Questions_Answers_FPS3_RFP_8_Jan_14.docx

UNCLASSIFIED

Questions and Answers FPS3 RFP

Section L

Section L

The following items have been removed:

- Vivotek Version-Fixed

- Short Range Thermal Imager; Fixed/Mounted (SRTI F/M) Version Fixed Mounted

- DiOP Thermal Imager Version PTZ Complete 180/60mm

- P&L E-Communications, Video Motion Detection (VMD) Version AVT234

- SightLogix Enterprise VMD Version SightSensor Video Motion Detection (VMD)

The following items have been updated to include additional information (new language is underlined):

- Advantor Annunciator Advantor Integrated Command, Control, and Access Control Version 4.0; Version 5.0; Version 5.0 (SP 6)

- Vindicator Annunciator Vindicator Command and Control (VCC) with Access Control System Version 2.40; Version 2.43; V5 - Version 5.0; V5 - Version 6.0; V5 – Version 6.5 (SP11)

- Video Management System (VMS)/Broadware 5.1.1(Approved with Predator Elite only)

- General Dynamics - LRTI with CCTV – PTZ Thermal Imager (GD-GIT VZ-250 Thermal Camera System/CCTV )

- FLIR T-2000 LRTI w/CCTV Version-PTZ Thermal Imager

- FLIR Wide-Area Surveillance Thermal Imager (WSTI) - Sentry II Version- PTZ Thermal Imager Protech PIRAMID Version SDI-77XL2-EX (Explosion Proof)

- General Electric Sentrol, BMS Version Model 2807T BMS (Explosion Proof)

- Banner Engineering Series Active Infrared (AIR) Sensor Version SMI30 (Intrinsically Safe)

- Visonic & Xtralis PIR Combination: Version Visonic CH 1000 PIR & Version Xtalis ADPRO 18 WH PIR

- DeTekion Vertical Taut Wire Sensor, (VTWS) Version VTW-400 (Full Fence & Outrigger configuration)

- FLIR/ICx PSRS STS-350 Ground Based Radar, Wide Area Detection/Approach Zone Sensors (WAD/AZS) Version ICX application software version 2.4.41.12 (350 meters)

- FLIR/ICx STS-1400 Ground Based Radar, WAD/AZS Version ICX application

The following items have been added:

- Bosch Allegiant Matrix/Control System, LTC 8600 & 8800 Series

- Bosch Auto Dome 600 Series Analog, PTZ (Version VG5-6xx-xxxx)

- Protech PIRAMID Version SDI-76M-HS1-H

- Inertia-Guard Fence Sensor – Version IG Fence Sensor

Section L

Section L

Power – No permanent power exists on base. The offerer must provide power for installation and operation of the system.

Question: Will the base (GFP Base Support) provide continuous fuel for the generators or are we responsible to supply the cost associated with the logistical chain of providing fuel?

The Government will provide fueling for proposed generator(s). Section L, Attachment L-2 Table 3-1 has been updated as follows: “Additionally, fueling of proposed generators will be furnished by the Government.”

Topic: Earned Value Management System requirement Question: Given that initial contract award is and IDIQ Contract with no actual value/funding, is this requirement at the IDIQ Contract level or at the individual Task Order/Delivery Order level?

Recommendation: Suggest the requirement be at the TO/DO level when required.

This requirement will be at the DO level as applicable.

Topic: Vendor Warranty duration Question: (1) Is completion of the Prime Contractor's contract performance period at the IDIQ Contract level or at the TO/DO level? (2) Does the Government expect warranties to commence at completion of the Prime Contractor's contract performance period or a prorated warranty based the initial warranty start of subcontractor manufacturer and vendor warranties?

Recommendation: (1) Suggest Prime Contractor's contract performance period be at the TO/DO level. (2) Please clarify.

(1) “Contract performance period” refers to DO-level performance period. (2) The Government expects warranties reflecting manufacturer/vendor’s commercial warranties to begin at system turnover/end of performance period. The Government understands that this may add additional cost.

Topic: RFQ Vs. RFP Question: Isn’t an RFQ non-binding and generally used for acquisitions under FAR Part 13; whereas RFPs are biding and used under competitive or Negotiated procedure?

Recommendation: Suggest RFQ be changed to RFP. Please clarify.

DOs under IDIQ contracts are technically “orders,” so solicitations are called RFQs – even though the solicitation and award process mirror those of an RFP.

