Final RFP_ASTRO_Questions_ROUND 2_16Jun22.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 41 KB Posted
- Attached to
- FA9451-22-R-1000 - Advanced Space Technology Research and Optimization (ASTRO) - Request for Proposal (RFP) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA9451-22-R-1000
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| FA9451-22-R-1000-A00004_11July22.pdf | ||
| FA9451-22-R-1000-A00003_7July22.pdf | ||
| FA9451-22-R-1000-A00002_30June22.pdf | ||
| FA9451-22-R-1000-A00001_22June22.pdf | ||
| RFP FA945122-R-1000_REV2_16June22.pdf | ||
| QandA Round 1_31May22.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| QandA Round 1_31May22.pdf | ||
| TASK ORDER 0001_REV1_31MAY22.pdf | ||
| RFP FA945122-R-1000_REV1_31May22.pdf | ||
| TASK ORDER 0003_REV1_31MAY22.pdf | ||
| TASK ORDER 0002_20APR22.pdf | ||
| TASK ORDER 0003_20APR22.pdf | ||
| TASK ORDER 0001_20APR22.pdf | ||
| RFP FA9451-22-R-1000_20APR22.pdf |
Show all 14
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Comments
| Comment # | Document | Page | Comment | GOVERNMENT RESPONSE | |
| 1 | Section L, 5.4.10 | 41 | Requesting confirmation that offerrors shall place their typical burdening on top of the total $9M in baselined ODCs. Or shall the offeror include burdening on a smaller amount to equal a total of $9M in the offeror's prooposal? | Baseline ODC amount provided is fully burdened | |
| 2 | Section L, 5.4.2 | 34 | Can the Government please clarify the following statement as it seems to be against other bidding instructions to bid TOs 1 and 2 for 3 years and TO 3 for 2 years: "Provide a cost summary by major cost elements by Offeror Fiscal Years (OFY) 23-29, for each separately priced CLIN...". | ||
| Does the Government expect pricing through OFY 29? | All Task Orders shall be priced seperately based on the period of performance idenified for each Task Order. | ||||
| 3 | Section L 2.3 | 15 of 50 | We have previously asked a question about proposal delivery as there seems to be contradictory direction regarding paper vs electronic copies. In preparation, we have gone ot the DoD SAFE Site and it contains the following notice on the main page "DoD SAFE is NOT to be used for contract solicitation or proposal submission.". Please confirm the utilization of DoD SAFE for delivery of electronic copies. Please confirm our understanding that delivery consists of; Full electronic delivery via DoD SAFE, original plus 2 hard (paper) copies and 5 CDs/DVDs. | The Government has evaluated other options for proposal submission however, DoD SAFE is the best means for the offeror to submit proposals. Hard paper copies and CDs/DVDs shall not be submitted. |
Because of possible delay in DoD SAFE processing, the Offeror must send proof of DoD SAFE drop-off reflecting time and date of submission (recommend screen-shot) to the contracting personnel as confirmation of timely proposal submission.
| 4 | Contract Structure | Because the resultant contract will allow for additional Task Orders to be awarded as necessary within the stated contract ordering period, please confirm that additional Task Orders will be initiated via ECP and that proposal preparation will be an allowable cost. | Proposal preparation shall be governed in accordance with FAR 31.205-18(c ) | |
| 5 | CLIN 0013 | 15 | Phase-Out. Becuase Phase-out will be dependent upon Task Orders in place at time of Phase-out, should this estimate allow for adjustment at a later date to allow for known Task Orders? | Phase Out CLINs will be implemented and priced at the Task Order level based on the execution requirement. The total price of all Task Orders awarded under this contract shall not exceed the IDIQ Base Ceiling value. |
| 1 | Bidder’s Library | In reviewing the Bidder’s Library, it was noted that there are missing sections within the Library. Can the Government please confirm the Bidder’s Library has been provided in its entirety to all offerors? We request that all offerors be provided with identical Bidder’s Library content in order to ensure a full and open competition. | No sections missing; The numbering was not correctly reformatted following the original Bidder's Library amendments | |
| 2 | Bidder’s Library | Can the Government confirm whether the following have been provided to all offerors? (a) A more current version of slide 14 as seen in Section 5 of the Bidder’s Library; (b) the FASOR Operational Mode Conventional Laser Firing Checklist as referenced by the Bidder’s Library; and (c) Sections 22 through 24 of the Bidder’s Library. We request that each be provided to all offerors in order to ensure a full and open competition. | Supplemental Bidder's Library Documents that were sent out following Round 1 of Q&A includes updates to address the items listed here. Sections 22-24 have been purposefully removed following OPSEC review. All pertinent information for this Source Selection has been included in the Bidders Library and associated supplemental documentation. | |
| 3 | Bidder’s Library | Was it the Government’s intention to include Figure 10 Boeing RASTER Organization as seen in document A038_LSCP_MSSC_2021_03_19_DRAFT_submittal.docx, page 23 of the Bidder’s Library? | Document was provided as a sample only. | |
| 1 | Base SOW, Attachment 2, 12, Transition Phase-In and Phase-Out Periods | In Section 12 of Attachment 2 of the Base SOW, the Government states if a non-incumbent is the successful offeror “Phase-In shall be in accordance with the requirements of the solicitation, and the non-incumbent's approved Phase-In Plan which must be submitted with its proposal.” | A Phase-In plan is required. Please review Section L Volume I - Executive Summary, Section 3.4 Contract Phase-In. |
| Could the Government please clarify if a Phase-In Plan is required with this proposal submission? | |||
| 2 | Base SOW, Attachment 2, 12, Transition Phase-In and Phase-Out Periods | In Section 12 of Attachment 2 of the Base SOW, the Government states if a non-incumbent is the successful offeror “Phase-In shall be in accordance with the requirements of the solicitation, and the non-incumbent's approved Phase-In Plan which must be submitted with its proposal.” | A Phase-In plan is required. Please review Section L Volume I - Executive Summary, Section 3.4 Contract Phase-In. |
| Could the Government please provide guidance as to what Volume the offeror’s Phase-in Plan should be provided? This information was not included in Section L of the Instruction to Offerors. | |||
| 3 | Base SOW, Attachment 2, 12, Transition Phase-In and Phase-Out Periods | Could the Government please provide a page limit for the offeror’s Phase-In Plan? | Phase-in plan will not be counted towards Executive Summary page count limitations. |
| 4 | Section L 5.4.1 Task Order Instructions | Task Order 0003 states the value of CLIN 0002/0009 is based on the Mod B-MST only. However, “both the Mod B-MST and Project B-MST will be incorporated into the contract award (Section J) and will be used as a baseline to determine the cost of new projects during contract execution. As new projects arise the contractor will use the appropriate B-MST as a baseline to complete the specific project MSTDs.” Could the Government clarify whether the P-BMST pricing is to be included as part of the value of CLIN 0002/0009 for 1 unit x 20? | The value of the Task Order 0003, CLIN 0002 is only based on the cost proposal and basis of estimates for the Mod B-MST example scenario. |
TO 0003, CLIN 0002 = Mod B-MST x 20 units.
The Project B-MST is for baseline reference of future special project Mission Support Tasker Details (MSTDs) during contract execution only and is not to be incorporated into the proposed pricing of Task Order 0003.
Reference:
Volume III Cost/Price, Section 5.4.1 Volume IV Contract Documentation Volume, Section 6.18 5 Section L 5.4.1 Task Order Instructions Task Order 0003 states the value of CLIN 0002/0009 is based on the Mod B-MST only. However, “both the Mod B-MST and Project B-MST will be incorporated into the contract award (Section J) and will be used as a baseline to determine the cost of new projects during contract execution. As new projects arise the contractor will use the appropriate B-MST as a baseline to complete the specific project MSTDs.” Recommend a CLIN structure within TO 3 to distinguish between the Mod B-MST price that would be multiplied by 20 for the TEP and the Project B-MST price. The Project B-MST is for baseline reference of future special project Mission Support Tasker Details (MSTDs) during contract execution only and is not to be incorporated into the proposed pricing of Task Order 0003.
The value of the Task Order 0003, CLIN 0002 is only based on the cost proposal and basis of estimates for the Mod B-MST scenario example which shall be multiplied by 20 units.
As new projects arise the contractor will use the appropriate B-MST as a baseline to complete the specific project MSTDs (i.e. Mod B-MST will be used to support MSTDs completed for modernization projects and Project B-MST will be used to support special project MSTDs). An example MSTD is provided as an attachment to Task Order 0003.
No projects will be executed under CLIN 0002. During contract execution, ceiling will be realigned from CLIN 0002 to establish specific CLINS based on the completed project MSTD form.
Reference:
Volume III Cost/Price, Section 5.4.1 Volume IV Contract Documentation Volume, Section 6.17 6 Section L 5.4.1 Task Order Instructions Task Order 0003 states the value of CLIN 0002/0009 is based on the Mod B-MST only. However, “both the Mod B-MST and Project B-MST will be incorporated into the contract award (Section J) and will be used as a baseline to determine the cost of new projects during contract execution. As new projects arise the contractor will use the appropriate B-MST as a baseline to complete the specific project MSTDs.” Could the Government clarify if the P-MST value is part of the TEP? No. The P-MST value is not a part of TEP. The Project B-MST is for baseline reference of future project Mission Support Tasker Details (MSTDs) during contract execution only and is not to be incorporated into the proposed pricing of Task Order 0003
The value of the Task Order 0003, CLIN 0002 is only based on the cost proposal and basis of estimates for the Mod B-MST scenario example which shall be multiplied by 20 units.
Reference:
Volume III Cost/Price, Section 5.4.1 Volume IV Contract Documentation Volume, Section 6.17 7 Section L 5.4.1 Task Order Instructions Task Order 0003 states the value of CLIN 0002/0009 is based on the Mod B-MST only. However, “both the Mod B-MST and Project B-MST will be incorporated into the contract award (Section J) and will be used as a baseline to determine the cost of new projects during contract execution. As new projects arise the contractor will use the appropriate B-MST as a baseline to complete the specific project MSTDs.” Could the Government clarify if the P-MST requires cost proposal and BOE/BOM and cost narrative like the Mod B-MST cost/price requirements? Yes, offerors shall provide cost details and basis of estimate to support the Project B-MST. This is for baseline reference of future special project Mission Support Tasker Details (MSTDs) during contract execution only and is not to be incorporated into the proposed pricing of Task Order 0003.
Reference:
Volume IV Contract Documentation Volume, Section 6.17 8 Base RFP Section B, p 6 of 187 Section B reflects CLIN 0009 as Project Reservoir under “Performance Bonus” header and states “The value of this CLIN is based on the Mod B-MST ONLY. To calculate the CLIN value, the Mod B-MST shall be multiplied by 20 units. The Projects B-MST is for baseline reference of future project Mission Support Tasker Details (MSTDs) during contract execution only and is not to be incorporated into the proposed price.” Could the Government provide guidance and clarification where Offerors are to provide the Project B-MST pricing (cost and fee) within Cost Volume III? Recommend a shortened top-level narrative for P-BMST showing the overall pricing as an appendix to the cost narrative. Offerors shall provide a cost details and basis of estimate to support the Project B-MST. This is for baseline reference of future project Mission Support Tasker Details (MSTDs) during contract execution only and is not to be incorporated into the proposed pricing of Task Order 0003. This is part of Volme IV Contract Documentation and should not be included in Volume III Cost Price.
The value of the Task Order 0003, CLIN 0002 is only based on the cost proposal and basis of estimates for the Mod B-MST scenario example which shall be multiplied by 20 units. This shall be included in Volume III cost/price.
Reference:
Volume III Cost/Price, Section 5.4.1 Volume IV Contract Documentation Volume, Section 6.17 9 Task Order 0003, p 3 of 59 On Page 3 of 9 for Project Reservoir (CLIN 0009 in Section B) but CLIN 0002 in Task Order 0003 document states “the value of CLIN 0002 is based on the Basic-Mission Support Tasker (B-MST) for the modernization and upgrades project scenario only multiplied by 20 units.” However, in Section L, 5.4.1 on page 33 of 50 states “The value of CLIN 0002 is based on the Mod B-MST only. To calculate the CLIN 0002 value, the Mod B-MST shall be multiplied by 20 units.” Could the Government clarify what is to be multiplied by 20 units and included within the TEP? Potential non-compliance issue. The value of the Task Order 0003, CLIN 0002 is only based on the cost proposal and basis of estimates for the Mod B-MST scenario example which shall be multiplied by 20 units and shall be included in TEP.
TO 0003, CLIN 0002 = Mod B-MST x 20 units ---> this must be included in the TEP
Reference:
Volume III Cost/Price, Section 5.4.1
| 10 | Section L 5.4.13 Professional Employee Compensation Plan page 42 of 50 | Section L 5.4.13 states “The professional employee compensation plan required by FAR 52.222-46 shall be submitted as a part of Volume IV.” Volume IV is the Contract Documentation Volume. If all teammates are to submit the same detail as the Prime are the teammates required to provide a Volume IV to include the professional employee compensation plan? Possible compliance issue. | Section L, 5.4.13 included the compensation plan submittal requirements for the Prime and Associate organizations including joint ventures (populated and unpopulated) and stated that Associate organizations shall submit unsanitized compensation plans directly to the Government. This is based on the assumption that the Associate organizations will be submitting a sanitized version of their professional employee compensation plan to the prime. In addition, please see Section L, 5.2.2 which states "Subcontractors and Inter-Divisions are required to submit fully disclosed proposals in the same format as required of the prime contractor. Proprietary subcontractor information submitted separately is due by the closing date for offers." | |
| 11 | Section L, Section 5.3.4.4 Labor Hour Skill Mix, p. 133 of 187 | In Section 5.3.4.4, The Government asks for offeror to “explain why the cost element requires an average, higher, or lower than average skill mix, as applicable.” | Currently the AMOS site is running at a bare minimum level or personnel to support the site. This is not ideal and is not what the PMO is pursuing with the award of ASTRO. Vendors should propose FTE as they see necessary to fullfil the requirments of the RFP. | |
| Request the Government please provide the current manpower necessary to support the AMOS site operations, maintenance, and sustainment so that offerors can determine whether their estimates are average, higher, or lower than the average skill mix. | ||||
| 12 | Section L, Section 4.7, TO 0003, p 122 of 187 | Technical Approach to Modernization and Integration Scenario includes integration of a Mission Partner LADAR which uses a Class 4 laser. This integration effort will require interfacing with the mount control system (in addition to plane watch) to ensure safe operations relative to Laser Clearing House (LCH) open/close firing windows [laser shutter control] to support Predictive Avoidance (PA) while tracking LEO satellites. There does not appear to be any mention of this interface or PA capability in the Bidder’s Library. Is this an omission or does the offeror need to propose to implement this functionality? Please clarify. | Supplemental Bidders Library disks will be sent to those who have alredy submitted requests | |
| 13 | Section L, Section 4.7, TO 0003, p 122 of 187 | To support mount/sensor automation current and proposed visiting experiments which includes hand-over from one sensor to another, including wide-field to narrow-field sensors, the site uses a software package called PARADE. Is PARADE available as GFE including documentation or does the offeror need to propose to implement this functionality? (PARADE does not appear to be mentioned in the Bidder’s library.) Please clarify. | Several software packages may be provided by the Government as Base Support. Additional software requirements may be purchased during contraact execution as ODCs. | |
| 14 | If the offeror was to win the ASTRO IDIQ, there could/would be multiple Task Orders that would be awarded to the offeror of varying scopes of work and specific pricing per Task Order. Can the Government please provide clarification and guidance as to the basis that the offeror should use to calculate the subcontracted dollars or total contract value for the Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Small Business Participation Plan. | Subcontracting Plans are implemented at the Basic IDIQ contract level (and subsequent ordering ceiling). Please reference the Basic SOW when developing the Small Business Subcontrating Plan and Small Business Participation Plan. | ||
| 15 | The RFP response is requesting discrete pricing for 2 notional Task Orders and 1 actual task order. Based on this, in execution, offerors would be beholden to subcontracted dollars and small business goals across the 3 priced task orders. Is this the Government’s intent? Please clarify | Subcontracting Plans are implemented at the Basic IDIQ contract level. Please reference the Basic SOW when developing the Small Business Subcontrating Plan and Small Business Participation Plan. | ||
| 16 | Should the offeror utilize the budgetary amounts (potential ceiling values) of the ASTRO ordering periods (reference L-III - INFORMATION TO OFFERORS (ITO) AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR PROPOSAL PREPARATION, 1.1 Budget/Funding Information) as a basis of our ASTRO IDIQ subcontracted dollars and total value within our Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Small Business Participation Plan? | The budget information which reflectes the ordering ceiling and the Basic SOW should both be reference in developing Small Business Subcontrating Plan and Small Business Participation Plan | ||
| 23 | SF33 Block 9 | 1 | Note 1: States “The Government requests a technical proposal to include a Contractor's Statement of Work (C-SOW) and a fully disclosed cost proposal no later than 06 JUNE 2022 delivered to Contracting Office via TBD.” If the contractor is not taking any exceptions to the SOW (in accordance with Section L, Paragraph 6.7), is a C-SOW required with proposal? If still required, is inclusion of the RFP (Unchanged) SOW acceptable, or is a contractor generated SOW required? | References to C-SOW submissions have been removed |
| 24 | Sec B, CLIN 0010 | 6 | Descriptive Data states: "The Contractor shall deliver hardware as required by the individual Task Orders. This CLIN is not separately priced (NSP)." If hardware is required for a Task Order, is the NSP note an error? | CLIN 0010 Hardware Deliverable is not seperately priced and will be implemented at Task Order level based on the execution requirement. |
| 25 | Sec B, CLIN 0011 | 7 | CLIN Noun is "Software Deliverable". Descriptive Data states: "The Contractor shall deliver hardware as required by the individual Task Orders. This CLIN is not separately priced (NSP)." "hardware shold read software" and if software is required for a Task Order, is the NSP note an error? | Error has been corrected |
| 26 | Sec L 52.215-20 and 252.215-7010 | Sec L Pages 1 and 2 | Given the competitive nature of this opportunity, please confirm that certified cost or pricing data is not required. | Section L, Para 1.2 Contract Historical Background states (in part) these requirements have historically been solicited through full and open competition; likewise, this acquisition is also planned to be full and open competition. FAR 15.403-1 (b) Exceptions to certified cost or pricing data requirements state sthat "The contracting officer shall not require certified cost or pricing data to support any action (contracts, subcontracts, or modifications) (but may require data other than certified cost or pricing data as defined in FAR 2.101 to support a determination of a fair and reasonable price or cost realism)— (1) When the contracting officer determines that prices agreed upon are based on adequate price competition (see standards in paragraph (c)(1) of this subsection). |
| 9 | FA9451-22-R-1000 | 31, 32 Sec 5.4.1 | Will the Government please clarify if the NTE ODC amounts are inclusive of applicable burdens, or if Offeror's are required to add applicable burdens to the NTE amounts? | ODC amounts are fully burdened. No additional burdens or fee shall be added. |
| 55 | Section L 5.4.1 Task Order Instructions pages 134 and 137 of 187 | Task Order 0001 and 0003 have Performance Bonus table, however, the Performance Bonus Available shows $TBD for each column within the table. Please clarify if Offerors should be pricing the Performance Bonus amount. | The Government is still considering whether the Performance Bonus CLINs will be priced and included in TEP or not. |
At this time Offerors are advised to follow the current Section L instructions to not price the CLINs with proposal submission.
56 Section L 5.4.1 Task Order Instructions pages 134 and 137 of 187 Task Order 0001 and 0003 have Performance Bonus table, however, the Performance Bonus Available shows $TBD for each column within the table. Recommend removal of Performance Bonus table due to Performance Bonus will not be included within the Total Evaluated Price (TEP) of the proposal. The Government is still considering whether the Performance Bonus CLINs will be priced and included in TEP or not.
At this time Offerors are advised to follow the current Section L instructions and the Performance Bonus CLINs are not to be included in the TEP. The Performance Bonus CLINs are included for informational purposes for contract execution.
| 45 | Section L, 2.1.7, p 115 of 187 | KM: TS/SCI billets – how many does the govt anticipate having for this contract (for awardee). This will help offerors to develop staffing plans for TS/SCI personnel, and could affect transition. | TS/SCI will be required for 50 personnel. Ops are currently at the SECRET level, however roughly 50 personnel will be required to have TS/SCI. |
| 46 | Volume 1 – Executive Summary, Page 119 of 187, 3.3. Offeror’s Proposed Team | The verbiage states; “The offeror shall provide a narrative summary describing its organization and management structure, as well as the roles and responsibilities of all the participants.” Can the Government please clarify what is meant by “all the participants” refers to “associate organizations” ? | We are requesting a high level overview of the team, including information regarding personnel to be fulfilling 'key positions' are defined in the RFP. We do not need to see info on every single person to be involved, but need to understand the mix of juinor and senior operators, experts in certain feilds, and gain an understanding of the overall team, including the management structure that will be in place to manage the team. |
| 47 | Exhibit A, CDRL for Base (p.47 and 48 of 187) A009, A010; | Note a Contract Funds Status Report (CFSR) as well as a Performance and Cost Report are due monthly. Can you clarify the difference between the two please from a data requirements perspective? Could these CDRLs be merged into one? | CFSR is bi-weekly deliverable; PCR and monthly reports; CFSR is forecast for burns to help estimate when funds are needed. PCR is actuals for funds that have been expended in the past. |
| Also for TO1 (P23/24), TO2 (P20/21), TO3 (P18/19) | |||
| 32 | CDRLs | Was it the Government’s intention to remove the below CDRLs: | CDRL A019 accounts for all deleted related CDRLs |
CDRLs and supporting DIDs will be finalized prior to award
| A012 Management Plan Task Order | |||
| Management Plan | |||
| DI-MGMT-80004A | |||
| A013 Management Plan Maintenance | |||
| Management Plan | |||
| DI-MGMT-80004A | |||
| A014 Management Plan Operations | |||
| Management Plan | |||
| DI-MGMT-80004A | |||
| A015 Management Plan Program | |||
| Management Plan | |||
| DI-MGMT-80004A | |||
| 21 | Bidders Library | Bidder’s library includes daily operations report, however, there are no CDRLS in base or TOs for this requirement. Could the Government please clarify its intent? | See CDRL A014 for daily operations report. |
| SF-33, p. 1 of 187 | If the Government requires a C-SOW with the submission of offeror’s proposals, please confirm the Volume offeror’s are required to submit the C-SOW within. | C-SOW submission is not required and has been removed | |
| SF-33, p. 1 of 187 | If the Government requires a C-SOW with the submission of offeror’s proposals, please confirm that the C-SOW is only required for the Base IDIQ Contract. | C-SOW submission is not required and has been removed | |
| SF-33, p. 1 of 187 | If the Government requires a C-SOW with the submission of offeror’s proposals, will the Government be providing a Statement of Objectives for offerors to develop their C-SOW from? | C-SOW submission is not required and has been removed | |
| SF-33, p. 1 of 187 | It appears the requirement of a C-SOW remains within Amendment 1. Is it the Government’s intent for offeror’s to provide a C-SOW with the submission of its proposals? | C-SOW submission is not required and has been removed | |
| RFP Submission Date | June 20 is a recognized federal holiday. Can the Government confirm that Government personnel will be available to provide submission receipt on June 20th. | Please check the SAM.gov for current proposal due dates | |
| Section L Task Order Pricing Instructions, Pages 30-34 of 50 (RFP Pages 133 – 137 of 187) | In the 31 May 2022 response to industry questions. Question and answer # 67 states the price for Task Order 0003 CLIN 0002 Project Reservoir is to reflect Mod B-MST 1 unit x 20. However, the x 20 aspect is for the total evaluated price during the evaluation period of submitted proposals. Could the Government clarify whether all pricing tables and the cost model submitted is to be x 20 as well? Recommend due to TO 3-unit price x 20 is for evaluation purposes only that Offerors provide only the specific tables shown within Section L 5.4.1 by CLIN reflect x 20 and all else Section L 5.4.2 Summary by Cost Elements for each task order, Section L 5.4.3 Schedule of Hours by Labor Skill Mix, Section L 5.4.4 Schedule of Materials to be priced as 1 unit. | Recommendation accepted: |
For Task Order 0003, Offerors shall:
- Price Section L 5.4.1 CLIN 0002 shall be calculated by multiplying the Mod B-MST x 20 units.
- Section L 5.4.2 Summary by Cost Elements for each task order, Section L 5.4.3 Schedule of Hours by Labor Skill Mix, Section L 5.4.4 Schedule of Materials do not use the 20 unit multiplier (i.e. costs below should reflect one Mod B-MST unit).
| Amendment 1, Section L, page 10 of 53, 2.1.1 and 2.1.3 | We appreciate the questions that have been answered at this time. Based on the second round of Q&A still awaiting release and the delay of receiving a supplemental Bidder's Library CD, we respectfully request the Government provide a revised questions submittal period to 13 June 2022 to allow all offerors additional time review the supplemental Bidder’s Library and all Q&A responses. | The Government will allow 03 business days to submit additional questions. All questions must be submitted to the Contracting officer on or before 22 June 2022. |
| Section L, page 16 of 53, Section 3.4 Contract Phase-In | Please confirm the Contract Phase-In will not be counted toward page count limitations of Volume I. | Phase-in plan will not be counted towards Executive Summary page count limitations. |
| Q&A Round 1 Response | In review of “Q&A Round 1 31 May 2022” many answers in the document are cut off in the cells (28-29, 34-35, 36, 37-38, 46 as examples) We request the Government please provide the original Q&A file, or review and revise the PDF Q&A file to show the full answers for all offerors. | The Excel version has been attached in SAM.gov |
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
MOSSAIC Draft RFP Comments &D
&P
&P
&P
&P
&P
&P
&P
&P
&P
&P
&P
&P
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .