RESPONSES TO Industry day questions and comments.docx

Command, Control, Communications, Computers and Intelligence (C4I) and Munitions Test Improvement Contract III (CIMTIC III) Industry Day Questions/Comments and Government Responses Q1: What specific incentives will the solicitation include for prime contractors to include small disadvantaged business categories?

A1: No incentives are planned, as this is a Full and Open Competition. Large Businesses will be required to provide their subcontracting plans, specifying their various small business goals.

Q2: What is the anticipated date of RFP release?

A2: 14 Jun 10 is the anticipated date, but is subject to change.

Q3: Should the area of expertise grow during the contract period, how difficult will it be to add new companies to the team?

A3: The Government does not foresee any difficulty adding new companies as long as the offeror notifies the Contracting Officer in writing and obtains prior approval.

Q4: The size of the RFP for CIMTIC III has grown from CIMTIC II, as shown in the table (in Section L, Paragraph 2.1 – Proposal Organization). Will the Government consider reducing the number of pages per volume?

A4: The Government concurs with this statement. Proposal sizes as well as the Sample DO size will change as follows:

Volume I, Technical Proposal: FROM 75 pages TO 65;

Volume II, Past Performance: FROM 50 pages TO 30;

Volume IV, Sample DO: FROM 30 pages TO 15.

The updated numbers will appear in the final RFP.

Q5: Recommend a Times Roman font over Arial. Times Roman is an easier font to read on paper. Will the Government consider changing the font?

A5: The Government concurs with this statement and will change the font in the upcoming Final RFP release. Please note that the fonts in the RFP document itself, which is prepared in the Government’s contract writing system, are not able to be changed. Attachments to the RFP, to include Sections L and M, however, will be changed to Times Roman font.

Q6: Reference Attachment 7 – Cost Format B: The RFP documents appear to have included the same Cost Format A from Attachment 6 in Attachment 7 instead of a Cost Format B. Will the Government clarify?

A6: This statement is correct. The Government will correct this oversight and include the proper Cost Format B as Attachment 7 when the Final RFP is released.

Q7: Reference RFP Page L-14-7.8 Rounding: The second sentence states “All labor rates will be rounded to the nearest dollar.” Is this correct, or should we round labor rates to the nearest penny?

A7: This is correct. All labor rates will be rounded to the nearest dollar.

Q8: Regarding Past Performance submittals (Instructions to Offerors, Section L): request that the number of submittals be limited to no more than five (5) due to the fact that pertinent capabilities can be adequately reflected within five (5) examples.

A8: The Government does not concur and will leave the number of submittals as currently specified. The current number specified is ten (10).

Q9: Regarding Evaluation Criteria (Section M): Please clarify how the Performance Confidence Assessment fits in the order and importance of the Evaluation Factors.

A9: Please refer to Section M, Section 1.1. Past performance is significantly more important than Cost.

Q10: Regarding (Statement of Work) Paragraph 3.24.2 Performance and Cost Reporting and CDRL A011: Cost reporting is typically not required in FFP efforts. We request that scope and reporting requirements are consistent with the type of contract.

A10: The Government concurs with this statement and will remove CDRL A011 in the upcoming Final RFP release. CDRL A029 has been added in its place and will be uploaded to FedBizOpps with the Final RFP.

Q11: For the Sample Task, we understand that this will come out 10 days prior to the due date of the proposal; however, can the Government provide examples of past tasks so Industry can get a better understanding of this work?

A11: The Government concurs with this statement and has provided Attachment #1 to these responses for your review. (See Attached) Q12: Subfactor TA-4 is listed as a requirement for Volume I – Technical Proposal, but the information is provided in Volume IV – Sample Delivery Order Response. There is no need to repeat information in Volume I concerning the sample delivery order. Please clarify.

A12: The Government concurs. Although, the Sample Delivery Order response is a subfactor under Technical Acceptability, the Government prefers a separate volume. Therefore, offerors need only provide one response to TA-4, Sample Delivery Order in Volume IV. A cross-reference may be provided in Volume I, Technical Proposal for this subfactor. Revised language will be provided under Section L, 2.2 Electronic Offerors.

Q13: Offerors requested thoughtful review and consideration of potential Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) clauses and their language pertaining to this acquisition.

Q13: Noted. The Government Legal Office as well as the Contracting Officer are currently working on the OCI clauses and will take this comment under advisement.