Substantial" with at least three (3) of the four (4) focus areas covered (See M3.2).
	56	L4.2.6	This statement on page 97 seems to conflict with L4.2.2.1 which requests past performance across all four focus areas on page 96.	L4.2.7 is correct, L4.2.1 is incorrect and will be reflected in the formal CS TAT RFP, Past Performance Questionnaires shall be submitted to the AFIKA/KD as identified in Attachment L-3.
	57	L4.4	Is this a different Federal Agency from the one that submitted the Past Performance? Can a certification from a private company on the Offeror’s accounting system be used instead?	Yes. This is asking the Offerors to identify the point of contact of the cognizant Federal agency like DCMA or DCAA in most cases, that are authorized to complete a preaward survey and validate the status of the contractor's accounting systems, financial competence, etc.
	58	M1.2	Page 96 states that at least two (2) of the five (5) references shall be for the Prime Offeror. What is the correct number of Past Performance needed from the partial set-aside Prime?	We believe the reference is incorrect and should be L4.2.2. We reworded L4.2.1, L4.2.2 and M1.1 for clarity. For the Unrestricted Full and Open Competition Pool Offerors will submit 10 references with at least 4 of those being the actual primes references. For the Partial SB Set-aside Offerors will submit 5 references with at least 2 of those being the actual primes references. In other words the Government wants to see a set number of the actual Primes reference. This is for multiple reasons most of all so we don't just receive references that are all from the primes subcontractors or team members.
	59	Section M 1.4	Factor 2 - Past Performance (Volume III) states that the government will evaluate 5 contracts with 5 from the Prime for the partial SB set-aside. This contradicts the statement in Section L 2.1 which lists 5 past performances with 2 from the prime.	The reference in M1.4 should read 2 from the Prime. This section is now M1.1 in the formal CS TAT RFP.
	60	Section M 3.2.3.1 (Relevancy Criteria)	The Past Performance Relevancy Criteria provides specific evaluation criteria for the magnitude (cost/type) of the past performance effort. This criteria seems applicable to the Full and Open solicitation but not the Small Business Set-Aside. For example, for a delivery/task order under IDIQ type contracts to be considered very relevant the criteria is cost contracts greater than $10M. Since the SB Set-Aside is reserved for tasks that are less than $3.5M it seems that the $10M criteria isn't congruent. Will the government provide separate Past Performance Relevancy Criteria for the Small Business Set-Aside contract?	The Government understands this and is why there is a flexible dollar range for the Offerors to be able to receive a "Relevant" rating for Magnitude of effort (Cost & type of contract) in those ranges that represent efforts involved with similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. Per M3.2.3.1 Magnitude of effort (Cost & type of contract) is only one of the four (4) factors that is evaluated for "Relevancy".
	61	Section L 1.0	The Partial SB set-aside competition pool is reserved for businesses that meet the NAICS 541712 size limitation of 500 personnel. Will the government also offer a limitation to the annual revenue of the company since the SB set-aside is limited to small tasks (<$3.5M)?	No. The size standard for this acquisition, based on the 541712 NAICS Code, is 500 employees.

Sheet2 There is no variance. L4.2.1 refers to the "UNRESTRICTED F&O COMPETITION POOL" where "At least four (4) of the ten (10) references shall be for the Prime Offeror". (50 pages (10 references max @ 5 pages each). The same can be said for L4.2.2 "PARTIAL SMALL BUSINESS (SB) SET-ASIDE COMPETITION POOL" where "At least two (2) of the five (5) references shall be for the Prime Offeror". (25 pages (5 references max @ 5 pages each).

Sheet3

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated Nov 14, 2017.