FA8224-20-R-0009 Draft RFP QA Matrix 11MAY2020.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 33 KB Posted
- Attached to
- ATSSI II Services Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8224-20-R-0009
About this file
This document contains draft solicitation materials and questions from potential offerors for the ATSSI II Services indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract. Key details include:
-
The Air Force Materiel Command Air Force Sustainment Center is seeking proposals to provide automated test system sustainment services. The draft performance work statement outlines requirements for sustaining and modernizing automated test systems used for weapon system evaluation. Potential offerors submitted questions on the draft solicitation documents to clarify requirements.
-
The estimated request for proposals release date is late May/early June 2020. The contract type will be an IDIQ with cost-plus-fixed-fee, firm-fixed-price, and time-and-materials task orders. The base ordering period is from April 2021 to April 2026 with three option periods extending orders through April 2030. The period of performance for awarded task orders may run through October 2028.
-
Offeror questions covered clarification of references, proposal submission requirements, evaluation criteria, contract line item details, and interface with government organizations. The government provided responses to adopt suggestions and remove ambiguities from the solicitation language.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 30
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Basic PWS
| AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEM SUSTAINMENT INITIATIVE II (ATSSI II) Rev.6 May 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
| 1 | PWS 3.1.2.1, 3.8.3.1 | Q&A response indicated MIL-DTL-87829 would be changed to "MIL-DTL-87929E". | The referenced PWS sections changed the reference document to "MIL-DTL-87829E" rather than "MIL-DTL-87929E". Would the Government clarify that the correct reference document is MIL-DTL-87929E? | The correct reference document is MIL-DTL-87929E. PWS Sections 3.1.2.1 and 3.8.3.1 have been updated to reference MIL-DTL-87929E. |
| 2 | PWS 7.8.2 | PWS section 7.8.2 references the Government QASP | Does the Government intend to issue an ATSSI II QASP as part of the final RFP documentation? | No. Contractor’s performance will be evaluated IAW the Task Order Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP). PWS Section 7.6.2 has bee updated |
PWS Questions Page &P of &N
Section L
| AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEM SUSTAINMENT INITIATIVE II (ATSSI II) Rev.6 May 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
| 1 | L 5.1.5 | Section K Representations, Certifications, and other Statements of Offerors | The Government has confirmed this is a full-and-open, unrestricted solicitation. However, Section L 5.1.5 still states, "Offer shall ensure certification as a small business under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 541512." |
| Therefore, will the Government please confirm the requirement should read, "Offeror shall ensure certification of its' business size under North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) Code 541512"? Alternatively, did the Government intend to remove this language when it removed L 5.2.2. Limitation on Subcontracting? | The verbiage in Section L has been changed as suggested. | |||
| 2 | L 1.3 | Section 1.3 outlines the requirements for hardcopy submission indicating the volumes, number of copies and submission in separately bound three-ring, loose leaf binders. Paragraph 1.3.10 Distribution - defines delivery of the hardcopy proposal. | The solicitation requires that hardcopies of proposals be delivered to the Contracting Officer at 6038 Aspen Ave. Bldg. 1289 NE, Hill Air Force Base, UT 84056, Attention: Ms. Emily J. McCollaum, no later than the date and time specified in Section A of the solicitation. The solicitation also requirees submisison of electronic copies. As the COVID-19 Coronavirus continues to impact the United States and global community, we are following all recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of State, and World Health Organization. As such, the evolving situation has potential impacts on hardcopy proposal preparation and delivery logistics. |
Will the Government please consider removing the requirement for hardcopies and consider digital submission of Adobe PDF proposal files?
