141121_FBO_Batch_3_87-190.pdf

RFP

Document Section Para. #

Page

Question/Comment Government Response

87 Amendment

L.3.6 Subcontr actor Consent

12 Section L states that the “offeror shall submit, along with the information required in this paragraph, a consent letter, executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse PPI to the offeror so the offeror can respond to such information.” Is it the Government’s intent to receive Consent Letters from ALL subcontractors and teaming partners or ONLY for those subcontractors and teaming partners in which a PPIS was completed and submitted as part of our proposal submission (per Section L3.3)?

Only those subcontractors or teaming partners that the offeror is proposing at this time.

88 Amendment

L L3.4 11 This paragraph states that the completed questionnaire shall be submitted via email. If an offeror is using a PPQ reference from a government customer who is not authorized to send unclassified emails regarding government matters in true name due to new government security regulations, can USSOCOM please provide an classified fax number (or unclassified) this customer can use to submit the completed past performance questionnaire.

Classified documentation is not requested. Unclassified information only should be provided on the PPQ and the SSEB will follow up with the reference as applicable.

89 Amendment

M M.2.3 15 Reference: Lines 3 and 4 of this paragraph state "how you will manage and execute each of the task orders", yet it later states "The Government will evaluate the following areas: Technical Approach, Personnel, Transition Plan and Quality".

Question: Is Management Approach (how you will manage and execute) being evaluated against M2.3 Factor 2?

Yes. Factor 2 will be evaluated IAW M2.3; it will be an integrated assessment of the proposals submitted for each Task Order. (Note:

Amendment 0002 revises L & M)

90 Amendment

L L4.2 12 Reference: Per Group_B_RFP_Q&A_07_Nov_2014, question 14, the basis of estimates (BOEs) were removed from Volume I.

Section L4.2 instructions states "The offeror shall provide basis of estimates for all FFP task orders in sufficient detail to ensure that the offeror has a complete understanding of the task order."

Question: Will the BOE requirement also be removed from Volume III?

The BOE requirement was removed from L2.3.1 because the Government has provided the labor categories, number of positions and number of hours to be provided, therefore a technical BOE is not required. However, offerors are still required to submit a BOE for ODCs as part of the Volume IV proposal. (Assumption: submitter meant Vol IV in the question)

91 Amendment

L L.3.2 Page

The instructions for the past performance summary state: "Provide a summary describing the role of the offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner. Include rationale supporting the assertion of relevance, but note the Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy. Clearly link past performance to the factors/sub-factors; explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort. This may include a discussion of efforts accomplished by the offeror to resolve problems encountered on prior contracts as well as past effort to identify and mange program risk. " Was it the intent for the linkage of past performance and discussion of what aspects of the contract are deemed relevant to be included in the PPI identified contracts only or remain in the Past Performance Summary? If it is the intent of the of the government to identify contract specific information with discussion on contracts for all subcontracts/teaming partners, etc.. would the government increase the page limit for the past performance summary section?

For PPI sheets submitted, the relevancy of the identified contract may be included in the PPI vice the summary.

92 Amendment

L 3.4 41 Can we submit more than 5 PPIs and PPQs in order to show the depth and breadth of the team?

No.

93 Amendment

L 4.2 26 This paragraph lays out requirements for supporting documents and says "Any subcontracting costs must be broken out as well. " Does this language require subcontractors to submit sealed packages with indirect loads for their fully burdened rates.

No. Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template.

94 Atch 1 SOW 10.0 10.4 9 This section states, "When directed by the KO, the contractor shall remove any employee who endangers national security." Would the government please specify a response time threshold for removal of personnel from the contract?

The timeframe will be dependent on the circumstance; as soon as practicable.

95 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.1.2.1 9 What is the anticipated frequency, location, target language(s) and student density for the 200-hour POI “Survival, Pre-deployment and Familiarization Training”?

There is no schedule. This is driven by missions requirements.

96 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.1.2.4 10 For proposal purposes, how many hours by language category for tutoring is projected? There is no schedule. This is driven by missions requirements.

97 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.2.3.1 12 Please define in days or hours the Government’s definition of “short-duration” as it relates to Situational Training Exercises.

Half a day to a week

98 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.2.3.2 13 Please define in days or hours the Government’s definition of “longer-duration” as it relates to Isolated Environment (ISO) Immersion Training.

1 to 6 weeks

99 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.2.3.6 13 Please provide the target locations, learner quantity and OCONUS lengths of stay for the Live Environment Training (LET).

We don't have this data. This is a potential requirement and we cannot predict what it might be. LET students must meet the minimum requirements of USSOCOM M 350-8

100 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.2.3.7 14 Please provide the target locations, learner quantity and OCONUS lengths of stay for the (LET) Home Stay program.

We don't have this data. This is a potential requirement and we cannot predict what it might be. LET students must meet the minimum requirements of USSOCOM M 350-8

101 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.3 16 For proposal purposes, please provide the language(s), word count, page count and type of media (print, audio, electronic) for translation.

We don't have this data. This is a potential requirement and we cannot predict in this detail what it might be. All translations are in support of training.

102 Atch 4 LREC Attachm ent 4

1.1.2 3 Does the Government have any specific test instruments in mind to evaluate culture and regional expertise learning or is the intention to develop tests as part of the POI and lesson development process described in the SOW?

There is no formal tool; available at this time. Tests are being developed.

103 Atch 4 LREC Attachm ent 4

1.2 Objective

3 Is the culture and regional expertise instruction requested via this contract limited to that necessary to develop, attain, and sustain language proficiency as stated or is it broader, including developing understanding of cultural factors that influence mission planning, engagement with the population and key personalities, and other operational or strategic factors bearing on the mission? The objective statement seems to be consistent with paragraphs 3.2.2.5, 3.2.2.6 and 3.2.2.7 while potentially in conflict with paragraphs 3.2.2.1 and 3.2.2.2.

The method used to instruct this subject shall employ the doctrinal PMESII- PT multi level system analysis

104 Atch 4 LREC 3.10.3 23 Does the government have a desired list of courses for the required continuing education opportunities?

There is no requisite list

105 Atch 4 LREC 3.2.3.7 13 Regarding home-stay families. Will the Government identify these home stay families or is the contractor expected to identify and vet these families?

The vendor will submit host families for Gov vetting.

106 Atch 4 LREC 8 8.2/8.3 35 Section 8.2 states that contractor shall fulfill the requirement of verifying security clearances and indoctrination of visitors. And Section 8.3 states that contractor shall provide security management support. Is there a security position at the Government operation level that supports the requirement, or is it a requirement that the requirement that the prime must provide?

This is a vendor responsibility

107 Atch 4 LREC 8 8.1 35 The LREC SOW states in Section 8.1, Security shall be in accordance with the attached DD254. Please provide the DD254 that corresponds to LREC Technical Capability.

LREC is provided as a sample task. Any future Request for Task Order Proposal will include the applicable DD254 requirements.

108 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.6 & 3.7 17-21 How many Language Instructors currently support USAJFKSWCS, AFSOAWC, MARSOS, and NSWCEN?

This changes from day to day, but on average 300 to 400 instructors (On SOFTS the majority are Part Time)

109 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.9.3.4 23 How does the current vendor support the MARSOC Training location of “Training Afloat”? We haven't done training afloat in several years. When it was done instructors went on ship with the Marines and were flown home.

110 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.9 22, In section 3.9, Stuttgart-Vaihingen, Germany is mentioned under the TSOC, USASOC, and NSWC as training locations. Is there 1 facility supporting all three organizations or three separate facilities?

No. Only 1st Bn 10th SFG(A) has a formal language training facility

111 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.9 22, In section 3.9, Fort Bragg is mentioned twice supporting JSOC and USASOC, are there two facilities or one combined facility? Are these separate from the USAJFKSWCS site?

There are five separate USSOCOM language training facilities on Fort Bragg and one (very small) at Camp MacKall

112 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.9.3.1 22 In section 3.9.3.1 USASOC Training Locations, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA is mentioned twice. Are there 2 separate facilities at Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA?

No, 1st SFG has one facility but they sometimes use satellite locations on JBLM. The Ranger program has pretty much closed.

113 Atch 4 LREC 3.1.1 3.1.1.1 6 Under "Objectives" in this subparagraph, do "realistic plans with clear class objectives" refer to "Lesson Plans" or "Programs of Instruction" or both?

Both

114 Atch 4 LREC 3.2.3.1 3.2.3.1 11 As stated under 3.2.1 "REC Instruction," the Situational Training Exercises (STX) may be combined with language training. Will the trainees participating in STX events already have foreign language skills? If so, at what skill level would that training be?

Yes, various levels starting at 0+

115 Atch 4 LREC 3.2.3 3.2.3.6.6 13 This subparagraph states that "The Contractor shall provide a comprehensive POI in English breaking down the activities planned for each day." Was that meant to state Lesson Plan rather than POI?

No, a POI is not a lesson plan

116 Atch 4 LREC 3.6.1 3.6.1.1.6 17 Are all proficiency goal targets based on the ILR achievement scale? Yes 117 Atch 4 LREC 4 Table 25, Will incumbent REC Instructors be exempted from experience requirements for the positions they currently hold?

No

118 Atch 4 LREC 3.6.2 3.6.2.6 17 Is the Target proficiency ILR 1+ or DLPT 1+? DLPT +1 119 Atch 6 LL 4.0 4.2 5 Table 4.1 identified required specialized experience for the Task Lead as a "minimum of 25 years of experience, including thorough knowledge of USSOCOM organization and staff processes (at least 3 years of experience at USSOCOM staff headquarters), special operations experience at the tactical level, proven leadership experience (Command at the 0- 5 AND 0-6 levels)...Prior Task Order Lead and Program Management experience required...and desired specialized experience as Geographic Combatant Command staff experience, operational experience in a least two Geographic Combatant Commands." In the interest of fair and reasonable competition, would the Government please reassess the FMD Lessons Learned Task Order Lead requirements or identify the incumbents Task Lead for Offerors?

Amendment 0002 Revises Table 4.1: Required specialized experience for the Task Lead as a "minimum of 20 years of military experience, including thorough knowledge of USSOCOM organization and staff processes (at least 3 years of experience at USSOCOM staff headquarters), proven leadership experience (Command at the 0-5 or 0-6 levels). Prior Task Order Lead and Program Management experience required and desired specialized experience as Geographic Combatant Command staff experience.

120 Atch 6 LL Tab TO TEP Sub-factor 2.1

Cell H7 The formula in cell H7 double counts the amount. Will the government reissue an amendment that corrects the cell?

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template.

121 Atch 6 LL 9 Page

Will the Government clarify what (if any) ODCs and Equipment are expected to be contractor provided? Will the Government consider adding a cost reimbursable line for ODCs and Equipment with a plug number (for evaluation purposes only)?

The Government does not anticipate materials, ODCs and equipment requirements. Offerors should propose as part of their FFP any ODCs they require to perform the tasks.

122 Atch 6 LL Att 6 2 2 Instructions specify: "Contractor proposal cost and price data shall reflect justification to determine all subcontractor costs are fair and reasonable (e.g. subcontract was competed or provide a cost analysis report to support a fair and reasonableness determination)." Does this requirement require the submission of a sealed package by subcontractors?

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template.

123 Atch 6b Pricing

1st Tab cell H7 The "TO TEP" Total is the sum of all entries above it to include the subtotal. Should that be revised to exclude the subtotal from the Total?

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and information required;

please review the changes as the revision should make this OBE.

124 Atch 7 FMD

MA

6.0 16 Will the Government clarify what materials and ODCs are expected to be contractor provided? Will the Government consider adding a cost reimbursable line for ODCs and Materials with a plug number (for evaluation purposes only)?

The Government does not anticipate materials, ODCs and equipment requirements. Offerors should propose as part of their FFP any ODCs they require to perform the tasks.

125 Atch 7 FMD

MA

Att 7 2 2 Instructions specify: "Contractor proposal cost and price data shall reflect justification to determine all subcontractor costs are fair and reasonable (e.g. subcontract was competed or provide a cost analysis report to support a fair and reasonableness determination)." Does this requirement require the submission of a sealed package by subcontractors?

No. Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and information required.

126 Atch 7b Pricing

Tab TO TEP Sub-factor 2.2

Cell H7 The formula in cell H7 double counts the amount. Will the government reissue an amendment that corrects the cell?

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template.

127 Atch 7b Pricing

1st Tab cell G7 The "TO TEP" Total is the sum of all entries above it to include the subtotal. Should that be revised to exclude the subtotal from the Total?

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and information required;

please review the changes as the revision should make this OBE.

128 Atch 8 ITC 2.2.3 3 Regarding new "technologies and software," are there specific technologies and/or software or types that the government anticipates to be used on this program?

Other than the programs already listed in the SOW, there are no known new technologies and software anticipated for use at this time. However, given the constant development and improvements to such products, the government welcomes relevant contractor input during the period of performance. Likewise, if the government procures new, emerging technology, it will provide training to both government and contractor personnel who require its use.

129 Atch 8 ITC 9 23-

Will the Government clarify what materials and ODCs are expected to be contractor provided? Will the Government consider adding a cost reimbursable line for ODCs and Materials with a plug number (for evaluation purposes only)?

The Government does not anticipate materials, ODCs and equipment requirements. Offerors should propose as part of their FFP any ODCs they require to perform the tasks.

130 Atch 8 ITC 3 n/a 2 Offerors are instructed that "Contractor proposal cost and price data shall reflect justification to determine all subcontractor costs are fair and reasonable (e.g. subcontract was competed or provide a cost analysis report to support a fair and reasonableness determination)." This requirement is included in the paragraph discussing additional requirements in support of the CPFF CLIN and the Cost CLIN. Is the subcontractor fair and reasonableness analysis a requirement for all subcontractors, including those proposed under the FFP CLINs, or only for the CPFF and Cost CLINs?

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and information required;

please review the changes as the revision should make this OBE.

131 Atch 9 PPI 5 2 Item 5 on the PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEET SWMS GROUP B states that the contractor must, " Describe in detail how your company past performance on this contract applies to the Relevancy Criteria identified in Section M." We do not see where Section M clearly lists any relevancy criteria. Please provide specific relevancy criteria that can be referenced.

Amendment 0002 will revise the PPI to clarify; Section L3.5 discusses relevancy. Section M identifies how the Government will evaluate the past performance information provided for recency and relevancy.

132 Atch 9 PPI 5 2 Item 5 on the PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEET SWMS GROUP B states that the contractor must, " Describe in detail how your company past performance on this contract applies to the Relevancy Criteria identified in Section M." Given the provided template, contractors are limited to 3/4 of a page to provide the detailed write up requested. Will the government consider extending the page limit per PPI to 3 or more pages to provide room for a detailed write up?

Amendment 0002 will revise the PPI (the page limit remains unchanged)

133 DD254s All Form

DD254

All All DD254s: Attachment 2 IDIQ Level, Attachment 5 MARSOC SOW DD254, Attachment 6a DD254, Attachment 7a DD254, Attachment 8a DD254. Are offerors required to fill in and submit any / all DD254s with proposals?

The offerors are not required to complete any information on the DD254;

however, they must be able to comply with all of the DD254 requirements.

134 Exhibit A CDRLs

A001, A002, A003

All All Do offerors need to complete and submit any of the CDRLs with the proposal? No, offerors are not required to complete any information on the CDRLs;

however, prime awardees will submit data to the Government IAW the CDRLs.

135 General Please concur that the rates for the three Task Orders are not ceiling rates to be utilized for future Task Orders and rates will be built on a Task Order basis.

Concur.

136 General Please concur that no IDIQ rates are required in this proposal and the IDIQ will be awarded solely based on the three Task Order responses.

Reference M-3 for the Basis of Award

137 General N/A N/A N/A How does the government intend for the contractor to provide ODC pricing when none of the template have a location to enter this data?

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and information required;

please review the changes as the revision should make this OBE.

138 General Will the forthcoming amendment extend the proposal submission date? Yes.

139 H92222-14-R-

Overall Is the Offeror permitted to use hyperlinks and utilize attachments in their proposal volumes? No.

140 H92222-14-R-

L-1 L1.4 38 For proposals that are submitted in sections, due to file size, should each section include a cover page, table of contents and acronym list or can these items be included as part of first section only?

No but the document file name and page numbering should identify the Volume (See L1.3 for naming conventions).

141 H92222-14-R-

M-3 M3.2 and M3.3

46 Will each Task Order awardee be awarded an IDIQ Prime Contract? Alternatively, could an IDIQ Prime Contract be awarded to a contractor that does not receive a task order award?

Following selection of prime contract awardees and prime contract source selection; the Government intends to award the TO’s identified under Factor 2 to the prime contract awardee whose task order proposal represents the best value to the Government, based on the evaluation factors. (Reference M3.3)

142 H92222-14-R-

L Per L.1.2.2

37 Per L.1.2.2, “For tables, charts, graphs, and figures, the text shall be no smaller than the equivalent to Microsoft Word 9 point, Times New Roman”, can the government confirm that resumes provided for Sub-factors 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3, which are in table format, may follow the same text size requirements of Times New Roman size 9 font?

No.

143 H92222-14-R-

Answer to Q. 15

L 4.2 41 Regarding DBA, the Government stated, "All ODCs should be included in the FFP."

Did the Government mean to say, "All ODCS should be included in the FFP Labor Rates, or should Offerors add a separate line to the FFP Pricing template(s) for ODCs if required? (NOTE: The answer to Question 7 for MSOS ITC indicates that ODC & material costs should be recovered through the fully-burdened labor rates.)

All costs associated with DBA/SOFA should be accounted for in accordance with the contractor's disclosed accounting practices and included as part of the FFP labor rate for the positions requiring the additional insurance." (Ref Q48)

144 H92222-14-R-

L Table L.1 37 We request that 2 additional pages be added to the total allowed for Volume I - Technical Proposal, in order to allow for an introduction of the offeror's team.

The page count remains unchanged.

145 H92222-14-R-

L B

4-4.2 41 2-4

B CLINs appear to only support a base year. Please confirm that the IDIQ is one base year plus four option years and clarify whether option period CLINs will be provided.

The IDIQ contract does not include options but rather a 5-year ordering period. Options if included will be at the task order level and identified in the request for task order proposal. Ref 252.216-7006

146 H92222-14-R-

B Item No 0003 and

3 Can the government please clarify what it is looking for in response to the following items

"SHARE RATIO ABOVE TARGET" "SHARE RATIO BELOW TARGET."

Offerors do not have to complete Section B. Item No 0003 and 0004 are not used at this time; they are placeholders in the event that a Fixed Price Incentive Fee or a Cost Plus Incentive Fee contract type is the most advantageous contract type for future requirements.

147 H92222-14-R-

L L1.2.3 37 Please confirm that the terms "glossary" and "acronym list" are used interchangeably and only an acronym list is desired in the proposal response.

Offerors may include a glossary and/or an acronym list.

148 H92222-14-R-

L.3.4 1 40 Past Performance Questionnaire allow certain vendors to request evaluations only from Government persons who will provide positive input while avoiding negative performance reviews. We have encountered debriefings where the Government has not checked vendors performance on the official Government only access website Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPAR) at www.cpars.gov. Will the Government commit to checking all of the proposer's official Government evaluations?

The Government is only interested in the performance that is recent and relevant to the immediate action; therefore, a check of all the proposer's official Government evaluations will not be conducted.

149 H92222-14-R-

I N/A 16-18 Based on the task specified in the SWMS B SOW we recommend the Government add Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act),and Workers’ Compensation and War-Hazard Insurance Overseas and the following clauses to section I.

If the USG does not plan to include them, please revise the RFP to include instructions on how offerors should address the costs associated with training and OCONUS activities affected by these clauses.

Amendment 0002 will incorporate FAR 52.228-3 Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Defense Base Act).

150 H92222-14- R-0021

M 2.1 43 Will a deficiency in one of the Subfactors result in an overall Factor rating of red? Yes.

151 H92222-14-R-

L 5.4 43 Will Audits be conducted during the source selection or after award? Audits are not anticipated for the source selection. Post award audits will be conducted as required.

152 H92222-14-R-

L L3.2 Past Performa nce Summary

40 The Past Performance Summary is only three pages long. The RFP states, "provide a summary describing the role of the offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner." How can we describe the role of "each" subcontractor on the team in only three pages while also addressing the other Section L requirements for this section?

The page count remains unchanged. The Government desires a clear and concise summary of the past performance factor to include the subcontractors the offeror is proposing.

153 H92222-14-R-

Atch 7b, RFP-

FMD

Manpow er Augment ation TO

Pricing Template

1 The Pricing Template to the FMD Manpower Augmentation TO includes a line item for ODCs (provide a breakout separately). We assume that this line item should be moved to Attachment 8b - Pricing Template for MSOS ITC since this TO requires the offerors to price out specific insurances as an ODC and does not provide a space to do so. Please confirm that the Government will correct both Pricing Templates.

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and information required;

please review the changes as the revision should make this OBE.

154 H92222-14-R-

L3.3 N/A 11 of

Would the Government please clarify that if an offeror is bidding as a newly formed Joint Venture (JV), that at least 3 of the 5 past performance referenced contracts be contracts held by members of the JV and that the other two may be other team member referenced contracts.

The Government has not specified the # of past performance references for prime or subs. Offerors should make the determination to submit past performance for those contracts that are recent and relevant.

155 H92222-14-R-

B N/A 2-4 There is no requirement for any of the CLINs in B to be completed by the Offeror. What information should be included for each CLIN in B? In what volume should B be included in?

Reference Q&A #63. Offerors price identified in the pricing template will serve as the task order schedule B totals.

156 H92222-14-R-

L L1.4 and L1.5

38 Cut-off Time for Proposal: (1) Due to the size of the Proposal response and the potential number of offerors would the Government consider changing the cut-off time to 5:00 PM EST to allow additional time? (2) Because there were issues with uploading responses to SWMS C would the Government consider allowing offerors to submit proposals directly to the CO if issues arise uploading to FBO are encountered?

Amendment 0002 extends the due date and time. Offerors are encouraged not to wait until the last minute to submit their proposals. Group C proposals were not submitted via FBO.

157 H92222-14-R-

L L1.6 38 The RFP requires the proposal to be valid for 385 days. This considerably exceeds the normal period for validity. It requires Small Businesses to hold rates for over a year. Small Business rates can be more fluid than large businesses. We will also be required to flow this requirement down to Large and Small Business Subcontractors. Costs of benefits, especially medical, are significantly impacted by new and evolving regulations like the Affordable Care Act. We recommend proposals be valid for 180 days. If required, the USG can request offerors who have been down selected to extend the validity of their offers.

The validity date is based on the anticipated award date of MSOS ITC task order. While this TO is part of the initial award, performance will not begin until Dec 2015.

158 H92222-14-R-

L L1.6 38 Proposal Validity : IF the requirement remains that proposals are valid for 385 days there is a strong chance that pricing will flow into a sixth year. For example a contract is awarded at the 370 day mark; we are already into year two of the pricing sheet. Pricing for this example would require five years of pricing from date of award. However, the pricing sheet only goes out five years from date of submission. We recommend the Government adjust validity to less than 385 days or include a sixth year in the pricing template.

Offerors should assume the base year start date to be the anticipated date reflected in the ITO.

159 H92222-14-R-

SF33 Block 12 1 Proposal Validity: Block 12 of the SF33 is not complete with the 385 day requirement from Section L.1.6 Was this an oversight and will the Government revise the SF33 to complete Block 12?

Block 12 of the SF33 is completed by the offeror. Proposal validity must be in accordance with L1.5 (Amendment 0002 corrects the paragraph numbering for L-1).

160 H92222-14-R-

L 4.1 41 The RFP states: The burden of proof for credibility of proposed prices rests with the offeror and the numbers must be verifiable. How does the USG intend to verify the proposed prices?

Volume III will be evaluated using one or more of the techniques defined in FAR 15.404 Proposal Analysis Techniques, in order to determine if the price is fair and reasonable. IAW FAR 15.403-1(b) the Government may require submission of Data Other Than Certified Cost or Pricing Data to the extent necessary to support a determination of fair and reasonable price

161 H92222-14-R-

L 2.3.1 and 4.2 and 12(A- 0001)

The RFP was amended to delete the requirement for BOE for Sample TOs (L2.3.1).

However, L4.2 was not changed and specifically requires that “The offeror shall provide basis of estimates for all FFP task orders in sufficient detail to ensure that the offeror has a complete understanding of the task order.” How does the BOE differ from the requirement that “Offeror shall submit supporting information required to evaluate FFP prices.” Is the cost detail expected to be different from the technical detail USG already provided, therefore warranting a detailed price BOE? If not, we recommend this requirement be deleted from L4.2.

Factor 2 represents actual task orders to be awarded as a result of this source selection. The BOE requirement was removed from L2.3.1 because the Government has provided the labor categories, number of positions and number of hours to be provided, therefore a technical BOE is not required.

However, offerors are still required to submit a BOE as part of the Volume IV proposal.

162 H92222-14-R-

Attachm ent 6,7,&

Instructio ns

2 In order to provide budgetary data for the contract period of performance, and comply with requested rates and validity, can USG provide a more accurate prediction of the number of IDIQ awards for Group B?

The number of prime awards is unknown.

163 H92222-14-R-

L 1.5 38 We highly recommend the submission date be extended in order to give industry the required time to respond with offers that meet the objectives of this acquisition and fully comply with the USG requirements.

Amendment 0002 extends the due date and time (Reference L1.4) Amendment 0002 also revises the Facility Clearance requirement. PPQs already submitted do not have to be amended.

164 H92222-14-R-

L 3.6 41 Regarding paragraph L 3.6 Subcontractor Consent/Client Authorization Letter, are consent letters required of every subcontractor, regardless of if they are providing past performance references or not? If a subcontractor does not provide a Past Performance Information Sheet in the Offeror’s proposal, nor submits a past performance questionnaire for consideration, are they still required to submit subcontractor consent and client authorization letters?

No. No.

165 H92222-14-R-

L and M L3.2 and M2.4

11 &

Paragraph L3.2 states "Clearly link past performance to the factors/sub-factors; explain what aspects of the contracts are deemed relevant to the proposed effort." The only reference for "factors and subfactors is found in Sections L and M, and are listed in Tables L.1 and M.1.

However, Section M evaluation criteria state that the past performance evaluation will consider the offeror’s demonstrated record of performance in providing the services delineated in the Group B SOW and specific TO requirements. Please clarify what is meant by factors/sub-factors in paragraph L3.2 in light of the subsequent evaluative guidance presented in paragraph M2.4.

The requirement is for the offeror to link the past performance they are submitting to the factors which encompass the breadth of the Group B SOW and the TO requirements.

166 H92222-14-R-

L NA NA Section L does not provide instructions for the separate submission of subcontractor proprietary cost information. Please provide instructions for submitting this information to the Government, as this is a critical step to protecting sub-contractor proprietary information.

Will the Government require a "sealed bid" submission from the prime's sub-contractor pricing information?

No. Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and the information required.

167 H92222-14-R-

L L2.2.1.4 39 Considering detailed nature of OCI Mitigation Plans, will the Government consider allowing the contractor to submit a summary of the plan while providing the full version as an attachment to the proposal?

The page limit remains unchanged. The Government does not desire a lengthy OCI plan but rather a clear and concise summary of your process.

168 H92222-14-R-

H H.4 12 How will the Government accept the OCI mitigation plan? Will it be at the overall IDIQ level or at the individual task order task order level?

Amendment 0002 Revises H.4

169 H92222-14-R-

Attach 6,7,& 8

Instructio ns

2 The instructions state: “Contractor proposal cost and price data shall reflect justification to determine all subcontractor costs are fair and reasonable (e.g., subcontract was competed or provide a cost analysis report to support a fair and reasonable determination.)” This is a competitive contract and the USG can use the offerors' proposed pricing to establish fair and reasonable. Is this the USG intent? If not please provide the format and specific information required to meet the USG expectation for justification by element of cost and/or CLIN.

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and information required.

170 H92222-14-R-

Attach 6,7,& 8

Instructio ns

2 The Government provided a plug dollar amount for travel. So that we can provide the cost reasonableness for travel will the Government provide more details on number of trips, locations, OCONUS trips, etc...The Government provided dollar amount for travel doesn't allow us to provide the detail requested.

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and information required.

171 H92222-14-R-

Section L L2.3.3 Transition Plan

39 Would the Government please provide the estimated number of days that will be provided for TO transition for the three priced TOs

30 days

172 H92222-14-R-

L L-2 38 Volume I Technical Proposal: Will the Government accept the submission of six (6) separate PDF files (each to contain a table of contents, glossary of acronyms, etc.) for each of the following items: (1) Program Management; (2) Language SOW response; (3) MARSOC G7 response; (4) FMD Lessons Learned response; (5) FMD Manpower response;

(6) MSOS Individual Training. Or must Volume I be submitted as 1 PDF file that contains all sections noted.

Multiple files can be submitted, follow the naming convention identified in L1.3 Electronic Submission.

173 Pricing Templates

Several of the pricing CLINs have plug data for travel. Can the government confirm DBA, COLA, HOLA, DBA, as well as other uplifts for FTEs living OCONUS are included in the plug, or will the offeror have the ability to re-address it after award?

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template and information required. The costs identified in the question should be included in ODCs. Travel costs are for transportation, lodging, Meals and incidental expenses.

174 Pricing Templates

Is it the Government's intent to allow the offeror to bid the labor categories and skill mix that they consider best meets staffing requirements, or does the Government want offerors to bid the precise level of effort as delineated in each task order?

No, offerors must propose against the labor categories and hours provided for each task order.

175 Task Orders We have identified certain labor categories that would fall under SCA designation. Will the government state which labor categories are SCA positions and include the relevant Wage Determinations and SCA clauses, as necessary.

Amendment 0001 provided WD for the SCA applicable positions under the sample LREC SOW. Amendment 0002 will provide WD for the SCA applicable position (driver/maintainer) under the sample MARSOC SOW.

Please advise what other positions require SCA.

176 Atch 6 LL SOW Para 4 Table 4.1, Page

Task Lead requirements read, “…proven leadership experience (Command at the 0-5 and 0- 6 levels).” Was it the Government’s intent to have it read, “…proven leadership experience (Command at the 0-5 and/or 0-6 levels).”?

Amendment 0002 revises Table 4.1: Required specialized experience for the Task Lead as a "minimum of 20 years of military experience, including thorough knowledge of USSOCOM organization and staff processes (at least 3 years of experience at USSOCOM staff headquarters), proven leadership experience (Command at the 0-5 or 0-6 levels)...Prior Task Order Lead and Program Management experience required...and desired specialized experience as Geographic Combatant Command staff experience.

177 Atch 6 LL 2.5 2.5 4 This section states, "The contractor shall also maintain oversight of the USSOCOM Specific Lessons Learned Database – the Joint Lessons Learned Information System- Special Operations Forces (JLLIS-SOF) on SIPR/NIPR/JIANT/FP and ensure data is synchronized, current, and available to users in the least amount of required time and effort." If the JLLIS-SOF system is hosted and managed (data synchronization, availability, etc) by USSOCOM, it appears this requirement would appear to hold the contractor accountable and liable for performance of a system outside of their span of control. Please specify to what degree the contractor will be liable for JLLIS-SOF system performance managed and operated by the government and/or their enterprise information technology service provider. If the intent is for the contractor to assume control of the system information technology management, would the government please provide system architecture descriptions and/or system technical documentation?

Amendment 0002 Revises the SOW: Contractor will maintain oversight of the observations, insights, and lessons learned placed into the JLLIS for their respective commands to ensure data is synchronized, current, and available to users in the least amount of required time and effort. Contractor will have no requirement for information technology management.

178 Attachment 8 4.2.10 4.2.10.2 18 The contractor is required to provide a field kit for each Role player consisting of equipment, weapon and uniforms. If a "Field Kit" is not available for rent from a government warehouse, can the contractor warehouse be co-located on the base with the government warehouse, or can the contractor warehouse be on base in a different location, or does the contractor warehouse need to be off base?

Amendment 0002 Revises the SOW: Due to the episodic and fluid nature of the exercise, as well as the fact that MSOS deploys away from home station to conduct the exercise, the contractor will have to transport and store the equipment off base. The exercise moves from one side of South Carolina to the other rendering permanent storage warehouses ineffective.

179 MSOS ITC TO 4.0 4.2.10.2 21 Equipment Requirements for all Derna Bridge Partner Nation (PN) role players: The contractor will provide a field kit and foreign weapon to each PN role player. The kit will include one the following unless otherwise specified-AK-47/MAC90 with sling, blank firing adapter (BFA) and magazine Question- As there could be up to 147 PN Role Players, is the contractor responsible to provide 147 AK-47/MAC 90’s or will the PN be able to cross deck weapons from event to event? This is significant for pricing.

The pricing for Subtask 2 at this time utilizes a Government provided plug number. After TO award and prior to performance on Subtask 2 or 3 the contractor will be required to submit a cost proposal. If the contractor is required to provide 147 role players, which historically is a rare instance, then yes the contractor would be required to provide that many weapons at one time. The exercise forces are not co-located and conduct simultaneous training events necessitating the weapons at the same time.

180 Atch 4 LREC 3 3.1.2.3 10 What is the expected frequency, location, target language(s) and student density for the “Sustainment and Enhancement Training (SET)”?

Amendment 0002 adds language to the SOW

181 Atch 4 LREC 3.2.3.2 12 Regarding "ISO instruction is a longer duration activity…" Can you define the approximate amount of time this refers to?

For purposes of the "sample task" is the answer 3 weeks?

182 Attachment

9_PPI

5 2 Item 5 on the PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE INFORMATION SHEET SWMS GROUP B states that the contractor must, " Clearly link the past performance information to the SWMS Group B Statement of Work. Ensure to reference SOW paragraph number on each past performance entry." We assume the SOW mentioned refers to the IDIQ SOW.

Can the Government please confirm?

Amendment 0002 will revise the PPI

183 Solicitation, Section L

L1.2 L1.2.3 37 Will the Government please clarify where in Volume I of the proposal offerors are to address the IDIQ Level Statement of Work? Per Section L, the "IDIQ Technical Capability" portion of the proposal is to address the LREC task order in 15 pages, and the MARSOC G7 task order in 15 pages. There is no mention made of where offerors are to address the IDIQ Level SOW, however.

Sub-factor 1.1 Program Management L2.2.1 "The offeror shall submit a clear and comprehensive description of its management approach and corporate resource capabilities to execute all SWMS Group B requirements delineated in the SOW."

184 Solicitation, Section L

L4 L4.1 41 The Draft RFP and the Final RFP both include FAR clauses which mandate that sealed packages are required from subcontractors.

However, the Q&A from May 2014, related to the draft RFP, stated sealed packages were NOT required of subcontractors. Does this fact stay in effect for the final RFP? Are sealed packages required for subcontractors?

Amendment 0002 removes the requirement in Volume IV to provide subcontractor sealed packages. Future task orders or task order modifications may require the submission of certified cost or pricing data, which could include subcontractor sealed packages.

185 Solicitation, Section L

L4 L4.1 41 If subcontractor sealed packages are required, what is the required method of submission? OBE See #198

186 Atch 4 LREC 4 4 24 What is the current manning architecture for the LREC program? The Joint School (SOFTS) has management staff and instructors

- Each component has a school with management and instructors

- Each O-6 level has a Command Language Program with management and instructors. This includes operational commands and TSOCs.

187 Attachment 4 Rev.1 - LREC

SOW

(subfactor 1.2)

2 2.2.11 5 Request clarify the number of required LREC Coordinators. Amendment 0002 adds a list to the SOW (Appendix A)

188 Attachment 4 Rev.1 - LREC

SOW

(subfactor 1.2)

3 3.7.8 21 Request identify the locations and number of required instructors. Amendment 0002 adds a list to the SOW (Appendix A)

189 Atch 8b Pricing

ST2 &

ST3

CPFF

Tab

Cell H8 N/A Cell H8 "ST2 Fixed Fee has 10%. Is this a typographical error? Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template.

190 Atch 8b Pricing

Tab ST2

& ST3

CPFF

Can the contractor modify the Excel templates to accommodate their Cost Accounting system (e.g. add a row for the fringe pool costs)?

Amendment 0002 revises the pricing template.