Industry_Day_QA_2nd_Round.pdf

Industry Day overview Questions and Answers Second Set of Q&A

4 September 2014

1. Can Sub Factor B experience be subcontracted out?

Answer: Not positive about the question, but the experience of subcontractors can be reflected during the oral presentation. The prime must have some experience in handling subcontract agreements or direct relationships with the subcontractor in question.

2. What is the criterion in Sub factor A?

Answer: Per Section M of the Request for Proposal (RFP), we expect vendors to have some munitions and weapon systems experience that lend them to potential DOs under this IDIQ.

3. Will experience be evaluated based on relevant and recent and if so, what is recent?

Answer: Yes, we will need to add language for experience to clarify relevant and recent.

4. There are provisions for progress payments for small businesses; will you allow progress payments for large businesses, too?

Answer: We will review, but will probably allow progress payments for all vendors.

5. The SOW indicates a supply chain must be in place prior to contract. It seemed very rigid and difficult especially at the umbrella level?

Answer: We need to change verbiage in SOW paragraph stating “plan”.

6. 6. If only one contractor forwards a proposal over the TINA level how will it be handled on each

DO?

Answer: At the time of establishing fair and reasonableness for the DO, the contracting officer may require the offeror to provide Certified Cost and Pricing and enter negotiations.

7. How are vendors vetted to eventually receive the Statement of Work?

Answer: Vendors must forward a valid DD Form 2345 to receive a copy of the SOW.

8. A tier 1 supplier can prime at least five areas. Would that be technically acceptable and how would risk be evaluated?

Answer: Yes, priming four for large business would be acceptable as long as they can further support the other areas as well through teaming/subcontracts.

9. Paragraph M1.1 seems to be legacy language?

Answer: We will review for accurate information.

10. Where OCI verification is required for issuance of DOs, the OCI verification process to conclude whether an OCI potential exists can require processing time and influence proposal and award turn-around time. Will the Government RFP – DO award scheduling include additional time for the OCI processing? Will a DO proposal extension request be honored in the event that additional time is required to conclude a thorough OCI evaluation? Large corporations may require 10 to 15 days to screen for potential OCI, with additional time required to conclude and suitably disposition the OCI.

Answer: We will be reasonable in the need to ensure OCI issues are addressed. 10-15 days may be appropriate.

11. Has the Government considered including RFP – “Contracting Cycle Agility” and “DO

Performance Agility” as proposal criteria and evaluation factors? Please elaborate.

Answer: While this criterion may be appropriate at the DO level, we are not implementing it for the overall IDIQ awards. It was discussed earlier, but the scope of the contract is broad and evaluating contractor on just part would not have been relevant.

12. What approach will the Government take to ensure that the contract OCI clause and SOW requirement are not duplicative or in conflict with each other? One recommendation would be to forego the additional contract clause and thereby retain the requirement in one location in the contract (e.g. SOW) and avoid duplication and/or redundancy and the potential for conflicting language.

Answer: We anticipate differing OCI issues at each DO level. The OCI clause in the basic contract is general in nature. Specific OCI issues will be addressed in the DOs as needed.

13. It is requested that the Government reconsider the applicability of the Agile Acquisition SOW paragraph 6.4 Material Requirements as related to the planned DOs for the Agile Acquisition IDIQ. It seems that material requirements in an FFP or CPFF completion type DO would be included in the initial DO pricing, and that additional approvals, funding, competitive processes, invoicing procedures, etc. would be unusual contract terms as well as inconsistent with the agile and rapid nature of this USAF initiative. This Material Requirements paragraph might be appropriate in a labor hour – level of effort type contract where material is not contemplated at the onset of the DO, and would only arise in performance of a DO on an incidental basis.

Answer: Per para 6.4, the details regarding material requirement will be at the DO level. We wanted to include this paragraph in the SOW to ensure everyone was aware of the requirement for material review that will apply to each applicable DO.

14. Agile Acquisition RFP Draft Section L includes the clause 52.232-14 Notice of Availability of

Progress Payments Exclusively for Small Business Concerns (Apr 1984). Will the Government be inserting a solicitation provision notifying Large Business of the availability of Progress Payments?

Answer: we will be allowing progress payments for all businesses.

15. FAR 52.207-1 Notice of Standard Competition (May 2006) is included in the Draft Section L document for the IDIQ. This provision is applicable only to sealed bid solicitations issued for comparison of contractor vs. Government performance. Is it the Government’s intent to conduct the IDIQ competition under the sealed bid process and compare Government estimates with contactor bids for IDIQ awards, or should this provision be deleted?

Answer: This Clause is not exclusive to sealed bidding methods but for all standard competitions. (OMB A-76)

16. It is understood that only the portion of the proposal that is covered in the 90 minute period will be evaluated and considered by the Government. It is also stated in Section L, 6.1 Model Contract/Representations and Certifications that, “The Offeror’s proposal shall include a copy of the Model Contract, and Sections A and K.” Further, 6.1.1 Section A - Solicitation/Contract Form states that, “the ‘original’ copy should be clearly marked under separate cover and should be provided without any punch holes.” If only the material covered in the 90 minute presentation is evaluated, that would force offeror’s to cover the whole model contract in their oral presentation, as well as to include the original version. It is requested that the Government provide clarification regarding oral presentation of the model contract within the 90 minute time allocation as well as clarification regarding the 90 minute coverage period and the separate “original” version of the model contract under separate cover.

Answer: This will be clarified in section L of the RFP.

17. Section L, 6.2 Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements. This paragraph states that, “Offerors are required to meet all solicitation requirements…, but then addresses the handling of exceptions.

The Government is requested to clarify whether all requirements must be met, or if all requirements are not required to be met and exceptions are allowable and will not be a basis for a proposal being determined non-responsive.

Answer: This will be clarified in Section L of the RFP.

18. Will the requirements under SOW paragraph 4.1 be modified to delete the restriction of changing or requesting a change of subcontractors within the first 6 months of contract award?

Answer: This paragraph has been modified.

19. Will the government permit teammates to be present at the oral presentation as long as the total attendee limit is not exceeded?

Answer: Teammates are permitted but understand the Prime is the focal point of the brief and must meet the minimum number of competencies listed.

20. Will the Small Business Delivery Order requests be released in parallel with the unrestricted

Delivery Order requests? Or will the Small Business Delivery Order requests be released first, then a determination of an unrestricted procurement made, and finally the unrestricted Delivery Order request be released? If so, what is the timeline for the latter scenario?

Answer: The SB DO request, which will be a synopsis, not the full package, will be released to SB first with a quick turnaround to determine if a SB set-aside is possible. The timeline will depend upon the urgency and the complexity of the DO.

21. Should the IDIQ proposal submittal include two Price Matrices, i.e., one Price Matrix for FFP and one Price Matrix for CPFF?

Answer: Only the price for a fully burdened labor rate, FFP.

22. When does the Government anticipate releasing a DD254?

Answer: We anticipate releasing the DD254 with the final RFP.