| Hard copies are no longer required. Section L has been updated | ||||
| 3 | 2.3.4 | Section L requires the two sample task detailed approaches "in the form of a PWS" suggesting only a PWS is to be included in a response, which disagrees with Section M3.4.1 which requires the response "contain" a PWS allowing for inclusion of the schedule, processes, and other Section M artifacts required for evaluation. | Request the Government review and revise Section L from "in the form of a PWS" to "contains a PWS" to agree with the Section M evaluation criteria. | "...in the form of a PWS" has been removed from Section 2.3.4. The sentence reads, "The offeror shall submit a detailed approach to the sample task IAW ATSSI II PWS section 3.6.3" |
| 4 | L 2.3.1 | The offeror shall demonstrate evidence of certification or third party validation of offeror’s QMS, a QMS recertification plan, and current certification for CMMI Level 3 as defined in section 7.6 of the PWS.” | Is it acceptable for one of the prime offeror's subcontractors to possess CMMI Level III certification if the prime offeror does not possess it? | No. In order to be considered acceptable either the Prime Contractor as a company shall be appraised as CMMI Level 3 or the working group within the Prime Company proposing to do the TPS work shall be appraised as CMMI Level 3. If the working group in the Prime Company proposing to do TPS work is not appriased as CMMI Level 3, they will be considered unacceptable. |
Section L Questions Page &P of &N
Section M
| AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEM SUSTAINMENT INITIATIVE II (ATSSI II) Rev.6 May 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
| 1 | M 3.3 | The Government’s evaluation of this subfactor will ensure the offeror’s proposal clearly and comprehensively describes their management approach with their Contractor/Government Interface Plan, Contractor Bias Mitigation Plan, and Partnering Agreements with an appropriate level of descriptions showing their functional and physical allocations that define how they will satisfy the above criteria with approaches and features that are technically sound. | Would the Government please clarify what they are requesting for "physical allocations"? | Functional and physical allocation language has been removed from Section M |
| 2 | M 3.2 | The Government’s evaluation of this subfactor will ensure the offeror’s proposal clearly and comprehensively describes the/their Industrial Process Control (IPC) Plan, Configuration Control and System Engineering Processes, and GFE Risk Mitigation Plan with an appropriate level of descriptions showing their functional and physical allocations that define how they will satisfy the above criteria with approaches and features that are technically sound. | Would the Government please clarify what they are requesting for "physical allocations"? | Functional and physical allocation language has been removed from Section M |
| 3 | M.3.3.1 | Section M states” This requirement is met when the offeror’s proposal indicates, at a minimum, specific interface personnel for the functions of Logistics, Configuration Control, and Program Management as well as evidence of offeror’s experience working with relevant Government organizations (i.e. PMEL, AFMETCAL, ATSG, TOMA, etc.). The offeror will provide all resumes, certifications, licenses for Government interface personnel, and evidence of working with Government organizations shall be included with the proposal. These points are not all inclusive. Demonstration of greater evidence of experience and/or interface functions that are beneficial to the Government may demonstrate the contractor’s ability to exceed this requirement.” When an offeror submits additional resumes of interface personnel and resumes with substantial certifications it utilizes page count that would have been used to demonstrate the offerors additional capability in for its technical response. | Would the government please allow resumes, certifications, and licenses to be included in an appendix that is not included in the page count? | Yes. Section L has been updated to exclude the Appendix in Volume 2 in the page count. Added verbiage in Section 2.2.3 of Section L to state, "In the appendix of the offeror’s proposal, the offeror shall include resumes, certifications, and licenses for Government interface personnel" |
Section M Questions Page &P of &N
TEP
| AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEM SUSTAINMENT INITIATIVE II (ATSSI II) Rev.6 May 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
TEP Questions Page &P of &N
SOO
| AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEM SUSTAINMENT INITIATIVE II (ATSSI II) Rev.6 May 2020 | ||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response |
| 1 | Attach 6 SOO Section 4.3.1 | Section 4.3.1 of the Attachment 6 SOO requires a Phase-In Transition Plan in accordance with PWS 3.6.1.1. Additionally, CDRL A023 Program Management Plan and Phase-In Transition Plan, is due 45 days after contract award. | Could the Government please clarify that a Phase-In Transition Plan is not required as part of the proposal submission as it does not appear as a requirement in Section L. | |
| A Phase II Transision Plan is not required as part of the Contactor's proposal but it is a requirement of the Awardable Program Management Sample Task Order. | ||||
| 2 | Attach 5 SOO | CDRLS A005 and A006 are both drawing CDRLS reflecting two different levels of drawing and both are cited in the CDRL table. The PWS does not distinguish between these two drawing requirements causing confusion. | Request government clarify use and application of CDRLs A005 and A006 in the SOO. | To eliminate confusion, CDRL A005, Commercial Drawings/Models and Associated Lists, has been removed from Attachment 5 SOO |
SOO Questions Page &P of &N
DRAFT Solicitation
| AUTOMATED TEST SYSTEM SUSTAINMENT INITIATIVE II (ATSSI II) Rev.6 May 2020 | |||||
| Question # | Reference | Discussion | Question/Comment | Government Response | |
| 1 | 30 April 2020 Government Response to Questions | Section L, FAR 52.232.28 (a). When asked if Offerors are required to include Performance-Based Payment financing terms as part of its Sample Task Order response, the Government answered that "Performance based payment financing terms shall be evaluated only for task orders, not basic IDIQ". | Will the Government please confirm Offerors are not required to submit Performance-Based Payment financing terms as part of their response to the Awardable Sample Task Order? | Correct, offeror's are not required to submit Performance-Based Payment financing terms. | |
| 2 | 30 April 2020 Government Response to Questions | Draft Solicitation Section F - CLINs 2001-2007 Period of Performance (22APR26 - 21APR30) | Will the Government please confirm it intends for the Option Period 2 (CLINS 2001-2007) period of performance to run concurrently with portions (i.e. 4/22/26 - 4/21/28) of the Base (CLINS 0001-0007) and Option 1 (CLINS 1001-1007) Periods from 4/22/26 - 10/21/28? | ||
| If yes, will the Government please clarify the reason for the concurrent periods of performance? | CLINs 0001-0007 Ordering Period – 4/22/2021-4/21/2026 |
*Period of Performance 4/22/2021-4/21/2028 CLINs 1001-1007 Period of Execution – 4/22/2021-10/21/2026 *Period of Performance – 4/22/2021-10/21/2028 CLINs 2001-2007 Ordering Period – 4/22/2026-4/21/2028 *Period of Performance 4/22/2026-4/21/2030 CLINs 3001-3007 Period of Execution – 4/22/2026-4/21/2028 *Period of Performance 4/22/2026-4/21/2030 *Period of Performance is not applicable to CLINs X007 as they are items, not services.
Option Years 100X and 300X are options to extend the period of performance time on an individual task order. CLIN 200X is an option to extend the IDIQ ordering period. CLINs 3001-3007 can not cause the task order's PoP to extend past CLINs 2001-2007 PoP.
3 30 April 2020 Government Response to Questions Draft Solicitation Section F - CLINs 3001-3007 Period of Performance (22APR26 - 21APR30) Will the Government please confirm it intends for the Option Period 3 (CLINS 3001-3007) period of performance to be the same as Option Period 2, and therefore also run concurrently with portions (i.e. 4/22/26 - 4/21/28) of the Base (CLINS 0001-0007) and Option 1 (CLINS 1001-1007) Periods from 4/22/26 - 10/21/28?
| If yes, will the Government please clarify the reason for the concurrent periods of performance? | See response to Question 2. Like CLIN 100x, CLIN 300X can be used to extend the task order PoP but not to exceed the PoP of CLIN 200X | ||||
| 4 | N/A | Contract type | Have you decided on a particular contract vehicle for this effort, and when do you anticipate releaseing the RFP (GovWin provides an estimate of Otc 2020)? | The contract vehicle will be an Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract. Estimated RFP release is late May/early June and is subject to change. |
Draft Solicitation Questions Page &P of &N
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .