ARES III - Final RFP QandA.pdf

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

1. Reference: RFP, Section B, page 4 of 32, CLINs 0008 and 0009 (CDRLs).

Feedback/Question: CLINs 0008 and 0009 each show a "TBD" in the Unit Price/Total Item Amount field. Also, Section F (RFP page 13 of 22) indicates that the CLIN 0008 (Exhibit B) CDRLs are due on 30 Jun 2014, the last day of the base period of performance and CLIN 0009 (Exhibit A) indicates that CDRLs are due "as required." Are CDRLs to be individually priced or "NSPed" (Not Separately Priced)? We suggest that CDRLs be NSP.

Response: ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’ will be amended to make the CDRLs not separately priced. (NSP).

CLIN 0008 was revised to ‘ASREQ’ due to the fact that they are due various times based on the completion of individual tasks.

2. Reference: In SOW Exhibits A and B, on each of the CDRL DD Form 1423-1s, block 5, Contract Reference, indicates "See SOW." However, in the SOW, the CDRLs are only referenced collectively in SOW Section 3.0, rather than individually in specific SOW sections.

Feedback/Question: Since many of the CDRLs could be generated from various SOW areas, we are not sure we can meaningfully cross reference the contract CDRLs in the Cross Reference Matrix (Attachment L-1). Please verify/clarify. We suggest that the CDRL column be deleted from the Cross Reference Matrix.

Response: The CDRL column is being deleted from the Cross Reference Matrix in ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’. Also see answer to question 56.

3. Reference: Section L 5.3.2, page L - 11 of 28, Organizational Structure Change History.

Feedback/Question: After the first paragraph in Section 5.3.2 are five additional paragraphs, labeled G through K;

however, there are no predecessor sections A-F. Are these G-K sections correctly placed; they do not seem to apply to the "Organizational Structure Change History" topic of 5.3.2. Item H seems to duplicate the proposal response instructions in section 5.3, Relevant Contracts. Item I deals with SBD compliance; however, is SDB past performance compliance information appropriate to this SB Set Aside procurement? Please clarify.

Response: Paras G and J on Page L-11 are being moved to the end of Attachment L-3 Past Performance Information Form, denoted as Paras M and N. Paras H, I and K have been deleted on ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01.’

4. Reference: Section M 2.2.1; page M 3 of 9; Subfactor 1: Scenarios

Feedback/Question: In the third sentence, after “The offeror’s scenario proposal provides proactive, innovative and agile techniques, practices and procedures regarding .." the sentence goes on to list items that are separated by seven commas. However, there are also many slashes in this sentence. This is rather complex sentence to parse and from which to determine the proposal response items. Does the Government expect offerors to address each item in this section? Or, could the Government consider re-punctuating this sentence or otherwise clarifying the items in the list?

Response: The Government expects each item in this section to be addressed.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

5. Reference: RFP Section L 5.2 and section L 5.3, page L -10 of 28, Early Proposal Information and Relevant Contracts.

Feedback/Question: Both sections reference Attachment L-2, but it appears that these references should be to Attachment L-3. Since these are specific proposal instructions, we suggest that the references be verified and corrected.

Response: Section L 5.1, 5.2 and 5.3 were corrected to read Attachment L-3 on ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01.’

6. Reference: RFP Section L 5.3.2, page L -11 of 28, Organizational Change History.

Feedback/Question: This is a "standalone" Past Performance volume topic, that is, it is not associated with each of the individual contact summaries, but it requires a single overall response. However, the page allocations for the Past Performance volume are based on "10 pages per contract." Can/should the offerors either "carve out" some pages from the 10 per contract to respond to this topic, or will the Government provide an additional extra page or two for responding to this requirement. This question assumes that the G - K items currently specified in L 5.3.2 will become items to be addressed for each contract summary. If these G - K topics become general response items, then they would fall into the same response category as the Organizational Change History and would require "overall" page budget for a response.

Response: Please reference response to question 3 for G – K. Table 2.2 in Section L has been changed to reflect Organizational Change History to have a maximum page limit of one page.

7. Reference: OCI Restrictions in Part II, Section I, page 27.

Feedback/Question: Does the OCI restrictions in Part II, Section I, page27 on SBIR and STTR contracts apply to existing contracts that have already been awarded or does only apply to new solicitations? In a related question, does the restriction only apply to SBIR's and STTR's?