8.

Section I – Clauses

RFP Reference: 252.225-7039 Contractors Performing Private Security Functions (Jun 2013) Topic: Clause validity Question: Defense Procurement & Acquisition Policy website, reflects this clause as “RESERVED” Recommendation: Please clarify.

During initial approval of the solicitation documents, this clause was required for all contracts that may have performance in Afghanistan. However, after the solicitation was provided, but before receiving final clearance to release, this clause was rescinded. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-11-18/html/2013-27314.htm Subsequently, this clause has been removed.

Section L

Topic: Item 2.1.5 – Notification to Offerors/Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Question: The companies listed in this section does not include all the companies listed in the FPS3 Cover Letter and in Section H, Page 31, FPS3-H003 Program Office Support Contractor(S) (Nov 2013) Recommendation: Please clarify.

The contractors listed in the cover letter and clause FPS3-H003are all possible contractors who may participate in FPS3 delivery orders throughout the contract’s 8-year lifespan. The list in Section L, are only those contractors who will be working on the evaluation and award of the IDIQ itself.

Section L

Section 5 Cost Formats Topic: 6.3.5 – Section 5 – Cost Formats Question: This section denotes files should be in MS EXCEL 2010 (“.xls”) format. However, the Government “Template” for FPS3 is in .XLSX format.

Recommendation: Please clarify the format required for submission. Suggest the Government permit the use of MS Excel 2007.

The contractor may use any MS Excel Format that is compatible with MS Excel 2010. Section L Para 6.3.5 has been updated.

Topic: Editable Documents Question: Will the Government provide an editable Solicitation to permit completion of fill-ins and typing for the SF33, Sections A – K in either MS Word or PDF?

Recommendation: Unlock current PDF files for editing and/or issue in MS WORD.

An unprotected conformed .pdf copy of the model contract will be included with Amendment 1 to the solicitation.

Section 3

Topic: BISS-SEG-27000B Question: Per section L 4.1.2.1 Specifications, Standards, and Handbooks. The following specifications, standards, and handbooks of the exact revision listed below form a part of this specification to the extent specified herein: lists BISS-SEG-27000B, but no document exists in the writer’s library. Can the Government provide this document?

Recommendation: Add TASS Specification BISS-SEG-27000B, dated 17 March 2010 to the Bidder’s Library.

References to BISS-SEG-27000B have been removed and/or updated from Section L to reflect the TASS Technical Manual. This Technical Manual contains the information necessary for offerors to create the solution for Sample Problem 2. BISS-SEG-27000B (the TASS performance spec) will be provided post-award.

Section L

Question: L.5.1.e requests Client Authorization Letters for each identified effort for a commercial customer authorizing release to the Government of requested information on the Offeror’s performance. Please confirm these letters be sent from the commercial customer and included in the proposal. Additionally, will the Government provide sample language for the letters as was provided for the Consent Letters (Attachment L-5).

Recommendation: Provide sample Client Authorization Letters.

Commercial customer client authorization letters are required to be included if a Past Performance effort for a commercial client is included in an offeror’s proposal. The client authorization letter is an acknowledgement from the offeror to current/previous commercial clients that the offeror authorizes past performance information to be provided to the government by this commercial client. No specific format is required, but an example is provided below:

Dear "Client":

We are currently responding to the Force Protection Program office Request for Proposal (RFP) No. FA8730-14-R-0004 for the procurement of Force Protection Site Security Systems (FPS3). There is an increased emphasis in an offeror’s past performance and experience as an evaluation factor in Force Protection procurements. Accordingly, the Force Protection Program Office is requiring that clients of entities responding to its RFP be identified and their participation in the evaluation process be requested. If contacted by a representative of the Force Protection program office requesting information on work we have performed, you are hereby authorized to respond to such a request.

We have identified Mr./Ms.______ of your organization as the point of contact based on his/her knowledge concerning our work. Your cooperation is appreciated. Any questions may be directed to:________.

Sincerely,

Paragraph 5.8 states “The offeror shall send out Past and Present Performance Questionnaires to each of the Points of Contact (POCs) identified in their Past and Present Performance Volume, and provide evidence of transmission to those POCs if requested. This shall be accomplished in advance of the due date of the Past and Present Performance Volume to ensure that information is provided by POCs by requested due date”

The contractor assumes this means the Past Performance Questionnaires and associated requests should be sent to the Government POCs no later than the day before the proposal due date. Please confirm.

