FA8604-16-R-7005_RFP__Answers_17Oct16_FINAL.pdf

FA8604-16-R-7005

AFRL ITSS RFP Questions & Comments

1. I’m having a bit of confusion as to whether this is a small business set aside or not. FBO has Set

Aside indicated as “N/A” and GovWin from Deltek indicates it is (Competition Type: Small Bus Set-Aside).The NAICS Code 541513 indicates it would be a Small Business Set-Aside with a 3-year average annual revenue $27.5M. Also, will companies need to recertify since for some companies on relatively fast growth paths will grow out of the $27.5M size standard category in January 2017.

A. This is a 100% Small Business Set-Aside at time of proposal submission.

2. Who is the incumbent?

A. RCF Information Systems, Inc.

3. What was the incumbent's contract period of performance?

A. The ordering period for the basic contract has ended, individual orders have varying periods of performance.

4. What was the incumbent's contract value?

A. The ceiling on the contract was $111,800,000.

5. Does the incumbent contract value represent the work performed on the summation of all three proposed task orders. If not, please explain the differences.

A. No, the value of all task orders, including the three initial task orders.

6. Since this contract covered by the Service Contract Act (SCA), please provide the appropriate DOL wage determinations

A. The work called for under this effort has been determined to be outside the scope of

SCA.

7. Since this contract covered by the Service Contract Act (SCA), please provide a FAR 52.222-42, "Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires" (applicable DOL Wage Determination labor category and $$)

A. See #6 Above

8. Was the incumbent contract covered by the Service Contract Act (SCA)? If so, please provide SCA anniversary dates for SCA covered employees so bidders can include DOL required vacation amounts in bidder pricing.

A. Several labor categories on the previous contract could have been covered by the SCA, however, the revised categories on this effort are not.

9. FA8604-16-R-7005_2Sep16, Section 4.6 Contractor Point of Contact (POC) – Can this be another duty as assigned, or does the “local POC” need to be an individual without technical duty responsibilities.

A. Staffing determination is addressed by vendor in their proposals.

10. What are the planned/anticipated dates for: a) contact award announcement, b) transition start, c) work start? This data is needed to develop a draft transition plan.

A. a) Award Announcement anticipated May 2017 and transition and work simultaneously starting June 2017.

11. Is transition separately priced?

A. No

12. Is an incumbent transition-out plan available for review? This would help bidders develop their transition-in plans.

A. See PWS 4.14

13. Does the transition period occur during the last 30 days of the incumbent’s contract?

A. See PWS 4.14

14. Are any resumes required with the proposal?

A. No

15. Many labor categories are not utilized by either of the three task orders. For example, none of the three proposed task orders utilize Telecommunications Engineers. Are these extra labor categories for future task orders beyond the initial three? Can these labor categories be utilized on the current three proposed task orders at a later date?

A. Yes. Possibly, if changes to the work so requires. Labor categories needed to meet requirements are determined by vendor as part of their proposals.

16. Will task orders beyond the initial three be also be evaluated based upon LPTA?

A. Yes.

17. Does the PPI Tool need to be used by bidders who claim “no relevant past performance”?

18. Confirming that a QC plan in not due with the proposal.

A. Confirmed.

19. Since this is a small business procurement, could the requirement for hard copy volumes be omitted? Requiring both hard copy and electronic copies is redundant and extremely taxing on small businesses. Most procurements, especially IT procurements, within the past 10 years utilize email submittals to reduce time, complexity and cost.

A. No, see submittal requirements identified in Section L, Table 3.1.

20. Is a previous DCAA accounting review a requirement of this procurement?

A. Not a requirement.

21. Will the winners of this contract be required to have their accounting systems reviewed by

DCAA? Is there the possibility of cost based task orders in the future?

A. No, the requirements of section L are firm.

22. Will the evaluated price for this initial LPTA evaluation include all priced labor categories, or only those labor categories applicable to the initial 3 task orders?

A. See Section L, Paragraph 4.4.4 and 4.4.5 and Section M, Paragraph 2.4.4

23. We see no conflict of interest (COI) language in the solicitation. There will be opportunity for

COI under this procurement due to the nature of contractor provided IT support. IT will have access to AFRL email, database records, telecommunications, etc. Suggest bidders (primes and their subcontractors/teammates) be required to submit OCI statements that are evaluated within the proposal’s evaluation criteria.

A. The need to protect sensitive information and the requirement for contractor personnel to sign Non-Disclosure Agreements (NDA) is identified in PWS, Paragraph 4.8

24. How often historically has this work operated in an emergency mode during the execution of

Continuity of Operations Plans (COOP) or similar plan situations.

A. Periodic exercises occur.

25. What automated tools available to assist in the initial GFE inventory?

A. There is no inventory requirement associated with GFE, see PWS paragraph 3.0.

26. What is the Government’s estimate as to how long an initial GFE inventory will take? Non-incumbent bidders do not have access to the site and equipment to gauge this event.

A. See #25 above. GFE is different than ADPE. See PWS paragraph 1.4.9 for ADPE requirements.

27. How many TS billets are available per task order? How many Secret billets are available per task order?

A. Billets are not addressed in the effort. Historical information provided.

28. Is 100% of the work required to be accomplished at WPAFB? If no, please explain.

29. Are local AFRL approved IT processes/procedures documented? Are these documents available for bidder review?

A. Document are not available for bidder review.

30. Will all three task orders start at the same time? If not, please describe the timeline?

31. Since there will be additional future task orders (beyond the initial three), is there any estimate as to the contract’s total growth potential? (i.e. 10%, 20 FTEs, etc).

A. No, future task orders will detail required support at time of issuance.

32. During the contract’s period of performance, will the Government potentially be making requests for changes/additions in staffing to any of the three initially awarded task orders?

A. Cannot be determined at this time. Changes of staffing may be required if changes to task orders warrant it.

33. Are bidders required to maintain staffing levels IAW their proposal?

A. Awardees will be required to maintain staffing to meet government requirement.

34. If work can be performed with a different amount or mix of staff while maintaining performance, can the winner adjust staffing during the contract?

A. See 33 above.

35. Confirming that there are no “key” positions on this contract.

A. No “key” positions identified on this contract.

36. Do current incumbent staff meet this RFP’s skill, certification and clearance requirements?

A. Each Offeror has to determine the appropriate labor mix to meet government requirements.

37. Is this the type of FFP contract where the monthly invoice will remain the same regardless of actual hours worked?

38. Does AFRL recognize closures beyond the typical 10 federal holidays? If so, please describe. Are contractors required or requested to work these days?

A. Only if base safety and security dictate such a closure, see PWS 4.2.

39. Since there is not a Project Manager labor category for bidders to utilize, how does the

Government plan on ensuring this is not a personal services contract?

A. This is not a personal services contract.

40. In Appendix 2 of Task Order 1 PWS (page 35), should the “Security Administrators I – V” be

“Systems Administrators I – V” as with the other two task orders?

A. Yes, Appendix 2 Task Order 0001, Page 35, has been revised. Other two Appendix for

Task Order 0002 and 0003 are correct and already state System Administrators I-V

41. In Appendix 2 of Task Order 1 PWS, Historical Manning is provided for the labor categories of “HPAC/Printer Administrator” and “Networked Multimedia, A/V Sys Design & VTC Specialist”. These labor categories do not appear to be represented in Attachment 4 (Labor Rate Matrix and Task Order Price Template).

A. Section L, Attachment 4 Labor Rate Matrix, Table A, Table B Task Order 0001, Table C Task Order 0002, and Table D 0003 has been corrected and now includes HPAC/Printer Administrator, Network Multimedia Specialist, and Networked Multimedia, A/V Sys Design & VTC Specialist.

42. All three task orders represent the following labor categories in Appendix 2; (1)Network

Administrator, Sr, and (2) Network Multimedia Specialist. There appears to be no stated historical manning in these labor categories. They are also not represented in Attachment 4 (Labor Rate Matrix and Task Order Price Template). Could the Government please clarify?

A. See questions 15 & 41. Historical manning represents notional historical information, Job Categories from Section L, Attachment 5 are listed in Appendix 2 Historical.

43. Reference Section 4.4.3 and Section 4.4.4 of Section L. In Section 4.4.3, the reference is made that when pricing fully loaded labor rates for the IDIQ, these will be the maximum rates permissible. When pricing the task orders as outlined in Section 4.4.4, is it permissible to discount the IDIQ labor rates or must you use the labor rate proposed for the IDIQ?

44. Sec. L, pg. L-8, heading 4.2.5.a. Section L asks for “transition plans and staffing for each of the three (3) initial Task Orders.” Question: Please clarify if the Government requests a separate transition schedule as well as a separate narrative for the transition methodology section; or would an overarching schedule and narrative, with clarifications of the differences between TOs, would be preferred?

A. The Offeror shall provide a staffing approach that addresses the requirements in Section L, 4.2.5.

45. Sec. L, pg. L-8, heading 4.2.6.a. Section L asks for “the Offeror’s technical approach for executing the PWS IT Support requirements for the contract’s total 5-year performance period, as well as for each of the three (3) initial task order awards…” Question: Please clarify if the Government requests a separate narrative for the transition year vs. the total 5-year performance period.

Also, please clarify if the technical approach should be repeated for each TO (noting differences in PWS requirements); or would an overarching narrative, with clarifications of the differences between TOs, be preferred?

A. The Offeror shall provide a technical approach that addresses the requirements in Section L, 4.2.6.a.

46. Sec. L, pg. L-8, heading 4.2.6.b. Section L asks for a management approach for the contract’s total 5-year performance period, as well as each of the three (3) initial task order awards…” Question: Please clarify if the management approach should be repeated for each TO (noting differences in PWS requirements); or would an overarching narrative, with clarifications of the differences between TOs, be preferred?

A. The Offeror shall provide a management approach that addresses the requirements in Section L, 4.2.6.b

47. Sec. L, pg. L-5, heading 3.6 and 3.7. This section asks for a table of contents and glossary within each volume. Question: Since the Executive Summary is also a separate volume, will it require its own table of contents and glossary?

A. No.

48. Sec. L, pg. L-7, heading 4.1.2. This section asks for a maser table of contents of the entire proposal. Question: Is the intent for the master table of contents to include Volumes IV and V?

49. L 1.1: The Government intends to issue competitively award the Basic AFRL ITSS Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contracts and Task Orders. Beyond the initial 3 TOs, is there anticipated contract growth? Approximately what how much growth is foreseen?

A. There will be additional orders, the number and size of which are unknown at this time.

50. Labor Matrix/Labor Category Descriptions: For LCs education/experience requirements. If the word “may” is used, can we assume it is optional unless specified by a TO?

51. Labor Matrix/Labor Category Descriptions: For LCs education/experience requirements. In most cases the education/experience is an “and” statement which could limit the available pool of personnel with the depth of experience a position could take. Will exceptions be allowed in execution?

A. The required education and experience levels are specified in Section L, Attachment 5.

52. Basic PWS 1.4.1: HD Availability. The contractor shall support the operational management of all Directorate IT systems in such a manner as to ensure that non-availability, either collectively or individually, does not exceed 1% of annual, normal operating hours (8,300 hours out of 24x7).

Clarify - 100% manned, or 100% availability on call. How measured?

A. See 2.0 Services Summary.

53. Although the incumbent contract may not be broken out by 3 task orders like this proposed effort, can you break out (approximately) the incumbent contract $ value by Task Order (1-3).

For Example: TO1: $50M, TO2: $20M, TO3: $16M

54. HPAC/Printer Administrator is identified as a labor category; however, the position does not show up in Attachment 4 (Labor Rates).

A. See question 41.

55. What will be the start date of each task order?

A. The start date will coincide with award of the basic contract.

56. Please confirm 1920 is the number hours that should be used for each FTE.

57. Section L, 4.5.3 and Model Contract, Section B, CLIN 0001: Should the proposed price for each of the initial task orders be provided under CLIN 0001 on three separate lines?

A. Three (3) model orders have been provided for clarification.

58. Model Contract, Section B, CLIN 0002: Will the government provide the travel estimate for each task order or should this CLIN be left blank?

A. CLIN 0002 should be left blank. A ceiling value will be provided by the Government at time of award. As this amount is the same for all vendors, it is not part of the TEP.

59. Model Contract, Section B, CLIN 0003: Will the government provide the equipment and material estimate for each task order or should this CLIN be left blank?

A. CLIN 0003 should be left blank. A ceiling value will be provided by the Government at time of award. As this amount is the same for all vendors, it is not part of the TEP.

60. Task Order 001 (PWS), Page 34: Two positions show incumbents, but they are not listed on Section L, Attachment 4, Table A. Should these positions be included in Section L, Attachment 4, Table A and Task Order tab for task order 0001? These positions are: HPAC/Printer Administrator (DoD 8571 IAT II) Networked Multimedia, A/V Sys Design & VTC Specialist (DoD

8570 IAT II)

A. See question 41.

61. Task Order 003 (PWS), page 37: There are five labor categories which are not listed in Section L, Attachment 4, Table A, Task Order 0003. Should these positions be included in Section L, Attachment 4, Table A?

Systems Administrator I (DoD 8570 IAM I) Systems Administrator II (DoD 8570 IAM I) Systems Administrator III (DoD 8570 IAM I) Systems Administrator IV (DoD 8570 IAM I) Systems Administrator V (DoD 8570 IAM I)

A. Section L, Attachment 4, Table B, C, and D have been revised to reflect Systems Administrator, I – V.

62. In Section L, Attachment 4, Table A, Labor Categories Tab:

Lists Systems Administrator I, II, III, IV, and V (line 89 – line 93), but in Attachment 4 Task Order tabs 0001, 0002, and 0003, it never lists Systems Administrator I, II, III, IV, and V.

Task Order 0001, 0002, and 0003 Tabs, it does lists Security Administrator I, II, III, IV, and V (line 92 – 96).

This position issue is also found in the PWS Task Order 0003 page 37 as it lists Systems Administrator I, II, III, IV, and V, while the Attachment 4, Task Order 0003 tab lists Security Administrator I, II, III, IV, and V. Please clarify.

A. Section L, Attachment 4, Table B, C, and D have been revised to align with Table A, and top reflect Systems Administrator, I-V.

63. PWS of Task Orders 0001, 0002, and 0003 on page 34, 35, 36 respectively: It lists Information

Technology Manager (DoD 8570 IAT I), but in Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Categories Description on page 14 it lists Information Technology Manager (DoD 8570 IT I). Please clarify.

A. Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Categories, Page 14 & 15, has been updated. The following changes have been made:

Page 14, Information Technology Generalist (DoD 8570 IAT I) Page 14, Information Technology Manager (DoD 8570 IAT I) Page 15, Intranet Applications Specialist – Web (DoD 8570 IAT I) Page 15, Intranet Applications Specialist, Sr. – Web (DoD 8570 IAT I)

64. PWS Task Orders 0001, 0002, and 0003 on page 34, 35, 36 respectively: It lists Intranet

Applications Specialist – Web (DoD 8570 IAT I) and Intranet Applications Specialist -Web, Sr.

(DoD 8570 IAT I), but in Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Categories Description on page 15 it lists Intranet Applications Specialist – Web (DoD 8570 IT I)and Intranet Applications Specialist, Sr.

(DoD 8570 IT I). Please clarify.

A. See question 63.

65. PWS Task Order 0001, on page 35: It lists Security Administrator I (DoD 8570 IAM I), but in Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Category Description on page 20 it only lists Security Administrator (DoD 8570 IAM I). On page 21 of Attachment 5, Labor Category Description it does list Systems Administrator I (DoD 8570 IAT II). Please clarify.

A. See question 40.

66. PWS Task Order 0001 on page 35: It lists Security Administrator III (DoD 8570 IAM I), and Security Administrator IV (DoD 8570 IAM I), but in Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Categories

Description there is no Security Administrator III (DoD 8570 IAM I) or Security Administrator IV (DoD 8570 IAM I). Please clarify.

A. See question 40.

67. PWS Task Order 0003 on page 37: It lists Systems Administrator IV (DoD 8570 IAM I), but in Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Categories Description on page 21 it lists Systems Administrator IV (DoD 8570 IAT II). Please clarify.

A. The following DoD 8570 requirements has been updated in Appendix 2 of Task Order 0001 (Page 35), 0002 (Page 36), and 0003 (Page 37)

Systems Administrator I (DoD 8570 IAT II) Systems Administrator II (DoD 8570 IAT II) Systems Administrator III (DoD 8570 IAT II) Systems Administrator IV (DoD 8570 IAT II) Systems Administrator V (DoD 8570 IAT II)

68. PWS Task Order 0003 on page 37: It lists Systems Administrator V (DoD 8570 IAM I), but in

Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Categories Description on page 22 it lists Systems Administrator V (DoD 8570 IAT II). Please clarify.

A. See question 67.

69. PWS of Task Orders 0001, 0002, and 0003 on page 35, 36, 37: It lists Video Telecommunications Specialist V (DoD 8570 IAT I), but in Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Categories Description on page 26 it lists Video Telecommunications Specialist V (DoD 8570 IAT II). Please clarify.

A. The following DoD 8570 requirement has been updated in Appendix 2 of Task Order 0001 (Page 35), 0002 (Page 36), and 0003 (Page 37)

Video Telecommunications Specialist V (DoD 8570 IAT II)

70. In reviewing the Attachment 4 – Labor Rate Matrix and Task Order Price Template, it does not have entries for a “HPAC/Printer Administrator” and a “Networked Multimedia, A/V Sys Design & VTC Specialist”. Both of these show in the Task Order PWS attachments and in Attachment 5

– Labor Categories Descriptions. Should these be included in the pricing information? If so please provide an updated Attachment 4 or provide guidance on how to factor for these two categories.

A. See question 41

71. Has overtime been authorized or required historically? If yes, will the government provide an estimate of overtime hours by labor category?

A. This is a FFP Contract.

72. Ref: 4.4.2 Section 2. Complete and submit the Labor Rate Matrices (Attachment 4, Table A), and Task Order Price Template (Attachment 4, Tables B, C, and D). Question: Is the offeror required to submit a completed Table E – Total Evaluated Price Calculation.

A. Yes, please see Section L, paragraph 4.4.5.

73. Ref: 4.5.3. Contractor shall provide complete pricing information in Section B of the RFP’s model contract, which includes inserting proposed prices for each Contract Line Item Number (CLIN) for each of the three initial task orders. Question: Is the offeror to fill in Section B Supplies or Services CLIN 0001 with the TEP from Attachment 4, Table E reflecting the total price for all three task orders?

A. See question 57.

74. Please confirm that the FAR Clause 52.222-41 Service Contract Labor Standards does not apply due to the inclusion of 52.222-53 Exemption from Application of the Service Contract Labor Standards to Contracts for Certain Services – Requirements.

75. Please confirm that the DoL Area Wage Determination does not apply.

A. Confirmed, DoL Area Wage Determination does not apply.

76. Labor categories – The following Labor Category descriptions contained in section L attachment

5 are not in the Attachment 4 Labor Rate Matrix and Task Order Price Template. Please clarify whether or not they should be included in the price matrix.

A. HPAC Printer Administrator B. Network Administrator Senior C. Network Multimedia Specialist D. Network Multimedia A/V Design and VTC Specialist

A. Section L, Attachment 4, Table A, B, C, and D have been revised to reflect correct labor

77. Task Order 1 PWS – Historical Manning Information A. Includes an HPAC/Printer Administrator – note that this Labor Category is not currently included in the pricing matrix.

78. Section L, page L-4 and L-5, the Font is not specified for tables, graphics and figures. We request that a different font be allowed for the smaller text in graphics, tables, and figures to make the text easier to read, for example Calibri or Arial.

A. Times New Roman is the default font throughout the proposal.

79. Section L, Attachment 1 Cross-Reference Matrix. Can the Government please provide this file as an Excel or MS Word file?

A. An Excel file is now provided.

80. Please clarify what is meant by “Tab Indexing” in Section L, page L-5. Is the Government referring to the creation of Tab dividers for each separate section? Is this the same as a “Section” listed in Section L, paragraph 4.4.1.2, page 11, for Volume IV, Price? If so, does the Government want each Section shown in Section L, paragraph 4.4.1.2 as separate tab dividers or combined under one tab?

A. Section should be logically tabbed to allow for a clear presentation of your proposals contents.

81. It appears that there is a contradiction in the instructions of Section L. Paragraph 3.9, page L-6.

In that paragraph it states: “If files are compressed, the necessary decompression program must be included.”, however in subparagraph (g) it states: “Do NOT submit documents using file compression software (such as .zip format).” Which instruction is correct?

A. Section L updated, do not use file compression software.

82. Section L, paragraph 3.10 states that “The “original” proposal shall be identified. Proposals shall be addressed to the CO, and mailed or hand-carried to:”. Is it acceptable to use FEDEX or UPS for delivery of the proposal?

A. The Contractor may use whatever package delivery service available. Please note, it is the Contractors responsibility to ensure the packages are received by the deadline regardless of method of delivery.

83. Past Performance questions. Please explain how the page counts for past performance work. It states that there is a 6 page limit per past performance reference, Section L, table 3.1, page L-4.

Is this limit inclusive of the PPI tool printouts as well as the Section L., paragraph 4.3.4, “Specific Content” section? If all of the PPI printouts are required to be placed under “tab 1” how will additional pages for “specific content” for section 4.3.4 be determined, are they separately counted and added to PPI pages? Or are the PPI printout pages not counted in the total of 6 pages per reference?

A. It is inclusive of the PPI Tool printouts, they are part of the 6 page limit per reference.

Section L, 4.3.1, Page 15, hard copies of the pages generated from the PPI tool shall be used and are subject to the limitations outlined in this RFP.

84. Will the Government provide a DD254 for this solicitation? It does not appear that one has been provided yet. Does the DD254 need to be provided with the solicitation response?

A. Draft DD 254 already provided with RFP on FedBizOps.

85. Are the headers and footers required to have 12 point Times New Roman type or can the type and font in them be smaller/different as long as it is readable? E.g. we normally use Arial in the Header and Footer as it is easier to read, and ensures that we are within the margin sizes required with all information needed.

A. Yes, 12 point Times New Roman is required.

86. Are the Title Pages/Covers/Separator/Tab Divider pages required to adhere to the 12 point

Times New Roman type or can the type and font in them be smaller/larger /different as long as it is readable? E.g. we normally use Arial in the Title/Cover and Separator pages with larger font sizes as it is easier to read.

A. See question 85.

87. Regarding Section 3.3 Page Size and Format, font requirements. “Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document, the font shall be Times New Roman and the text size shall be no less than 12 -point.” and “For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than 8 point.”?

88. Does text in headers/footers require Times New Roman 12pt font?

89. Are Section headers (i.e., 2.0 Technical Approach) required to be in Times New Roman 12pt font?

90. Do tables and graphics require Times New Roman 8pt font (or larger)?

91. May tables / graphics be provided in a non-serif font, as long as they are in 8pt point font or higher?

92. Reference paragraphs 4.3.1, 4.3.2, 4.3.3, 4.3.4 This entire section is unclear because section 4.3.2 is introduced in the middle of the other sections that appear to be discussing content required for the PPI tool Paragraph 4.3.1 indicates that we should print out the PPI data from the PPI tool for this section, in accordance with Attachment 2; the Paragraph 4.3.3 indicates that we should submit information in accordance with Attachment 2; then Paragraph 4.3.4 asks offerors to explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort, how problems were resolved and demonstrate how they were overcome. Can you please explain what exactly is required for the content for these different paragraphs? These paragraphs appear to ask for information that is identical and redundant in many cases to the information requested in the PPI tool. It is also unclear whether this data goes into the PPI tool only to be reprinted or needs to be additional information in separate sections that are not a part of the PPI tool. Please clarify.

A. Each of the aforementioned paragraphs provide more specific detail on the required past performance submittal. Paragraph 4.3.2 is a separate requirement.

93. RFP, Section L.4.5.5.2: In this section the Government requests contact information for the

Contract Administration Office and DCAA, and the Government Paying Office. Will the Government clarify which contract administration office and Government Paying Office should be provided by the Offeror in this section?

A. It would be the Contractor’s local cognizant admin, DCAA, and payment office.

94. RFP, Section L.4.2.4: Is the Cross Reference Matrix Excluded from the page limitations for Volume II –Technical?

95. RFP, Section L.3.1: Where the Government indicates, “Five (5) hard copies,” will the Government confirm that this means one (1) original plus four (4) copies labeled ‘Original’ then Copy (1) of 4,

(2) of 4, etc?

A. Correct.

96. Section L, paragraph 4.3.3. Is the number of past performances (3 to 5) inclusive of the subcontractor past performance or separate? Specifically, should the prime submit 3 to 5 and each sub submit 3 to 5 past performances, or is the total number supposed to be 3 to 5 for ALL prime and subs submissions.

A. It is a maximum of 5 submissions including the prime and all sub-contractors.

97. Section M, Can you also please explain what is meant by the Section M statement in paragraph 2.3.2.2., "In determining the relevancy of effort performed under individual past performance contracts, the government will only consider the specific effort or portion consistent with that proposed by the prime, subcontractor or teaming partner."

A. The Government will only consider relevant information identified by the Offeror.

98. Section M 2.2.2 Subfactor 2: IT Support (p. 3-4); Section M 2.3.2 Evaluation Process (p. 5); PWS Section 1.6 Continuity of Operations (COOP) (p. 9); Section M 2.3.2 Evaluation Process indicates the Performance Evaluation Rating will focus on performance that is relevant to the technical subfactors. Section M 2.2.2 Subfactor 2: IT Support references PWS paragraphs (including subparagraphs) 1.4.1 - 1.4.12, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 2.0, 4.5, 4.7, and 4.9. Question: PWS Section 1.6 COOP appears to be a general contract term and condition requirement and not a specific PWS scope area as the other functional tasks listed under Section 1.4 Requirements. Is this correct, or should it be considered a requirement that “requires” specific Past Performance coverage as opposed to experience/expertise that is contained within the Technical Volume?

A. Paragraph 1.6 is a general requirement of the PWS. The Past Performance submittal should meet the requirements of Section M, paragraph 2.3.2.

99. Section L Atch.4 Labor Rate Matrix and Task Order Price Template 10 August 2016 Excel File; We have noticed the width most of the columns in this spreadsheet do not self-adjust to the number of characters needed to display data. This will create readability issues with most of the cells when we print this file for the required hard copy proposals. Will the Government provide an updated Price Template spreadsheet which allows data in all cells to be displayed?

A. Section L, Attachment 4 will be revised to allow for wider columns.

100. Section L 3.5 (p. 5), 4.2.4 (p. 7); Atch L-1 Cross Reference Matrix; Section L 4.2.4 indicates offerors shall include a completed Atch L-1 Cross Reference Matrix with the Technical Proposal. Section L 3.5 instructs offerors to “fill out the Solicitation Cross-Reference Matrix at Attachment 1 of this ITO indicating the proposal reference information as it relates to the ITO, PWS, CLIN numbers, and CDRL references found therein.” Atch L-1 does not have columns for CLIN numbers or CDRL references. Question: Is it the Government’s expectation that offerors add these columns and indicate applicable CLIN numbers or CDRL references for each row?

A. Matrix will be updated accordingly.

101. Section L Atch.4 Labor Rate Matrix and Task Order Price Template 10 August 2016 Excel File; Attachment does not have the following labor categories in the Task Order 0001, 0002, and 0003 Tabs which may be found in Section L Attachment 5 Labor Category Descriptions.

Systems Administrator I (DoD 8570 IAT II) Systems Administrator II (DoD 8570 IAT II) Systems

Administrator III (DoD 8570 IAT II) Systems Administrator IV (DoD 8570 IAT II) Systems Administrator V (DoD 8570 IAT II) Network Multimedia Specialist (DoD 8570 IAT II)

Networked Multimedia, A/V System Design & VTC Specialist (DoD 8570 IAT II) HPAC/Printer Administrator (DoD8570 IAT II) These Labor Categories are used in the Historical FTEs. Will the government please update the Excel spreadsheet for Task Order 0001, 0002, and 0003 Tabs with all the labor categories?

102. Section L Atch.4 Labor, Rate Matrix and Task Order Price Template 10 August 2016 Excel File; The task orders have Security Admin I-V linked to the rates for Sys Admins. “Tab 1 Labor Categories” is missing the following labor categories:

Security Administrator (WPAFB) Security Administrator I (WPAFB) Security Administrator II (WPAFB) Security Administrator III (WPAFB) Security Administrator IV (WPAFB) Security Administrator V (WPAFB)

Will the government please update the spreadsheet to include the missing labor categories and verify the Security Admin and Sys Admin links? If the Security Admin I-V labor categories are correct, please provide their descriptions in Atch 5 (Section_L_Atch_5_- _Labor_Category_Descriptions_14_June_16).

A. Appendix 2, Task Order 0001 has been updated to reflect correct labor categories.

Section L, Attachment 4, Table A, B, C, and D have been revised to reflect correct labor

103. DRFP Responses to Questions (#23), 27 May 2016, The answer to Question #23 stated the government does not anticipate the labor categories will be covered by the SCA, yet the following clauses are included in Section I of the RFP:

a. 52.222-17, Nondisplacement Of Qualified Workers (May 2014)

b. 52.222-41, Service Contract Labor Standards (May 2014)

c. 52.222-42, Statement Of Equivalent Rates For Federal Hires (May 2014)

d. 52.222-53, Exemption From Application Of The Service Contract Labor Standards To Contracts For Certain Services - Requirements (May 2014)

For pricing purposes, it is important that this question be answered prior to proposal submittal. 1. Is SCA applicable to this acquisition?

A. See question 6. 52.222-41, 52.222-42, and 52.22-53 removed.

104. Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Category Descriptions, Descriptions for the following positions appear to be SCA positions: Data Control Clerk I – ADPE, Data Control Clerk II – ADPE, Data Control Clerk III – ADPE, Data Entry Clerk I , Data Entry Clerk II Please clarify.

A. See question 8.

105. PWS’s for Task Orders 0001, 0002, and 0003, Appendix 2 to these PWS’s, provides

“HISTORICAL MANNING INFORMATION” that will not be relevant to the PWS after award (in fact it may be contradictory to proposed manning). May we assume these Appendices will be deleted in the Task Order award documents? If so, then it would appear that the clearance requirements, also contained in those Appendices, will need to be incorporated elsewhere in the documents.

A. Appendices are not included in award documents. PWS, Para 4.9 addresses clearances.

106. Basic PWS, Paragraph 4.14.1, Is the 30 day start-up transition period considered to be part of the PoP?

A. See question 10.

107. Basic PWS, Paragraph 4.14.1, Does the 30 day start-up transition period precede the 12 month PoP?

108. Basic PWS, Paragraph 4.14.2, This paragraph defines “Transition” as “the 30 day period at the end of the contract”, and states that the “outgoing” contractor will perform all duties necessary to transfer …support from the Contractor [themselves] to the Government and/or another [incoming] contractor.” Does this mean that both the incoming and outgoing contractors will be providing support during this time frame?

109. Basic PWS, Paragraph 4.14.1 and DRFP Responses to Questions (#45), 27 May 2016, This paragraph defines “Transition” as “the 30 day period at the end of the contract”, and states that the “outgoing” contractor will perform all duties necessary to transfer …support from the Contractor [themselves] to the Government and/or another [incoming] contractor.” Does this mean that both the incoming and outgoing contractors will be providing support during this time frame?

110. Basic PWS, Paragraph 4.14.1 and DRFP Responses to Questions (#45), 27 May 2016, The language in paragraph 4.14.1 that states “at the conclusion of the [30 day] transition period… the Contractor shall assume complete responsibility for performance of the work detailed in the PWS”, appears to be in conflict with the answer to Question #45 that states the contract is to be “fully staffed on day 1”. What manning levels are we to assume during the referenced 30 day start-up transition period? Please elaborate on your intent for this 30 day period.

111. PWS’s (ALL), Paragraph 4.3 “Extended Hours”. Reference to “T&M orders”, Is it the intent to have Time & Material” task orders?

A. PWS Paragraph 4.3 has been updated.

112. B040 ORDERING PROCEDURES, paragraph (3), B040 only references LPTA. Will all task order RFPs be LPTA?

113. Section L, (Page 2 of 14) Paragraph 2 e),) and Table 3.1, Paragraph 2e refers to “Section

A” of the proposal documentation, yet Table 3.1 lists only Vol I, Vol II, Vol III, etc. What “Section A” are you referring to?

A. Section L, paragraph 2 e) and SF 33, Block 12 (Solicitation, Offer, and Award) will be updated to reflect the 180 day requirement.

114. Section L, (Page 5 of 14) Paragraph 3.5, Where, in the proposal, is the Solicitation Cross-

Reference Matrix to be included?

A. See Section L, 4.2.4.

115. Section L, (Page 9 of 14) Paragraph 4.3.4, last sentence, What does “Categorize the relevant information into the specific Technical subfactors to evaluate the proposal” mean? It appears this sentence may have been left in the RFP inadvertently.

A. Past Performance will be evaluated relative to the technical sub-factors.

116. Section L, (Pages 10/11 of 14) Paragraphs 4.4.1.1, 4.4.1.2 and 4.4.1.3, Paragraph 4.4.1.1 acknowledges a high probability of adequate price competition and states that if this proves to be false, THEN “Offerors may be required to submit cost data …to determine reasonableness”.

Conversely, paragraphs 4.4.1.2 and 4.4.1.3 require mandatory submittal of “data other than certified cost or pricing data” to evaluate reasonableness and balance, but do not indicate what data is to be provided. What data are offerors required to submit and when?

A. If adequate price competition does not exist, then additional data will be requested in accordance with FAR 15.403.

117. Section L, (Page 11 of 14), Paragraph 4.4.2 , Section 2 and Section M, (Page 7 of 8), Paragraph 2.4, Section L requires submittal of “supporting data deemed necessary to support price “reasonableness” but does not elaborate on the extent of data required. Similarly, Section M states that in addition to completeness, unbalanced pricing and the TEP, the Price Factor will be evaluated for “reasonableness” – NOT cost realism. Since reasonableness, not realism, is the evaluation criteria, may we correctly assume that the supporting data addressed in Section L does not include indirect rate buildup information for the fully burdened labor rates? Please advise what supporting data is required.

A. The Price Volume does not require indirect rate build up data. The Contractor’s Price Volume should provide whatever supporting data the Contractor feels is necessary to substantiate the prices stated.

118. Section L, (Page 11 of 14), Paragraph 4.4.1.4, The parenthetical entry refers to “paragraph 6.4.2 below” but Section L does not include a paragraph with that number. Where may this paragraph be located?

A. This parenthetical entry has been removed.

119. Section L, (Page 12 of 14), Paragraph 4.4.4 (last sentence), Section L instructs offerors to complete “Attachment 4, Table B, for each task order”. Shouldn’t it read “Attachment 4, Tables B, C, and D” since Table B is only for Task Order 0001?

A. See Section L, 4.4.4.

120. Section L, (Page 13 of 14), Paragraph 4.5.3, Paragraph 4.5.3 states “contractor shall provide complete pricing information in Section B of the RFP’s model contract, which includes inserting proposed prices for each CLIN for each of the three (3) initial task orders.” This implies there are multiple CLINs (one for each TO) in Section B. This is not the case, there is only one Labor CLIN, presumably relating to the IDIQ level “model contract” and it does not appear to be editable. Additionally, it would not be possible to provide a FFP at the IDIQ level. a) Where are the referenced “model contracts”, (Section B’s), that allow offerors to insert the required pricing information for TOs 0001, 0002, and 0003? b) Please confirm that there is no need to provide a FFP at the IDIQ level.

A. See question 57.

121. Section L, (Page 13 of 14), Paragraph 4.5.3, Considering the Labor CLIN is FFP, and per DFARS Subpart 204.71, “due consideration shall be given to the effect of the chosen unit of measure on administration and payment” in structuring line items, especially on fixed price contracts.” And “Services: Line item quantities shall match the frequency with which performance will be reviewed, and on fixed-price line items, payment made. For example, a contract with a twelve-month period of performance should have a quantity and unit of measure suited to how the contract will be managed. If the intent is to review, accept, and pay for the services monthly, then the quantity should be 12, with a unit of measure such as “Months” or “Lots.” May we correctly assume that the FFP Labor CLIN (at the TO level) will have a “Unit of Measure” and “Quantity” as described above?

A. CLIN will specify one (1) lot. Monthly invoice and payment instructions will be specified in Section G of the individual orders.

122. Section L, Paragraphs 4.4.1.3 1 and 4.5.3, Paragraph 4.4.1.3 warns that pricing information shall not be included anywhere other than the pricing volume. This is in conflict with paragraph 4.5.3 that requires “complete pricing information” be included in Section B.

Please advise.

A. CLIN pricing will also be submitted in Section B of the model orders in Volume V.

123. Section L, Attachment 4, Attachment is missing the HPAC/Printer Administrator (DOD

8750 IAT II), Networked Multimedia, A/V Sys Design & VTC Specialist (DoD 8570 IAT II).

124. Section L, Attachment 4, Attachment is missing a Labor category for a CAD

Operator/Designer as required by paragraph 1.4.7 of the PWS.

A. Actual CAD reference is 1.4.10. A specific CAD Operator/Designer category is not required.

125. Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Category Descriptions, Attachment is missing the Labor

Description for HPAC/Printer Administrator (DOD 8750 IAT II).

A. Labor Category has been added to the matrix, Section L Attachment 4.

126. Section L, Attachment 5, Labor Category Descriptions, Attachment is missing the Labor Description for CAD Operator/Designer.

A. CAD requirement is a capability the Offeror has to satisfy but does not require a specific labor category.

127. Section L, Attachment 4, Labor Rate Matrix, Task Order 0002 and Task Order 0003, Column widths in Task Order 0002 and Task Order 0003 Price Templates cannot expand to see pricing for all subtotals.

A. See question 100.

128. Section M, Paragraph 1.3.1, a) Given this is an LPTA source selection with award of the first three task orders based on the TEP of “an award-eligible proposal”, what is the government’s baseline for distinguishing between the lowest price and technical acceptability if pricing strategies are significantly different due to varying staffing approaches? b) Given that solicitation includes Historical Manning for each task, is it the government’s intent that this be used by all offerors so that all may be evaluated on an equal plane? If not, how will the government determine that proposal staffing is appropriate and pricing is complete and reasonable? Recommendation: It is recommended that the government baseline the requirement to equitable total levels of effort and the exact labor category compositions described in each task. This allows for an equitable evaluation at the IDIQ level. Alternative staffing should be considered in future competitive tasks but should not be considered at the IDIQ level.

A. Technical acceptability and pricing will be evaluated as stated in the RFP. Historical Manning is provided as just that, historical information to assist potential vendors in understanding requirements.

129. CDRL A001, DI-FNCL-80331A/T, Funds and Man-Hours Expenditure Report, Per DLA

Assist, http://quicksearch.dla.mil/qsDocDetails.aspx?ident_number=204896, this Data Item Description (DID) is “not applicable on fixed-price contracts.” Why is CDRL A001 included when the DID says this is NOT for FFP?

A. The Air Force has determined that for this particular acquisition, CDRL A001 is required.

130. CDRL A002, DI-MGMT-81468/T, Contract Funds Status Report, Per DLA Assist, http://quicksearch.dla.mil/qsDocDetails.aspx?ident_number=205536, the CFSR will not be applied to firm fixed price contracts (as defined in FAR 16.202) unless unusual circumstances require specific funding visibility. Why is CDRL A002 included when the DID says this is NOT for

FFP?

A. The Air Force has determined that for this particular acquisition, CDRL A002 is required.

http://quicksearch.dla.mil/qsDocDetails.aspx?ident_number=204896 http://quicksearch.dla.mil/qsDocDetails.aspx?ident_number=205536

131. RFP, With questions due COB 28 Sep 16, and assuming a 5 day turnaround time for responses, there will be only 12 business days remaining to address any resultant changes to the RFP and submit the proposal. Considering the very real potential for significant revision, based on Government responses to industry questions, request proposal submittal date be extended to 8 Nov 16.

A. No, the submittal date will not be extended to 8 Nov 16.

132. Is there an incumbent contractor that has supported the referenced Task Orders?

A. See question 2.

133. If so, what is the name of the contractor(s) and the contract numbers of those contracts?

A. See question 2. FA860411D7450.

134. In order to be found relevant in our past performance volume, would the our citation be required to cover all of the IT elements specified in Par. 4.2.6 a).a in Section L.?

A. Section L, 4.3.3, addresses relevancy. Section M, 2.3.2, address evaluation process.

135. Can we assume that the Government would like to see one technical volume addressing the basic PWS and the IT elements with references in the proposal and the Cross Reference Matrix specifying each of the 3 individual Task Order instead of 3 technical volumes one for each Task order PWS?

A. It is incumbent upon the contractor to organize their proposal in a manner that demonstrates their ability to meet the requirements.

136. RFP Section: K(1) or K(2) (i). “If the offeror does not certify to the conditions in paragraph (k)(1) or (k)(2) and the Contracting Officer did not attach a Service Contract Labor Standards wage determination to the solicitation, the offeror shall notify the Contracting Officer as soon as possible…” Question: Does the Service Contract Labor Standards Act apply and if so, will the KO provide the appropriate WD?

A. See question 8.

137. DD254. Location of classified material. Question: Will the contractor be required to obtain a Branch FCL to hold classified information at their own offices located off-site, or will classified material be accessed only at the AF facility?

A. No classified material will be held by the Offeror off-site.

138. DD254, block 11.h. COMSEC account. Question: Will the offeror be required to obtain their own COMSEC account or will we be using the Air Force account?

A. Will be using the AF Account.

139. DD254, block 13. Reference JAFAN Manual 6/0. Per Dept. of AF memorandum dated 4 April 2016, the JAFAN series has been rescinded and replaced with DoDM 5205.07, DoD Special Access Program (SAP) Security Manual, Volumes 1-4. Question: Should we abide by the latest security guidance?

A. Offerors are required to comply with all current security guidelines. This is a Draft

DD254.

140. PWS 1.7.3. “The contractor must submit a Safety and Health Plan and corresponding site safety checklist to the contracting officer 10 days after contract award.” Question: Should we consider the first day of contract transition to be the contract award date?

141. PWS 4.14.1 Transition Paragraph states that the transition period will be 30 days.

Question: Does the Government anticipate any time between the official Notification of Award and the start-up transition period?

142. Reference: CDRL Number A007. Section 12, Date of First Submission states 10 DAC Question: Please define DAC, is it the award date or the first day of transition.

143. Section L, Paragraphs 4.2.5a)a. and 4.2.6 b) and Section M, corresponding paragraphs The two Section L paragraphs both ask for the offeror’s approach to providing and retaining personnel. Specifically, Para 4.2.5a)a. reads: “methodology for …Obtaining and maintaining personnel” and Para 4.2.6.b) reads “management approach to providing and retaining qualified personnel”. While there may be a nuance that we are missing, the requirement to address “obtaining/providing” and “maintaining/retaining” personnel in both sections is an RFP requirement for achieving technical acceptability. To eliminate this redundancy, recommend the following:

Address obtaining personnel (with appropriate certs) in para 4.2.5 Subfactor 1:Transition

Approach Address retaining/maintaining personnel in para 4.2.6 b) Management Approach Ensure corresponding Section M evaluation criteria is consistent

A. The requirement remains unchanged.

144. PWS Task Order 001, PWS Task Order 0002 and PWS Task Order 0003, 1.4.12.1 – Compiling system accreditation and authorization documentation, pg. 9, How many systems is the contractor responsible for regarding this requirement?

A. TO 0001 – 59 Packages TO 0002 – 9 Packages TO 0003 – 2 Packages

145. PWS Task Order 0001, PWS Task Order 0002 and PWS Task Order 0003, 1.4.12.5 –

Handling account requests, pg. 9, How many account requests on average are historically handled?

A. TO 0001 - 300/year TO 0002 - 150/year TO 0003 - 60/year

146. PWS Task Order 0001, Appendix 2 – Historical Manning Information, Appendix 2, How many networked printers are managed via HPAC for each task order?

A. The number varies by Task Order and printer information is provided in Appendix 1, Environmental Information, for each Task Order.

147. PWS Task Order 0001, Appendix 2 – Historical Manning Information, Appendix 2, How many network printers are NOT managed under HPAC on each of the three task orders?

A. The…