Response: ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’ contains a revised OCI clause where the SBIR and STTR restriction has been deleted.

8. Reference: Part IV, Section L, page 5; Table 2.2

Feedback/Question: This section references the number of contracts from the prime and subcontractors. For subcontractors it lists "Maximum 2 contracts from each onsite contractor," but in the instructions for Volume III - Past Performance it states "no more than two (2) recent contracts performed by each of your teaming partners and significant subcontractors." Do you want past performance information only for subcontractors that will be onsite or from all significant subcontractors?

Response: The answer is a maximum of three (3) contracts for each prime contractor, and no more than two (2) contractors for each subcontractor regardless of whether they are onsite or offsite. Also, see response to question 33.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

9. Reference: Volume III - Past Performance

Feedback/Question: When are the Past Performance Questionnaires due? We could not see any requirement in the RFP.

Response: A Cover Letter has been attached and included with ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’. Please reference Section J, Attachment 6. The due date is no later than 21-Oct-2011.

10. Reference: Attachment L-7 Cost Model

Feedback/Question: On Sheet, "L-7b Prime&Inter Labor Hours", cell J27 is supposed to be populated with the Year 1 Productive Man Year Hours per Note 3 of that sheet. This is to account for the fact that the first year has a period of performance of 50 weeks versus 52 weeks as well as the phase in period during the first year. However, cell J27 is used to calculate the Labor Hours for Year 2 of the Base Contract period (Column H). We believe it should be used to calculate the Labor Hours for Year 1 (Column F).

Response: You are correct, Column H has been corrected to read “=($J$27)*E33” and Column F has been corrected to read “=($D$25)*G33” for each row.

11. Reference: Attachment L-7 Cost Model

Feedback/Question: The Base Period specified by the RFP CLIN's and Period of Performance are 14 June 2012 through 30 June 2014. However, the spreadsheet ATTACHMENT_L-7_COST_MODEL.xlsx sheet "L-7b Prime&Inter Labor Hours" lists the dates for the base period as 14 April 2012 through 31 March 2014. This issue is repeated for the option years on this sheet. We believe the dates in the spreadsheet are incorrect and we should populate the spreadsheet based on the dates used in the RFP.

Response: Yes, you are correct. In the L-7b Cost Model, Notes #3, Year 1 Productive Man-year Hours: The first year of the basic period of performance is only 11 weeks versus 52 (year1 is 14Jul 2012 through 30 Sep 2012); adjust Productive Man-year hours accordingly in Cell J27. The last year (Option Period 2) period of performance is only 39 weeks versus 52 (the final year is 1 Oct 2016 through 30 Jun 2017); adjust Productive Man-year hours accordingly in Cell J28.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

12. Reference: Attachment L-7 Cost Model

Feedback/Question: In the calculations the G&A rate is only applied to the Prime Direct Labor and IDWA Labor. It is not applied to subcontractor labor or ODCs. This goes against our DCAA approved accounting practices so I wanted to find out if this is what you intended or was this was an error.

Response: Offerors are allowed to make changes to the formulas due to their approved accounting practices.

However, any changes made must be stated in the comments block of the applicable worksheet, with a justification for the change.

13. Reference: Attachment L-7 Cost Model

Feedback/Question: The Prime Contractor fee is only applied to the Prime Contractor Direct Labor and IDWA Labor, both fixed and incentive. This is not an issue with the accounting system but I want to check if this is what you intended or are we allowed to charge fee on Subcontractor Direct Labor.

Response: We have changed CLINs 0003, 1003, 2003 from CPFF to Cost. This change should allow offerors to specify applicable contract types for the specific work to be done. The cost model has been changed to reflect that prime contractors may charge G&A to subcontractor labor but not fee. On L-7e: Cost Model, cell D169 was changed from ‘SUBCONTRACTOR FEE (Note 10)’ to ‘G&A ON SUBCONTRACTOR COSTS (Note 10).” Note 10 on L-7e – Total Costs was changed to read “G&A on Subcontractor Costs: Insert proposed G&A rate (if any) on D169.”

14. Reference: RFP Section L, Para. 7.3.5.2 Non-Disclosure Agreements

Feedback/Question: Did the AF intend that the offerors establish NDAs with all the AFRL vendors identified in ARES III Final RFP Para. 7.3.5.2 Non-Disclosure Agreements, prior to and as part of the proposal submission? Can we have the contact information for each company listed?

Response: You do not need to establish NDAs with AFRL vendors during proposal submission. The Government considers this something that the successful contractor would do during the Phase-In Period.

Company Contact Information:

Jacobs Technology 8 Draco Drive, Bldg 8350 Edwards AFB CA 93524 Cage Code: 07486 POC: Tyler Nakamura / Arlen Naffziger

Engineering Research Corporation (ERC) Cage Code: 4901 Corporate Dr NW STE E Huntsville AL 35805 Cage Code: 0VYZ2 POC: David Campbell

QI-Solutions, QISI 1741 Ives Ave STE B Oxnard CA 93033 Cage Code: 3YWE7 POC: Jim Allen / Carl Seastrand

New Directions Technologies Incorporated (NDTI) 137 W. Drummond Ave Ridgecrest, CA 93555 Cage Code: 05ZG9 POC: Cedric Knight

General Dynamics-IT 77 A Street Needham MA 02494 Cage Code: 4KAB7 POC: David Vaughn / Jim Bowen

Pratt & Whitney-Rocketdyne 6633 Canoga Ave Canoga Park CA 91303 POC: Joseph Capizzi

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

Aerojet Hwy 50 and Aerojet Rd Rancho Cordova CA 95742 Cage Code: 05824 POC: Donna Brown

ATK Launch Systems Inc.

9160 N Hwy 83 Corinne UT 84307 Cage Code: 07703 POC: Alan Green

Northrop-Grumman 1 Spac Park Blvd Redondo Beach CA 90278 Cage Code: 11982 POC: Craig Ganser

Saalex Solutions, Inc.

1721 Pacific Ave, STE 180 Oxnard CA 93033 Cage Code: 1T4Z9 POC: Jackie Mathis

15. Reference: RFP Section L, Para. 2.3 Electronic Offers

Feedback/Question: In order to convert the PDF contract documentation to Microsoft Office 2007 format, the file must be unlocked. At least our copy of the Adobe Acrobat software that will convert a PDF file to MS Word will not operate on a locked file. Request the Government either 1) revise L.2.3 to not include the contract, or 2) provide an unlocked version of the file so it can be converted to Word.

Response: Unfortunately we have restrictions that limit us to provide word documents of contract documentation.

However, with exception of the cover page, you should be able to copy (Control+C) and paste (Control+V) any page of the proposal into Microsoft 2007 format.

16. Reference: Section H, 3.3.2.2., AFFTC-H001, FAR 52-216.10.

Feedback/Question: Please clarify the “negotiated monthly cost parameter”. Is this an indirect rate term, a multiplier of the total proposed cost per month, or something else? On what basis is the parameter negotiated, by whom, and how often? When, how and who will negotiate the cost parameters for loaded subcontractor labor? Could the Government provide a specific example of application of the parameter for clarification purposes?

Response: This is an indirect rate term. The negotiated monthly cost parameter will be derived from the proposed costs in the cost model. If there are significant changes, whether increase or decrease in contract, the Government or the contractor may request to revise their cost model and their respective proposed costs.

17. Reference: Section H, 3.3.2.2., AFFTC-H001, FAR 52-216.10.

Feedback/Question: We suggest that withholding 50% of the incentive fee earned until the end of contract is too high and does not offer the incentive envisioned. We request the Government consider a lower withhold consistent with FAR 52.216.8, i.e., “. . . provided, that after payment of 85 percent of the incentive fee, the Contracting Officer may withhold further payment of fee until a reserve is set aside in an amount that the Contracting Officer considers necessary to protect the Government's interest. This reserve shall not exceed 15 percent of the total fixed fee or $100,000, whichever is less.”

Response: The Government has considered your suggestion. However, it is the decision of the acquisition strategy panel to provide payments of incentive fee as specified in the solicitation.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

18. Reference: Section H, 3.3.2.2., AFFTC-H001, FAR 52-216.10.

Feedback/Question: Recommend modifying the wording of this Incentive Fee requirement to state that the contractor identifies “at least one fully qualified candidate” rather than “candidates”. Staffing the unique skills required on the ARES III contract is challenging, and finding multiple candidates for some positions may be prohibitive, particularly in 30 days. It would seem that if the contractor found a fully qualified candidate they have achieved the Governments objective. Perhaps the criterion could be revised to identify one qualified candidate within 30 days, and one or more additional candidates within 60 days.

Response: The Government has changed the wording from “perspective candidates that meet” to “a perspective candidate that meets” in Section H, Table 2: CONTRACTOR PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE ASSESSMENT. This refers to new positions, not vacancies. The Government Task Manager will provide the qualifications and experience requirements at the time of need.

19. Reference: Section H, AFFTC-H001, FAR 52-216.10.

Feedback/Question: How is the determination of a candidate being “qualified” made? Will it be based upon specific position descriptions/qualifications?

Response: Please see response to question number 18 above.

20. Reference: Section J, Exhibit A, Data Item A003, Page 5 of 10.

Feedback/Question: Data Item A003 Data Accession List, Block 16 tailoring instructions for Block 4 appears to be for A004. Please clarify.

Response: The Block 16 data (Block 4 information) has been changed on CDRL A003. The ‘Delete 10.2.8, 10.2.9’ and ‘Modify 10.2.3…., Modify 10.2.6…, Modify 10.2.7….’ information has been removed.

21. Reference: Exhibit A, Data Item A006

Feedback/Question: Data Item A006 Funds and Man-Hour Expenditure Report, Blk 16 – Remarks for Blocks 12 & 13 indicate the delivery frequency is every two weeks; however Block 10 shows “BI-MO”. Please clarify.

Response: Block 10, 12, 13 and 16 has been changed to MTHLY (monthly) in the ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’.

22. Reference: Exhibit B, Data Item B001, Page 1 of 6

Feedback/Question: In block 16 Remarks – Blocks 11, 12 & 13 indicate delivery of reports at least 30 days prior to submission deadlines. However, H029 “implementation of Disclosure Release” requires delivery 45 days. Please clarify.

Response: Clause H029 and the CDRL information have been changed to reflect 5 weeks in the ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

23. Reference: Section J, Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Para 3.4.2.9 – Standard Rate Validation, Page 15 of 33.

Feedback/Question: What is the AFRL standard rate?

Response: The SOW was changed in para. 3.4.2.9 Rate Information to, “The Contractor shall provide, as required, cost accounting data supporting their direct, indirect and overhead (O/H ) rates.”

24. Reference: Section J, Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Para 3.4.2.9 – Standard Rate Validation, Page 15 of 33.

Feedback/Question: Please clarify “to construct and validate the AFRL standard direct rate, indirect, and overhead (O/H) rates.” Please clarify the validation process.

Response: Please see response in question 23 above.

25. Reference: Section J, Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Para 3.4.2.5 – Financial Management System, Page 15 of 33.

Feedback/Question: The table in this paragraph shows two “Labor $ (CLIN XXXX)” columns. Are these to represent the Prime and Sub labor as shown in the table in paragraph 3.4.2.4?

Response: Yes, the two labors are prime and sub labor. Please reference Section B of the RFP for appropriate CLIN numbers.

26. Reference: Section J, Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Para 3.7.1.1, Page 16-17 of 33.

Feedback/Question: The last sentence states “The contractor shall maintain a database of personnel with active security clearances and initiate periodic background updates as required”. We presume this database is limited to Prime Contractor and Subcontractor personnel or is intended to be a task ARES III performs for other personnel?

Response: Correct. It shall be limited to ARES III Prime and Subcontractor Personnel.

27. Reference: Section J, Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Para 3.12.5 – Transition Period, Page 26 of 33.

Feedback/Question: The paragraph currently refers to the period as 16 Mar 2012 to 13 Apr 2012. The period of performance in the CLIN 0001 “Phase-In” is 14 Jun 2012 to 13 Jul 2012. Should the Transition Period reflect the Phase-in period of performance?

Response: This has been changed to reflect the period of performance listed in Section B, CLIN 0001.

28. Reference: Section J, Attachment 3, DD254 Page 2 of 2.

Feedback/Question: Block 12 “Public Release” requests 5 weeks’ notice. However, H029 “implementation of Disclosure Release” requires delivery 45 days. Please clarify.

Response: Clause H029 will be changed to read ‘at least five weeks’ instead of 45 days.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

29. Reference: Section L, Paragraph 2.0, Page 3 of 28

Feedback/Question: Paragraph 2.0 (c) states “ …Similarly, for oral presentations, elaborate productions are unnecessary and not desired. It is recommended that the offeror’s potential program manager assigned to the contract.” The last sentence in the quoted portion is an incomplete sentence. We assume it should read “Similarly, for oral presentations, elaborate productions are unnecessary and not desired. It is recommended that the offeror’s potential program manager assigned to the contract should brief the oral presentations.” Is that correct?

Response: Yes, the words “…should brief the oral presentations.” will be added to amendment 01.

30. Reference: Section H, Para 3.3.1 – Technical Criteria, Page 8 of 32.

Feedback/Question: The criterion of “Technical data is correct” is subjective and the very nature of research may mean there is not always a clear definition of “Correct”. This seems likely to be a point leading to disputes. We recommend the specific definition of and criteria for “correct” are included in the contract.

Response: There is a myriad of data that can be generated on each task associated with this effort. Therefore, there is not one definition that would encompass all definitions of ‘correct’.

31. Reference: Section I, FAR 52.219-25

Feedback/Question: Regarding Small Disadvantaged Business participation, however this appears to be the only referenced to SDB participation in the RFP. Should this FAR clause be deleted?

Response: FAR clause 52.219-25 is being deleted in ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’.

32. Reference: Section H, Table 3

Feedback/Question: It would appear the end dates in the table are incorrect.

Response: The dates have been corrected in ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’.

33. Reference: Section L, Table 2.2.

Feedback/Question: Is there a total page limit on Volume III? The RFP specifies a maximum of 10 pages per citation, but also asks for additional information such as the Organizational Change History for prime and subcontractors. Is introductory material discussing general past performance allowable in Volume III?

Response: It depends on how many subcontractors are on the team. For example, the prime can submit a maximum of 3 contracts and if the offeror has one subcontractor, the maximum page limit would be 50 pages (30 for the prime and 20 for the sub). However, if the prime contractor has 3 subcontractors the maximum page limit would be 90 pages; 30 for the prime and 20 for each sub (60 pages total for the sub info).

34. Reference: Section L, Table 2.2.

Feedback/Question: The referenced table does not include delivery of hardcopy or electronic copies of the oral presentation materials. Please clarify as to whether an electronic copy of the oral presentation is to be delivered.

Response: The RFP is being amended to reflect zero CDs for Volume 1 Executive Summary; 3 CDs each for Volume 2 Technical and Volume 3 Past Performance; 4 CDs for Volume IV Cost/Price; and one CD for Volume V Contract Documentation.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

35. Reference: Section L, Para 2.2.1.1.

Feedback/Question: Since Attachment L-3 is a Government-provided format, is it exempt from the double space requirement applicable to other portions of the proposal?

Response: Items A through F of Attachment L-3: Past Performance Information form are exempt from the double space requirement. All other information must be double spaced.

36. Reference: Section L, Para 2.1.5

Feedback/Question: Is there a break between the presentation of Subfactors 2, 3, and 4 and the MIS demonstration to allow time for connection of our laptop to the Government’s projection system? Will offerors be allowed to arrive early and verify the setup of their laptops/MIS software in advance of the beginning of the oral presentations?

Response: We do not plan to have a break between the presentation of subfactors 2, 3 and 4 and the MIS presentation. However, the contractors will be allowed to arrive early to set up their electronic equipment.

37. Reference: Section L, Para 2.3

Feedback/Question: Is Microsoft Office 2003 an acceptable delivery format, as it is upwardly compatible with Office 2007?

Response: Yes

38. Reference: Section L, Para 5.1

Feedback/Question: Does the terminology “in accordance with the format contained in ATTACHMENT L-3” mean to use that format as a form? Please clarify.

Response: Yes, Items A through F are considered a “form” and may be single spaced.

39. Reference: Section L, Attachment L-1: Cross Reference Matrix

Feedback/Question: Cross Reference Matrix. In what volume is the referenced cross reference matrix to be included? To what requirements does the term “Work Req” refer? Is it the CWBS Dictionary? Does this matrix replace the volume-specific cross reference matrices in contractor format normally provided by offerors?

Response: The ‘Work Req’ column has been changed to ‘Description’. This matrix is to be part of Vol 2:

Technical/Risk per para L.4.2.2. Also see answer to question 56.

40. Reference: Attachment 1, Statement of Work, Appendix B, Page 33 of 33.

Feedback/Question: Estimated Contract Man-Year Equivalents (CMEs). The Table reflects each Contract Year as defined by the AFRL, but the first column shows FY (Fiscal Year). Please clarify.

Response: This Appendix has been corrected via ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

41. Reference: Section L, Para 5.3 Relevant Contracts.

Feedback/Question: “Submit information in accordance with ATTACHMENT L-2: Past Performance Information on no more than three (3) recent contracts as a prime as defined in Section M para. 3.2.1….”. This wording appears to preclude the Prime offeror on ARES III from including highly relevant contracts on which they were in the subcontract role. Does the Government intend that all contracts submitted by the Prime (no more than three) will only be contracts on which the offeror was in the prime role? Would the Government consider deleting the phrase “…as a prime…”?

Response: The wording “as a prime” was deleted in the first sentence of Section L, Para 5.3.

42. Reference: Section I, 52.222-41

Feedback/Question: Did the Government intend to flow down 52.222-41 Service Contract Act of 1965 and applicable wage determination for this effort?

Response: No. The Service Contract Act and applicable wage determination are not applicable to this acquisition.

43. Reference: Section J, Statement of Work 3.1.4 and 3.1.4.2.7 and Section L, 7.3.5.2 Non-Disclosure Agreements.

Feedback/Question: SOW, 3.1.4 Phase-In Period, page 6: 3.1.4.2.7 Establish non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) as required with incumbent contractors supporting AFRL. Section L, page 18. 7.3.5.2 Non-Disclosure Agreements, “Include Non-Disclosure Agreements with the following companies….” Would the Government please clarify whether NDAs are to be submitted with the proposal or accomplished during Phase-In?

Response: See answer provided on question 14.

44. Reference: Section B, pages 2-7, Item numbers 0003, 1003, 2003, Subcontractor Labor.

Feedback/Question: These paragraphs specifically state Fixed Fee. If a subcontractor does not have an approved accounting system, we would normally issue that subcontractor a different type of contract to reduce our risk. Was it the Government’s intent to direct Prime offerors to only award Cost Plus Fixed Fee subcontract agreements?

Response: See response to question 13. It is not the Government’s intent to direct offerors to only award CPFF subcontracts.

45. Reference: Section B, pages 2-7, Item numbers 0003, 1003, 2003, Subcontractor Labor. These paragraphs refer to a fixed-fee for contractors.

Feedback/Question: 1. Is the reference to subcontractor fixed fee the same as the Prime, meaning does the Government expect that the subcontractor will propose a 3% fee, or is subcontractor fee percentage determined by the offeror? 2. Is the Prime offeror restricted to proposing subcontractors Fixed Fees only, or does the Prime offeror have the ability to modify the type of fee structure proposed for subcontractors? For example, is the Prime restricted from issuing an incentive fee to their subcontractor?

Response: On question 1, the fee is determined by the offeror. On question 2, please see the answer to question 44.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

46. Reference: Section B, CLIN 1006 and 1007.

Feedback/Question: The CLIN expires 30 JUN 2016. Should it be 2015? Section B, page 6, CLIN 1007 begins 1 JUL 2014. Should it be 2015?

Response: Yes, you are correct. This has been changed on ‘ARES III Final RFP amendment 01’.

47. Reference: Section G, G018 (From Draft RFP).

Feedback/Question: With the removal of Section G018 (Contract Holidays), will Government Holidays and Closures by Executive Orders and emergencies be provided elsewhere in the contract?

Response: Para 3.1.4 Contract Holidays has been added to the SOW. Para 3.1.4 Phase-In Period was re-numbered to Para 3.1.5. Closures by Executive Orders and emergencies will not be provided elsewhere in the contract.

48. Reference: Section H, H047 (From Draft RFP).

Feedback/Question: With the removal of Section H027 (Travel), will travel guidance and regulations be provided elsewhere in the contract?

Response: Clause H047 was taken out of the Final RFP because it was an obsolete clause. Travel required would still fall under Joint Travel Regulation (JTR) rates.

49. Reference: Section H, AFFTC H001 – 3.0 Fee Structure.

Feedback/Question: It states “the contractor will earn up to 4 percent Incentive Fee”. This would imply that there is a graduated scale for incentive fee, but none is provided. And, in 3.1 it states “If each criterion is achieved … the contractor will receive 50 percent of…incentive. It also states “if not achieved, the contractor will receive none of the incentive for that performance period.” Is the incentive fee to be on a graduated scale for meeting some but not all of the criteria, or is it going to be all or nothing?

Response: The incentive fee is all or nothing for each period.

50. Reference: Section I, Page 24 of 32, FAR Clause 52.244-2. Section J, Attachment 1 – Statement of Work paragraph 3.6.2.

Feedback/Question: Section I, Page 24 of 32, FAR Clause 52.244-2. The FAR clause Paragraph (d), approval required on subcontracts: “at or above $50,000.00”. Section J, Page 16, Attachment 1, Statement of Work, paragraph

3.6.2 Contracting Officer Approval. “The contractor shall obtain the Contracting Officer’s approval prior to a single purchase of any item or group of items or services which is more than $100,000.” These provisions conflict with each other. Please clarify?

Response: The Statement of Work has been changed to reflect $50,000.00. FAR clause 52.244-2 is correct.

51. Reference: Section J, Attachment 2, DD254, Facility Clearance.

Feedback/Question: Are all subcontractors required to have a facility clearance upon proposal submission, or can the subcontractor facility clearance be obtained upon contract award?

Response: Facility clearance is not required prior to award, only the ability to obtain one.

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

52. Reference: Section L, 2.2.1.1 (b)

Feedback/Question: Can text within tables be single spaced?

Response: Please double-space all documentation, including text within tables.

53. Reference: Section L, Attachment L-4: Past Performance Questionnaire.

Feedback/Question: Will the Government provide a Word copy of Attachment L-4, Past Performance Questionnaire, to facilitate the submission of these documents?

Response: A word document version of Attachment L-4 has been provided for download on FedBizOpps per your request.

54. Reference: Section M, Para 2.2.2.5

Feedback/Question: In the statement “transparency to the AFRL / RZ West accounting system”. Does this transparency requirement mean to provide visibility to AFRL management, or a data interface of some kind?

Response: The transparency requirements does mean to provide visibility to AFRL management and not a data interface of some kind.

55. Reference: Section J, Attachment 1 – Statement of Work para 3.4.2.11.

Feedback/Question: The last sentence refers to “status of expenditures”. Can you clarify this requirement by providing a list of applicable status types or provide more detail on how this element is to be reported?

Response: Status of Expenditures relates to paid invoices in Wide Area Work Flow. Applicable status types of reporting should include “Invoice Submitted”, “Invoice Approved by PM / Rejected by PM” and “Paid Invoice”.

56. Reference: Section L, Page L-19, Attachment L-1: Cross Reference Matrix.

Feedback/Question: The current table in the RFP appears to be for a product build and may not work well for the current labor based RFP. Would the Government consider using the matrix below?

Section L Section M SOW Proposal Reference

Response: The Government has revised the Cross Reference Matrix as shown below. Please note that the first two rows are examples only.

SOLICITATION CROSS REFERENCE MATRIX

DESCRIPTION SOW WBS LEVEL

(If Applicable) Section L Section M Proposal

Program Manager 3.2.1 XX 4.2.4.1 2.2.2.1 XX

MIS 3.4.2 N/A 2.1.5 2.2.2.5 XX

ARES III Solicitation No. FA9300‐11‐R‐0002 Final RFP Question and Answers

57. Reference: Section L, para 7.3.2

Feedback/Question: This section requests information for the Government Paying Office. Will the Government Paying Office be provided by the Contracting Officer upon contract award, so that the offeror will not include this information in the Contract Volume?

Response: Section L, para 7.3.2 was revised to 7.3.2 Government Offices -- Provide the mailing address, telephone and fax numbers and facility codes for the nearest (cognizant) Defense Contract Management Administration (DCMA) and Defense Contract Auditing Agency (DCAA) to the offeror’s home office.