Correct. Offeror requests for Past Performance Questionnaire submittals must be sent to the relevant POC not later than the proposal due date. However, the Government requests that these be sent in sufficient time for the identified POCs to complete the questionnaire and return to the government by the proposal due date. Offerors should follow-up with their identified POCs to track and to allow completion of the questionnaires by the proposal due date to the maximum extent possible.

PWS 3.1 explicitly lists Organizational Level Training and training materials being a part of sustainment activities. However, the paragraph states that the level of support will be identified in the DO. The sample task “RFP” contained in Attachment 8, Section 4.2.26 does not call out this level of support. We assume this effort is not required.

Please confirm this effort should not be included in the Sample Problem 1 response.

The solicitation does not include training requirements associated with the Sample Problems. For future orders, training requirements will be specified in the solicitation for each order.

Attachment 8, Section L

4.2.5.7

ATT 5

SOW paragraph 4.2.5.7 provides a risk consequence template and detailed guidance on evaluating schedule and cost risks, including 5 defined levels of “Likelihood and Consequence”.

Sample problem Attachment 5 (Risk Matrix) simply states “identify the probability and impact of occurrence.”

In addition to classifying risks as low, medium or high, please confirm if you prefer the level of detail found in the SOW (4.2.5.7) for probability (i.e. Likelihood) and impact (i.e. Consequence), or are the general assessments of low, medium or high acceptable for probability and impact? If the first, please confirm if you want actual percentage values for probability and the actual dollar/schedule values for impact or prefer that they just be translated into the 1-5 values shown in the SOW risk matrices.

The government expects the sample problem risk matrix to follow the level of detail found in SOW para 4.2.5.7 for likelihood and consequence. This includes the percentage values for probability and the actual dollar/schedule values for impact.

Please confirm these requirements should not be addressed.

Correct. Only those IDIQ SOW/PWS requirements that are identified in Sections L and M should be addressed.

a. The text size for Tables, Charts, Graphs and Figures shall be no less than 8 point and readable font type. There are no other restrictions on font type for Tables, charts, graphs and figures.

b. Offerors may use their discretion on Font Size and Type, page formats and margins for the Cost Formats.

Updated documents will be posted in Amendment 1 to the solicitation.

This section states the technical evaluation factor contains a component addressing “The adequacy of the offeror’s management structure and reporting chain relationships to provide effective direction and control of the work activity including effectiveness of the integration, management, and control of subcontractor effort as evidenced by the offeror’s management approach to direct sample problem work activity”.

The Section L requirements for the Sample problems contain a technical approach within the page-constrained volume and only an organization chart in the attachments. Where should offerors address management structure and approach? If within the page-constrained volume, respectfully-request addition of two pages of allowance to address the evaluation elements.

The management structure should be addressed in Attachment 2 “Organization Chart” for each Sample Problem solution in the Technical Volume of the proposal (para 4.4.5 & 4.5.3). These paragraphs have been updated to include the following:

“A narrative (recommended 2 pages or less) may be included describing the offeror’s management structure and reporting chain relationships to provide effective direction and control of the work activity including effectiveness of the integration, management, and control of subcontractor effort as evidenced by the offeror’s management approach to direct sample problem work activity.”

These attachments do not have a page limit.

Attachment L-1 Solicitation Cross Reference Matrix Example

Cross Ref Matrix

Section L instructions regarding the Cross Reference Matrix (paragraphs 2.2.3 and 3.3) have been updated to reflect this.

No. The Model Contract shall not have any offeror markings on it in the headers and footers. The Model Contract is to remain just as it is in the solicitation except for the fill-ins provided by the offeror.

24.

Is an introductory cover letter to be treated as a "cover page" as referred to in the RFP?

If an introductory cover letter is included with the proposal, it will not be included as part of the proposal evaluation (and will therefore not be included in the page count). The “Narrative – Summary” portion of Volume I is intended to provide offerors an opportunity to include the relevant overview information pertaining to the proposal.

25.

Due to the Xmas-New Year holidays, we found that some Companies are closed for vacation. Therefore we request a two week extension to January 31, 2014 in responding to the RFP.

Due to the Holidays, additional questions and amendment 001 review cycle, the Government anticipates extending the proposal due date to 31 Jan 14.

26.

When will Amendment 1 be released?

Please refer to the cover letter dated 6 Jan 14 for an answer to this question.

However, the technical requirements provided by the Government have not addressed Immediate Visual Assessment (IVA) requirements on the second line of detection for a PL-2 resource, which would normally be clarified in AFI 31-101. The Government has clarified in paragraph 2.1.2.c that the surveillance requirement for the entire restricted area excludes the interior of the hangars.

Should bidders assume that IVA is NOT required on the second line of detection around the individual resources?

The Government believes that the information included in the solicitation is sufficient to answer the stated question. Offerors must include a line of detection at all points specified in the solicitation. The solution must meet the assessment and surveillance requirements detailed in Section L.

The B-Tables contain only Prime Contractor T&M rates and are to be included in the Contract Documentation Volume. Several questions pertain to this Table:

1.The B-Tables appear to be duplicative of the T&M Summary spreadsheet contained in the Cost Formats and included in Volume IV Cost/Price. Is there a different purpose to having the B-Table spreadsheet in the Contract Documentation?

2. After Award, are only Prime Contractor T&M rates going to be used to bid on T&M task orders or can Subcontractor T&M rates (contained in the Cost Format T&M Summary sheet) also be proposed when bidding T&M task orders? (In other words, does the Government expect to see only one set of labor rates --from the Prime-- under which Subcontractor costs will be managed.)

3. After Award, when bidding on Firm Fixed Price task orders, do the T&M labor rates and categories have to be used? What level of cost detail will need to be provided when proposing on a FFP task order?

4. The B-Tables contain offeror indirect rates for GFY15-22. Will Government personnel be reviewing Volume V or will outside contractors/FFRDC review this volume?

1. The T&M Summaries in the Cost Formats will be utilized for evaluation purposes. Exhibit B - B-Table Labor Rates will be incorporated in the resulting contracts as proposed.

2. The contractor may submit T&M Rates for Subcontractors in Exhibit B. Subcontractor T&M rates may also be proposed when bidding T&M task orders. The template has been updated and will be incorporated in Amendment 1.

3. Offerors are not required to use the T&M Labor Rates for FFP Task Order proposals.

4. To clarify, the B-Tables should NOT contain any indirect rates. The T&M labor rates included in the B-table shall be fully burdened rates inclusive of profit. Government Personnel will be reviewing Volume V, however contractor personnel listed in section 2.1.5 of section L may be used to support the evaluation in a purely advisory role. Any objections to the use of these companies shall be provided to the PCO as soon as possible.

Please confirm that the referenced table is actually Table 4.4 on page 51.

Since CDRLs A021 and A033 are not included in the sample problems, would the Government consider modifying the instructions to require Offerors to address their approach to testing the requirements rather than the detailed plan and procedures which, individually, would exceed the allotted page count. If not, request that the Government extend the page count accordingly or clarify the level of detail expected.

This has been corrected to read, “Table 4-4”.

Section L para’s 4.4.2 and 4.5.2 will be updated to read: “Provide a description of the proposed test approach/plan to verify that the proposed system installation complies with the sample problem requirements including a description of how the contractor proposes to verify the functionality/ performance of the proposed system/subsystems.”

Please note that test procedures are no longer required. Additionally, Section L will be updated to include the Test Verification Matrix as a separate attachment to each Sample Problem. These attachments do not have a page limit.

When responding to the Cost/Price Volume requirements in the solicitation, the offeror, subcontractor, teaming partner and joint venture partner may use any generally accepted estimating technique, including contemporary estimating methods (such as Cost-to-Cost and Cost-to-Non-Cost Estimating Relationships (CERs), commercially available parametric cost models, in-house developed parametric cost models, etc.), to develop their estimates. If necessary, reasonable and supportable allocation techniques may be used to spread hours and/or costs to lower levels of the work breakdown structure (WBS). It is up the contractor to explain the basis of the contractor’s estimate and methodology.

This section specifically instructs the offeror to include the “price and hours included in the prime contractor’s proposal” for each service/subcontract/interdivisional transfer. If the prime contractor’s labor costs are NOT to be included in the BOE (Section 3), shouldn’t subcontractor labor costs be excluded from this sanitized portion of Volume IV as well?

In order to address this question, reduce confusion, and eliminate administrative burden, the Government has made the following changes to the instructions for the Cost Volume:

Para 6.3.3 Section 3 – Basis of Estimates (BOEs) and has been replaced with the following: “The BOEs shall be comprehensive enough to provide sufficient detail and clarity to enable the Government to perform a cost/price realism assessment of the Offeror’s proposed cost. The level of detail shall allow the Government to replicate the offeror’s estimated cost considering the Offeror’s unique technical approach. The offeror must provide clear traceability from their excel Cost Formats to their BOEs. To support the amounts in the Cost Formats, provide at least one BOE for each WBS element proposed. If not already adequately addressed in the offeror’s cost volume, each separate BOE in Section 3 shall provide the basis, rationale, estimating methodology and/or historical database used to derive proposed estimates Describe each labor category identified in the Cost Formats to include duties, level of responsibility and minimum qualifications (i.e., years of experience, education requirements, etc.).”

Para 6.3 Volume Organization has removed the requirement for a separate sanitized Volume IV.

Section 2 – Materials and Services/Subcontracts Summary remains unchanged. Offerors shall include the “price and hours included in the prime contractor’s proposal” for each service/subcontract/interdivisional transfer.

Attachment 8 – 1.4.2 Attachment 7 page 9 Attachment 8 – row 32

Offeror respectfully requests that the Government increase the allowable page count for each Sample Task by five pages. This increase will allow for a sufficient level of specificity, thoroughness, and completeness in meeting the requirements of Sections L and M of the RFP and for a more complete Government evaluation of the offeror’s design and approach.

The solicitation will be updated to include the Quality Control checklist for Sample Problem #1 and the Test Verification Matrices for both Sample Problems as attachments (no page limit). This should allow for sufficient space to complete the Sample Problem solutions within the specified page limits.

Given the Government’s CDRL guidance, the contractor assumes the effort to cover the management of data products (e.g. design documentation, design reviews, test plan, test report) should be proposed under WBS 1.4.3 (Configuration Management). Please confirm.

This solicitation does not require offerors to price management of data products for the Sample Problem solutions. The four data products referenced in the questions are specifically addressed below:

· The proposed design is delivered as part of the proposal with no further requirements specified for design work.

· Design reviews are not a requirement in Section L.

· The test plan is delivered as part of the proposed solution.

· Submittal of a test report is not a requirement in Section L.

For future delivery orders, the requirements for data products will be specified in the solicitation for the order.

37.

Regarding Attachment 7, WBS,

1. p. 3, Table of Contents, shows WBS Element 1.8.1.9 as “Fence” and 1.8.1.10 as “Lighting Subsystem”. In the text (p. 12) these two are reversed: 1.8.1.9 is identified as “Lighting Subsystem” and 1.8.1.10 is “Fence”. Which is correct?

1. P. 3, Table of Contents, does not include 1.8.2.6 but the text (p. 13) does, identifying it as “Comm Subsystem”. However, this appears to be duplicative of 1.8.2.3 “Data/Comm Subsystem” (p. 12). Is 1.8.2.6 “Comm Subsystem” supposed to be in the WBS and if so, how is that differentiated from 1.8.2.3 “Data/Comm Subsystem”?

1. P. 14, describes 1.10 “Interim Contractor Support” and 1.11 “Contractor Logistic Support”. The write-ups are very similar – at times they are identical. Could the Gov clarify the difference between the two? Is one intended for tactical sites and the other for fixed sites?

1.The Table of Contents has been corrected to read:

1.8.1.9 Lighting Subsystem (as applicable)

1.8.1.10 Fence (Delay/Denial) (as applicable)

2. Removed 1.8.2.6 Comm Subsytem as it is a duplicate of 1.8.2.3.

3. The activities under both ICS and CLS are very similar. The primary difference is that ICS is the initial support after the system is fielded and CLS is the long term support for the system.

38.

1. Are we correct to assume that only Sample Problem 1 includes both “Design and Installation” as well as “Interim Contractor Support”?

1. Are we correct to assume that Sample Problem 2 does not include “Interim Contractor Support”?

1. Are we correct to assume that neither Sample Problem includes “Contractor Logistic Support”?

1.Correct, only Sample Problem 1 includes both “Design and Installation” as well as “Interim Contractor Support”

2. Correct, sample problem 2 does not include “Interim Contractor Support”

3.Correct, neither Sample Problem includes “Contractor Logistic Support”

ITAR registration is not required as part of this proposal. ITAR registration will be required to be submitted with proposals for applicable future Delivery Orders.

NOTE: Updated documents will be posted in Amendment 1 to the solicitation.

UNCLASSIFIED

Enclosure 1 01/08/14