QandA_Round2_20July.pdf

A-10 Teamcenter Professional Engineering Services

FA8202-16-R-1003 AMDT 0002

Questions & Answers Round 2

20 July 2016

Q1. PWS par. 3.1.d Task Requirements: Are government or contractor personnel currently managing the HEDC Oracle Database?

A1. A contract issued by the 75 ABW/SC is managing the HEDC Teamcenter and Oracle servers.

Q2. PWS par 3.1.h Task Requirements: Are the existing and developed interfaces between Teamcenter and government data management systems such as WSMT & REMIS automated interfaces or a data migration process?

A2. The current Teamcenter Profession Services contract is working through phase I of data migration with a much larger contract for A-10 PLM Implementation. Phase II will require the Teamcenter Professional Services contract to maintain the manual data migration processes as well as any automated processes derived in phase II efforts.

Q3. PWS par. 6 Travel Requirements: Please confirm that the No. Days in the table are days per trip rather than the total days for the total No. Trips.

A3. No. Days column should read No. Days per Trip. As such, clarification in the PWS table will be made as shown below.

Destination No. Persons No. Trips No.

Days/Trip

A-10 Supplier Facility (Example: Boeing, Northrop, etc.)

1 2 6

Contractor Facility to Hill AFB 1 12 5

PLM World 2 1 6

Q4. PWS par. 3.3 Position and Hours: Wouldn’t 1960 or 1920 labor hours be more appropriate instead of 2080 hours to accommodate for the 10 holidays and personnel time off for the period of performance?

A4. The hours identified in paragraph 3.3 of the PWS are an estimated amount; it is the government’s intention to have contractor support for all hours that the A-10 government employees work.

Q5. Attachment 7 Evaluation Factor for Award: Will the government accept the prime offeror’s personnel Teamcenter experience in lieu of company past performance along with the teaming partner three recent/relevant contracts?

Questions & Answers Round 2

A5. Attachment 7, Evaluation Factors for Award, paragraphs 5.2.1 and 5.2.2 define the requirements for recent and relevant past performance.

Q6. In attachment 6, item 3.1 Narrative Summary, Section M evaluation factors/subfactors are referred to. Where can Section M be found?

A6. Section M is Atch7_52.212-2_SectionM_Evaluation.

Q7. Do the Microsoft Software Products require Software Assurance? If so, Microsoft Visio Pro is not available with Software Assurance and MS Visual Studio Pro requires MSDN. Please clarify.

A7. Software Assurance is not required.

Q8. Subversion is an open source product from Apache. Is there a specific third-party support vendor required?

A8. No third-party support vendor required.

Q9. Attachment 6/ 3.0 Volume I- 3.3.3: Define facility code?

A9. The facility code is for work performed at other locations, which may or may not have a different cognizant Contract Administration Office. This code may be left blank or identified as N/A if it does not apply.

Q10. Attachment 6/ 3.0 Volume I- 3.3.3: What is labor surplus designation?

A10. “Labor surplus area” means a geographical area identified by the Department of Labor in accordance with 20 CFR Part 654, subpart A, as an area of concentrated unemployment or underemployment or an area of labor surplus.

Q11. Attachment 6/ 3.0 Volume I- 3.3.3: DFARS 252.277-7013 – How do you provide verification for unlimited restricted rights?

A11. Verification may be a statement that all work performed under this contract will have unlimited/unrestricted rights in accordance with DFARS 252.227-7013 and/or DFARS 252.227-7015. The appropriate clauses have been added to the solicitation.

Q12. Attachment 6, page 15, item 7.1 refers to “Model Contract, and Sections A thru K”. Where can these documents be found?

Questions & Answers Round 2

A12. “Model Contract, and Sections A thru K” will be replaced with “SF1449”. All references to model contract will also be updated to SF1449 as necessary.

Q13. Please note that Volume II – Factor I : Technical Volume Subfactor E: Management Approach item 4.3.2.3 is repeated on pages 10 & 11 of Attachment 6.

A13. Attachment 6 & 7 have been updated to correct the numbering of Subfactor E: Management Approach.

Q14. The following information is requested in order to complete Volume II – Factor 1: Technical Volume. This information is needed ASAP in order to meet submittal deadline. Please advise availability.

A14. All information required can be found under the GFI Attachment 18 Package – this was loaded to FBO as a separate package on 24 June 2016.

Q15. Section L, Paragraph 2.2 – Organization/Number of Copies/Page Limits: Section 2.2/Table 2.2 mandates that Volume III, ITO Paragraph 5.0 – Performance Confidence be limited to 15 pages. Section

5.1.1 requires that the offeror shall submit PPI sheets using Attachment 8 for up to three (3) contracts for the prime and three (3) for each subcontractor. Attachment 8, without any input from the offeror, is three (3) pages. If an offeror was to have only one subcontractor (which would require six (6) past performance examples and the completion of six (6) Attachment 8 documents, the total number of pages without filling in any information in the Attachments is 18 pages – three pages longer than allowed. And this does not include the required Attachment 10 – Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Letter.

We humbly request that maximum page limit for Section 2.2 be increased to 20 or 25 pages to allow offerors to be compliant in their page count and still address all proposal requirements.

Do the Attachment 10 – Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Letters count towards the total page count for Volume III.

A15. The page count for Performance Confidence has been increased to 25 pages. Attachment 10, Subcontractor/Teaming Partner Consent Letters do count towards the total page count for Volume III.

Q16. Section 4 – Sample Task Responses (Sub-Factor A, B, C, D): 4.3.2 Subfactor E: Management Approach: Sections 4.3.2.1, 4.3.2.2, and 4.3.2.7 requires the offeror to address those certain tasks identified in PWS Section 6.4.

There is not a PWS Section 6.4. Please provide this section or strike the requirement to address this section/paragraph.

A16. The PWS numbering has been corrected; Section 6.4 is available.

Questions & Answers Round 2

Q17. Section L, Paragraph 5.3: Typo in Paragraph 5.3 as follows: The offeror shall submit past performance information for work efforts identified in para 5.1.2; maximum of five (3) recent work efforts that are most relevant in demonstrating the offeror’s ability to perform the proposed effort.

Action Necessary: Change five (3) to three (3)

A17. Section L has been corrected.

Q18. SF 1449 – Box 8, Offer Due Data/Local Time: The solicitation remains due on July 25, 2016.

Questions are due on July 18, 2016, seven (7) calendar and only five (5) business days prior to the due date.

A July 25 due date therefore leaves only 4-½ working/business days for the government to read, respond to, and publish the answers to questions and for offerors to receive the answers to questions, modify their responses as required to address the answers, and then print, bind, package, ship, and delivery their proposals. To ensure timely delivery due to the current Monday deadline, most offerors will ship their proposals on Thursday, July 21 for a Friday, July 22 delivery. This reduces the total time to complete the steps outlined above to less than three days which is not enough time.

We humbly and respectfully request that the solicitation due date be extended to allow additional and needed time to read question, research information, draft responses, and distribute those responses to the Q&A process and for offerors to read, understand, and modify their proposals to address the changes required by the posting of the answers and comments to the Q&A process.

A18. In accordance with Attachment 6_52.212-1_SectionL_Instructions, paragraph 2.1.1, questions were to be submitted no later than 18 July 2016, 10 AM MT. Interested parties were welcome to submit questions prior to that date. The Government will extend the closing date, please refer to the appropriate amendment for the updated date.

Q19. As we provide the Siemens software quote for you, we had a question about License Types. If these are being used in a “Sandbox / Development” environment … SPLMS provides an option on many of their products to use what are called “QA/Test License” options. They typically are used by IT to mimic the software pieces in “production environments”, and this seems to be the case. “QA/Test” may not be used for “production” work, and are offered at a significant discount to the list price of Extended Licenses. Do you know if the intention for the new licenses is to be “extended” or “QA/Test”?

A19. They are intend to be extended licenses, not QA/Test.

Q20. If you had the current License File for Sold To: 1240828 … we could determine the types currently deployed; is there any chance you have access to review that?

A20. Please refer to Q19.

Questions & Answers Round 2

Q21. Do we need to submit a completed DD254?

A21. The Government provided all known information in the DD254 and will be completed at time of award.

Q22. What is the required Sample Task Format?

A22. There is no specific Sample Task Format.

Q23. Can an offeror submit less than the page count identified in Attachment 6?

A23. Yes, the page counts identified are maximums.

Q24. Can you provide a blank SF1449?

A24. The SF1449 is prefilled with the basic requirements, provisions, and clauses. This is located on FedBizOps as “FA820216R1003” and described as “solicitation”. It is acceptable to handwrite/sign any required fill-ins by the offeror as long as the handwriting is legible. In lieu of entering pricing directly on the SF1449, a pricing attachment has been provided in an excel format. Please refer to Atch 6, paragraph 6.1.1.1, 6.1.1.2, & 7.1.2.