Pre Solicitation Questions and Answers.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 28 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- FA8530-24-R-B001
About this file
This document provides details for the Technical Data Support Services Enterprise-3 (TDSSe3) federal contract opportunity. The TDSSe3 contract is an Indefinite Delivery Indefinite Quantity contract being competitively awarded as an 8(a) Small Business set-aside to provide continuation of technical order and engineering data sustainment and conversion services. The period of performance is nine years consisting of a four-year base ordering period and one five-year option period. Services include technical order and engineering data management, update, conversion, distribution, and library services. The pre-solicitation notice provides an opportunity for industry to provide feedback on draft documentation by March 7, 2024, including the requirement description, Sections L&M, PWS, CLIN structure, labor categories, and cost/price evaluation model. The contract will replace the expiring TDSSe2 contract and is issued by the Air Force Sustainment Center on behalf of the Department of the Air Force Materiel Command.
View the file
Other files
Show all 22
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
| Question and Answer Document 1: Pre-Solicitation FA8530-23-R-TDSSe3 | |||
| The government’s specification shall take precedence/priority over any questions/answers response in the event there is a conflict between the former and latter. | |||
| No. | Reference | Question | Answer |
| 1 | Request clarification on the Period of Performance of the contract. At the industry day the length was stated to be a basic Five-year contract with a five-year optional ordering period (plus a optional 6 month option. Then in the synopsis it states: The period of performance will be for nine (9) years (Four (4) year ordering period with one (1) option for five (5) additional ordering periods) and FAR Extension of Services clause 52.217-8 will be included. And finally, PWS paragraph 4.1.1 states the basic ordering period will be a single five-year contract with a three-year optional ordering period. Request clarification. | To increase competition, the Government adjusted the projected Period of Performance to 9 years (4-year ordering period with one 5 year optional ordering period). |
The PWS has been corrected to reflect the above PoP.
| 2 | RFP Section L. D. (Vol III Cost/Price)1.h | If a Cost Accounting Standard Disclosure has been created but not yet reviewed by the Government, will that be acceptable? | **Awaiting response from SB and/or DCAA will post an answer once received. |
| 3 | RFP Section L.D. (Vol III Cost/Price)1.h. | Does the CAS Disclosure come from the JV, both member partners separately, or from any of the members? | **Awaiting response from SB and/or DCAA will post an answer once received. |
| 4 | Section L.II. Volume Organization A. para 5 and 7 | REDACTION. Para 5 states that each page containing proprietary information as “PROPRIETARY to (Insert company name here). 7. “With the exception of the cover page in Volume I, each page shall not contain company-specific logos, letterheads, company names.” These are in conflict if there is proprietary information in the proposal. Example would include providing “evidence of the review and approval by DCAA / DCMA” where the company name is included in the DCAA approval letter. Please clarify. | The DCAA approval letter would not be considered part of this as the letter is generated by DCAA and not generated by the offeror. |
| 5 | PWS 4.3.1.1 | The PWS states “Contractor is expected to be proficient in all legacy editorial formats as well as current content management systems and desktop publishing software.” What are all legacy editorial formats and current content management systems as this is a broad requirement? | Legacy source data can include but not be limted to Word, PDF, GML, SGML, XML files. The contracter must be proficent with software and systems required to output manuals in appropriate MiL Standard/AF TMSS Specification formats. Specific legacy editorial requirements will be defined by program at the Task Order level. |
| 6 | PWS 4.3.2 | Please confirm if the reference to AFMCI 63-10 is intended to be AFMCI 63-101. | The PWS para have been corrected to read AFMCI 63-101 |
| 7 | Section L.C.2 | Will the government provide RFP Attachments 4&5? | Attachment 4 and 5 will be released with the official solicitation |
| 8 | Section L.C.2 | Reference Subfactor Two statement: “The offeror’s written technical proposal shall provide a detailed narrative, with supporting documentation, to demonstrate the offeror’s approach to satisfying the scenarios within the TDSSe³ RFP, RFP Attachment 4 Capability Task and in accordance with RFP Attachment 6 PWS.” Please clarify the requirement for “with supporting documentation…” Does the Offeror need to provide separate documents to meet this requirement, or does our narrative in the Technical Volume suffice? | The Offeror may provide a narrative along with supporting charts, graphs, illiustrations, or spreadsheets as part of the written technial proposal. The Offeror is NOT required to submit separate documents outside of the written technical proposal. Any pages submitted in response to the scenarios will be totaled against the 85 cumulative page count limit described in RFP Attach 4_ Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors. |
| 9 | Section L.II.A. General | The ITO states: “The attachments identified in the table shall be separately tabbed and identified in a three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary.” Please clarify this requirement. Is a three-ring binder required? | All proposals should be submitted digitally. Section L has been updated. |
| 10 | Is 10pt font acceptable for tables and graphics? | Print shall be no smaller than a font size of 12. (RFP Attach 4_ Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors; II. Volume Organization; A. General; 2) | |
| 11 | Section L p.5 II.D.1. | Should the document submitted for cost and pricing information be in Word or pdf format? | Either format is acceptable for information required in Volume III. |
| 12 | Section L p.5 II.D.1.e and 1.f | Is it correct that a major subcontractor is a subcontractor with a proposed value of at least $2 million for CLINs X002, X003, X004, X006, and X008? | Yes. |
| 13 | Section L p.5 II.D.1.e | If bidding under an unpopulated MPJV, are the mentor and protégé considered subcontractors for the purposes of providing a detail price buildup? | **Awaiting response from SB and/or DCAA will post an answer once received. |
| 14 | Section L p.6 II.D.1.h | If bidding under an unpopulated MPJV, and both the mentor and protégé have accounting systems reviewed/approved by the Government, does the offeror still need to complete Attachment 13 (Pre-Award Survey)? | **Awaiting response from SB and/or DCAA will post an answer once received. |
| 15 | Section L p.6 II.D.1.i.i | This section requires breakouts by individual cost elements for CLINs X002, X003, X004, X006 and X008 for the Prime offeror and all major subcontactors. Are breakouts by individual cost elements also required for CLINs X001 and X007? | No, because those are firm fixed price (FFP) CLINs. |
| 16 | Section L p.7 II.D.1.i.i.4. | Are salary survey detail reports considered adequate support for proposed direct labor rates? | Yes, if that information is the basis of the offeror's proposed direct labor rates. |
| 17 | Section L p.8 II.D.1.i.i.last paragraph | refers to “…offerors shall include roll-up cost data on Cost Formats A and C.” What specifically are “Cost Formats A and C?” I don’t see these on the Attachment 2 Cost Price Evaluation Model. | This comment is in regards to a prior version of the solicitation package. The current package resolves this question and the references to Formats A and C have been removed. |
| 18 | Reference the TDSSe3 Industry Day Questions 29-30 November 2023 (spreadsheet row 24) government response to Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA) on current TDSSe2 contract. The Government stated there is only one CBA that is at Hill AFB. | Can the government please confirm the number and location of any CBA on the current TDSSe2 contract? | The Government is aware there may be additional CBAs and is researching to find the formal document. |
| 19 | 1. Reference the February 29, 2024, Synopsis and PWS included for same time. The synopsis indicates a period of performance (POP) “or nine (9) years (Four (4) year ordering period with one (1) option for five (5) additional ordering periods)”. The PWS 4.1.1 indicates “a single five-year task ordering period with a three-year optional task ordering period”. | Can the government please provide clarification as to the correct anticipated contract POP? | See Question 1 |
| 20 | 1. Reference Section L, II. Volume Organization, A. General, bullets 2 and 3. This section identifies that a page size is 8 ½ inches and charts, graphs, drawings, diagrams, supporting illustrations, or spreadsheets are not greater than 11X17. | In formulating the page count, if 11” X 17” pages are utilized, do they count as 1 page or 2 pages? | 11” X 17” pages will be counted as two pages (See UPDATED RFP Attach 4_ Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors; II. Volume Organization; A. General; 2) |
| 21 | 1. Reference the RFI Question and Answer Document 1: RFI FA8530-23-R-TDSSe3 response to question 2 and current Section L, II. Volume Organization, A, 5, 6, and 7. It seems the reference to adding company name to Section L reference is still included. Per the government’s response to previous Q&A, it was stated that it would be removed. | Is it still the government’s intention to remove the company name requirement from these references or should the company name be included? | The company name should only be included on the proposal title page. All other references to the company name should be removed |
| 22 | 1. Reference Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, 2. Attachment 2: Cost-Price Evaluation Model, Non-Labor Add-on Factors: bullet 1. Material Handling. The anticipated cost associated with material handling is dependent on the volume and type of material anticipated to support the requirements. | Can the government please identify the volume and type of materials that are anticipated to be needed and stored in support of the requirements so a proper factor can be determined? | The Government cannot identify the volume and types of material due to the construct of the IDIQ basic contract. Offerors are advised to develop a material handling factor inclusive of their customary indirect rate structure. |
| 23 | PWS, 4.1.1 and Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
TDSSe-3 contract will encompass a single five-year task ordering period with a three-year optional task ordering period. Performance of work will extend no longer than twelve months past the last awarded task order. Excel model tabs require pricing for ten years, but the PWS dates cover nine years (5 base, 3 option, 1 extension). Is the intention for the base period to have one extension year and the option period have one
| extension year? | This comment is in regards to a prior version of the solicitation package. The current package resolves this question. The extension year will only be accounted for one time and will be based on CLINs 90XX (Option 1, Year 9). | |
| 24 | PWS, 4.1.2 and Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
Locations will include but not limited to: Hanscom AFB MA;
Hill AFT UT; Kirtland AFB NM; Peterson AFB CO;
Robins AFB GA; Tinker AFB
| OK | Excel model only covers three locations: Robins AFB GA, Hill AFB UT, and Tinker AFB OK. | Yes, rates will be established at the IDIQ level for three locations: Robins AFB GA, Hill AFB UT, and Tinker AFB OK. Rates for other locations will be established at the task order level if/when needed. |
| 25 | PWS 4.12.1 and 4.12.3 |
Adequate Proposal Determination and Submission: The Air Force:
Proposal Adequacy Checklist (AFPAC) will be used to determine an adequate proposal.
Completing the AFPAC: The AFPAC shall be completed and submitted as part of the
| proposal. | Will this checklist be required at the IDIQ level or Task Order level? Please provide the AFPAC if at the IDIQ level price proposal submission. | This will not be required at the IDIQ level if adequate price competition is achieved. |
| 26 | PWS 4.12.1 |
The basis and rationale for all costs shall be provided as part of the proposal so that the CO may rely on the information as sufficiently current (where available) to determine fair and
| reasonable price. | Does this statement apply to the IDIQ and Task Order proposal submittals? | Directions in Section L&M must be followed for the IDIQ proposal submittal. This PWS language is more relevant to the task order proposal submittals. |
| 27 | PWS, 4.1.2 and Cost Price Evaluation Excel Mode |
Locations will include but not limited to: Hanscom AFB MA;
Hill AFT UT; Kirtland AFB NM; Peterson AFB CO;
Robins AFB GA; Tinker AFB
| OK. | Please provide SCA WD Schedules for all six locations in the PWS. | The only SCA WD Schedules provided on the basic will be Robins, Hill, and Tinker. Other possible SCA WD Schedules will be provided at the individual order level; if applicable. |
| 28 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, para. e and the Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
A list identifying each major/minor subcontractor and/or vendor, reflecting the estimated total price, by CLIN,
| for each subcontractor/vendor. | The Excel model, note #4 states “Government-estimated hours shall be applied to calculate the total price for CLIN X001 (All labor CLINS). These hours will not be disclosed to the offeror.” How is the offeror to determine which subcontractors are major or minor if no labor hours are provided by labor category? How shall the offeror calculate total estimated price for each subcontractor if no hours are provided by labor category? | The Government has disclosed the total estimated hours by year by CLIN and will not disclose the estimated hours by category. The offeror may use the provided values for total yearly hours and the offeror's judgment to estimate whether any subcontractors are likely to exceed $2M over the course of the nine-year IDIQ. The Government will calculate total estimated price based on the rates proposed by the offeror. |
| 29 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, para. f and the Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
…for the Prime and all subcontractors with a proposed value equal to or greater than $2,000,000 (herein referred to
| as major subcontractors)… | How shall the offeror determine if a subcontractor is major without labor hours by labor category in which to allocate to the subcontractor, and calculate total estimated price for that subcontractor? | See Question 28. |
| 30 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, para. i.i and the Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
Elemental Cost Breakouts:
Irrespective of the presence of adequate price competition, breakouts by individual cost elements shall be provided for proposed rates applicable to
CLINS X002, X003, X004,
X006, and X008 for the Prime offeror and all major subcontractors to assist in the
| determination of realism. | How shall the Prime offeror and its major subcontractors determine IDIQ price proposal elemental cost breakouts dollar value per CLIN if no labor hours are being provided by labor category? | The elemental cost breakout should be provided at the level of the burdened rate per labor category. No labor hours should be applied to extend the amounts. |
| 31 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, para. i.i and the Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
Elemental cost breakouts shall be provided as part of the offeror’s proposal and shall be in .xls file format (with live working formulas) as provided in the “On Site Cost Elemental Breakout” and “Off Site Cost Elemental Breakout” worksheets contained in RFP Attachment XX Cost-Price
| Evaluation Model. | How shall the Prime offeror and its major subcontractors determine IDIQ price proposal elemental cost breakout dollar values per CLIN if no labor hours are being provided by labor category? | See Question 30. |
| 32 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, para. i.i and the Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
Offerors should refer to the format indicated in Table 15-2 of FAR 15.408 for instructions on submitting acceptable
| elemental cost breakouts. | How shall the Prime offeror and its major subcontractors (defined as having a total contract value that meets or exceeds $2,000,000) determine IDIQ price proposal elemental cost breakout dollar values per CLIN if no labor hours are being provided by labor category? | See Question 30. |
| 33 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, para. i.i and the Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
…all offerors (Prime and major subcontractors_ who have neither a FPRA nor a FPRR shall submit the following items/information as
| part of their proposal. | How shall the Prime offerer determine if a subcontractor is major or minor without labor hours by labor category in which to allocate to subcontractors when developing the IDIQ price proposal? | See Question 28. |
| 34 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, para. i.ii and the Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
The Offeror’s cost proposal shall contain the proposed fully burdened rates at cost (less
| Profit/fee)… | How will profit/fee be determined and calculated for FFP (CLIN X001) and CPFF (CLIN X002) burdened labor rates, less profit/fee, since the IDIQ price proposal submittal must exclude any fee or profit? | Profit or fee will be negotiated when task orders are issued and not included at the basic contract level. |
| 35 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, para. i.iii CLIN Description Table Model |
CLINS X005 and X006 ODCs
| FFP and CPFF add- on factor | The description does not mention the allowability of profit or fee to be included in the add-on factor. | See Question 34. |
| 36 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, 2. Attachment X: CostPrice Evaluation Model: On-Base and Off-Base Rates: |
First paragraph states “…all known locations: Robins AFB,
| Tinker AFB, and Hill AFB.” | PWS states there are multiple locations and also includes NM, CO, and MA for a total of six named locations. | Rates will be established at the IDIQ level for three locations: Robins AFB GA, Hill AFB UT, and Tinker AFB OK. Rates for other locations will be negotiated and established at the task order level if/when needed. |
| 37 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, Cost/Price, 2. Attachment X: CostPrice Evaluation Model: Annual Hours: |
Paragraph states “…and a twothousand-eighty (2080) hour work year. Any leap year will consist of a two-thousandeighty-eight (2088) hours work
| year.” | Is the offeror to assume only one FTE per labor category for IDIQ bidding purposes? | No. The explanation regarding annual hours is provided to clarify that overtime and/or shift differentials should not be included in the proposed labor rate. The Government will apply our internally-estimated hours per category to calculate the total proposed price and total estimated price per offeror. |
| 38 | PWS, 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 and Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
3.3.1 On-Base Support and
3.3.2 Off-Base Support.
Cost Price Evaluation Model
| tabs | Tab CLIN X001 requires input for FFP (On-Site) burdened labor rates, less profit. Tab CLIN X002 requires input for CPFF (On-Site) burdened labor rates, less fee. There are no tabs for Off-Site entries. | This comment may be in regards to a prior version of the Cost-Price Evaluation Model. The current Cost-Price Evaluation Model provides space for both on-site and off-site burdened labor rates for both CLIN X001 and CLIN X002. Specifically, on those tabs, on-site rates can be entered in Columns E-AC and off-site rates can be entered in Columns AH-BF of each tab. |
| 39 | PWS, 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 and Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
3.3.1 On-Base Support and
3.3.2 Off-Base Support.
Cost Price Evaluation Model
| tabs | The Cost Price Evaluation Model Excel file tabs FORMAT B PRIME tabs combine FFP/CPFF in the Column Header meaning the BLR’s must be the same. Depending upon a company’s burdening methods for on-site or off-site support, these calculations and BLR’s may differ | This comment may be in regards to a prior version of the Cost-Price Evaluation Model. The current Cost-Price Evaluation Model provides space for both on-site and off-site burdened labor rates for FORMAT B PRIME tabs. Specifically, on those tabs, on-site rates can be entered in Columns D-L and off-site rates can be entered in Columns N-V of each FORMAT B PRIME tab. |
| 40 | PWS, 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 and Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
3.3.1 On-Base Support and
3.3.2 Off-Base Support.
Cost Price Evaluation Model
| tabs | Tabs FORMAT B SUB requires input for FFP (On-Site) burdened labor rates, less profit and CPFF (On-Site) burdened labor rates, less fee. There are no tabs for Off-Site entries since burdening methods may differ for each site location type. | This comment may be in regards to a prior version of the Cost-Price Evaluation Model. The current Cost-Price Evaluation Model provides space for both on-site and off-site burdened labor rates for FORMAT B SUB tabs. Specifically, on those tabs, on-site rates can be entered in Columns D-L and off-site rates can be entered in Columns N-V of each FORMAT B SUB tab. |
| 41 | General | |
| Annual Labor Rate Escalation | How will annual labor escalation for SCA WD Schedule applicable pay rates and H&W benefits increases be considered in the IDIQ price proposal (i.e. FAR PART 22.1002-5 Service Contract Labor Standards Executive Orders 13658 and 14026: The wage rate is subject to annual increases by an amount determined by the Secretary of Labor)? | Annual SCA and H&W increase are addressed at the order level. |
| 42 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, D.1.i.4 and Attachment X: CostPrice Evaluation Model: |
Paragraph states “Note for any subcontractors, to include minor subcontractors (with less that $2,000,000 in total costs), offerors shall include roll-up cost data on Cost Formats A
| and C.” | The Attachment X: Cost-Price Evaluation Model does not include FORMAT C tabs; only FORMAT B (major subcontractors). | This comment is in regards to a prior version of the solicitation package. The current package resolves this question. |
| 43 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, D.2 and Attachment X: CostPrice Evaluation Model |
First paragraph states “Offerors shall propose labor rates burdened to the cost line for the five one-year basic ordering period and the option for five one-year ordering periods for both Firm Fixed Price (FFP) and Cost-Plus
| Fixed Fee (CPFF) CLINS.” | PWS, 4.1.1 states “TDSSe-3 contract will encompass a single five-year task ordering period with a three-year optional task ordering period.” | The PWS has been corrected to reflect the projected Period of Performance to 9 years (4-year ordering period with one 5 year optional ordering period). |
| 44 | RFP, Section L, D. Volume III, D.2 and Attachment X: CostPrice Evaluation Model |
Paragraph states “ Pursuant to FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services, an evaluated price will be calculated for all CLINS 11XX by multiplying the offeror’s Option 1, Year 10 evaluated price by fifty percent
| (50%).” | Attachment X: Cost-Price Evaluation Model tabs do not designate which Column(s) are designated for extension years. Will the five-year base period have a one-year extension period? And will the three-year option period have a one-year extension period? (Total ten years) | This comment is in regards to a prior version of the solicitation package. The current package resolves this question. Section L, D. Volume III, D. 2. was revised to "Pursuant to FAR 52.217-8 Option to Extend Services, an evaluated price will be calculated for all CLINs 90XX by multiplying the offeror’s Option 1, Year 9 evaluated price by fifty percent (50%)." The extension will only be calculated one time for evaluation purposes and will be based on CLINs 90XX (Option 1, Year 9). |
| 45 | RFP, Section M, paragraph E.1 Cost/Price Proposal Factor |
Paragraph states “The Government will evaluate each offeror’s proposed prices submitted…for reasonableness, balance, and cost realism IAW paragraphs A, B, and C below.
A TEP, which will include an aggregate calculation of FFP CLINs and a Most Probable Cost (MPC) for cost-type CLINs, will be presented to the Source Selection Authority for consideration in making the
| best value determination.” | Price infers the inclusion of fee. Since profit and fee are not to be included in the IDIQ price proposal submittal, how will the profit/fee factor be applied in the evaluation? | See Question 34. |
| 46 | Cost Price Evaluation Excel Model |
Excel model requires entry for add-on factors for “Overtime”, “Night Shift” and “Swing
| Shift”. | Can the template be edited to accommodate different add-ons for exempt and non-exempt employees? | No; the Government requests that offerors utilize the model's structure for a single add-on factor per shift differential category. Offerors may account for exempt and non-exempt employees when developing the proposed add-on factors, if that is consistent with customary business practices. |
| 47 | PWS 4.13 Labor Category Descriptions and Qualifications |
“Labor Categories contained in the solicitation/contract for this effort will be consistent with the Department of Labor Register of Wage Determinations as issued under the Service Contract Act.” In order to level the competition, will the Government designate which labor categories are SCA WD Schedule applicable and the occupation codes? 1. The Department of Labor is the authority on SCA labor category determinations and mapping. Determining how labor is mapped to SCA will be the responsibility of each vendor.
2. The Air Force has released our unique labor category definitions, the Government GS Equivalencies to include series and step, the latest standard SCA labor categories (RFP Attach 3), and any known CBAs (RFP Attach 12), as part of the RFP.
3. The Air Force will evaluate SCA mapping as part of Volume II, Written Technical Proposal, Subfactor One (Management Plan). To do this, the Air Force will include a baseline mapping for offerors to propose against, with offerors describing deviations and justification, from the baseline. The mapping baseline will be released with the technical package as part of the RFP.
48 RFI Questions #6, #10, #18 Response to question #6 states it is the offeror’s responsibility to determine SCA/WD applicability (i.e. mapping).
Responses to #19 and #18 also state it is the offeror’s
| responsibility. | In order to level the competition, will the Government designate which labor categories are SCA WD Schedule applicable and the occupation codes? | See response to question 47. | ||
| 49 | What size font can graphics, figures and tables be in ? We recommend a 10-point font. | Print shall be no smaller than a font size of 12. (RFP Attach 4_ Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors; II. Volume Organization; A. General; 2) | ||
| 50 | Will the Air Force consider increasing the Technical proposal page limit to 95. | The page limitation for Volume II, Written Technical Proposal is 85 cumulative pages (RFP Attach 4_ Section L - Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors; II. Volume Organization; A. General; 3) | ||
| 51 | Can partner of the JV provide the government an approved accounting system? | **Awaiting response from SB and/or DCAA will post an answer once received. | ||
| 52 | Will the Air Force except questions on the scenarios and the awardable task once they are released? | Questions wil be accpeted until a specified deadline that will be posted on SAM.gov with the soliciation. | ||
| 53 | Section L Page 2 | II Volume Organization Section A General. Last sentance above table. 'The attachements identified in the table shall be separately tabbed and identified in a three-ring, loose-leaf binders, as necessary.' This should be removed since proposal submissions allow for no paper. | See Question 9 | |
| 54 | Synopsis Page 3 Para 3 | Extension of Services clause 52.217-8 will be included' is listed only in Synopsis and no other documents. Will this be added to final release? Will 120-day approval for 8a certifcation prior to Base Year 4 of contract be mandated? | Clause 52.217-8 will be included in the basic award. We will check 8(a) status according to FAR 19.812(d), which reads:"For 8(a) contracts exceeding 5 years including options, the contracting officer shall verify in DSBS or SAM that the concern is an SBA-certified 8(a) participant no more than 120 days prior to the end of the fifth year of the contract. If the concern is not an SBA-certified 8(a) participant, the contracting officer shall not exercise the option (see 13 CFR 124.521(e)(2))." | |
| 55 | Attachment 5 | SSP Attachment 5, Section M: Pricing: Will rates be required for "other satellite locations" such as Hanscom and Peterson? | No, not for the basic contract. Those would be negotiated at the order level if/when needed. | |
| 56 | CLIN Description Draft | CLIN number Identifiers Table- Base Ordering Period and Option 1 Periods need to be recalculated to a 4-year base and five 1-year options. | This will be correctly be anotated in the RFP release. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .