Attachment_2_-_Industry_Day_Slides.pdf

U.S. Army Special Operations Command

ARSOF Training Support H92239-19-R-0002

Industry Day 27 March 2019

Agenda

Welcome

– Barbara Bowles, Director of Contracting

Requirement Overview

– LTC Seth Wheeler, DCO, 1st SWTG(A)

Solicitation Summary

– Gail Williams, Contracting Officer

Q&A

– Carrie Nelson, Contract Specialist

Briefers

ARSOF Training Support – H92239-19-R-0002

USASOC Contracting

Mrs. Gail Williams, Contracting Officer Mrs. Carrie Nelson, Contract Specialist

Subject Matter Experts

LTC Seth Wheeler MAJ Aleksander Null

MAJ Chris Lewis Mr. Steve Davidson Mr. Kevin Streets

1st SPECIAL WARFARE TRAINING GROUP(A) U.S. Army John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center and School

1st SWTG Overview Brief

Briefer:

Type of Brief:

Date:

Version:

Command Group Information

27 MAR 2019

The overall classification of this handout is: UNCLASSIFIED

1st Special Warfare Training Group (Airborne)

Provide USASOC the capability to conduct worldwide Special Operations.

Mission Assess, Select, Train, and Qualify U.S. Army Civil

Affairs, Psychological Operations, and Special Forces Soldiers and execute advanced tactical and special activities training in order to provide USASOC the capability to conduct worldwide Special Operations.

UNCLASSIFIED

1st SWTG(A) Task Organization

1st SWTG(A)

2ND BATTALIONMilitary Free Fall School SF Underwater Operations School SF Adv. Recon, Target Analysis &

Exploitation Techniques Course Special Forces Sniper Course

1ST BATTALION ARSOF Assessment & Selection Small Unit Tactics (SUT) & Survival (SERE) SF Detachment Commander Course (18A) UW Culmination Exercise (ROBIN SAGE)

6TH BATTALION 18F-SF Intelligence SGT Course (SFISC) Advanced Intelligence Courses

5TH BATTALION PO Qualification Course MISO Planning Course MILDEC Planning Course

3RD BATTALION CA Qualification Course

Out of Training (OT) Soldiers Company Maintenance & Transportation Company Riggers / Joint Armament Facility

SPT BATTALION Forward Support Company (Camp Mackall) Foreign Weapons Course (SFAB) Joint Armament Facility (JAF)

4TH BATTALION SFQC Administration SF Weapons Sergeant Course (18B) SF Engineer Sergeant Course (18C) SF Communication Sergeant Course (18E)

TRAINING REQUIREMENTS

Over 2,900 Personnel (Mil/Civ/Contractors)

Support 3,600 U.S. Students & 69 Allied Students Daily

TRAINING OUTPUTS

Trained over 13,316 students in 96 Programs of Instruction

Graduated: 337 SF; 66 CA; 162 PO Personnel

Graduated: 4119 Advanced Course Students

RANGE 37, NC

SNIPER | SFARTAETC

CAMP MACKALL, NC

ASSESSMENT & SELECTION |

QUALIFICATION COURSES |

SERE

FORT BRAGG, NC

SWCS HQ | LANGUAGE

REG STUDIES | SOF MEDICS

JB LEWIS-McCHORD, WA

ASOT | ASOM

YUMA PROVING GROUNDS, AZ

MILITARY FREE FALL

KEY WEST, FL

COMBAT DIVER

CAMP DAWSON, WV

ADVANCED TECHNICAL

TECHNOLOGY

FORT KNOX, KY

ADVANCED MARKSMANSHIP

Training Locations

ROLES:

KLE (US, Foreign, Civilian, Military)

US Country Team

Partner force

Guerrilla Chief

Resistance members (Guerrilla, Auxiliary, Underground)

Media

Civilians

OPFOR

Contract Footprint

UNCLASSIFIED

CMK

A&S

SUT

SERE

SLUSS-TILLER

BLACK KNIGHT

FBNC

AIT

18A MOS

PO MOS

RG 37

ROBIN SAGE

SF CA PO

Role Players

A&S (Officer)

SFQC:

SUT

SERE

18A MOS

ROBIN SAGE

AIT

A&S

CAQC:

SLUSS-TILLER

AIT

A&S

POQC:

MOS

BLACK KNIGHT

ESC ENG Support Construction Maintenance

14 pax CMK 12 pax Range 37

Sample Training Schedule

Examples of Multiple Overlapping Requirements

Conclusion

Mrs. Gail Williams Contracting Officer

The solicitation was issued 13 March 2019 and currently scheduled to close on 12 April 2019 @ 12:00 PM EST. Please note that it is each Offeror’s responsibility to monitor the FedBizOpps website, www.fbo.gov, and acknowledge all amendments.

This is a 100% Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business (SDVOSB) competitive, best value trade-off selection. The Government will perform an integrated assessment using the evaluation factors described in the solicitation.

The applicable NAICS code is 611519, “Other Technical and Trade Schools”, which includes “Specialized Military Training”, with a size standard of $15M. A NAICS code appeal has been received and results will be announced separately.

The Government will award a single award, Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contract resulting from this solicitation, with a guaranteed minimum of one (1) task order to provide annual full-time support during the base ordering period.

Annual Full Time Support. The sub-Contract Line Item Numbers associated with CLINs 0002, 1002, 2002, 3002, and 4002 are to provide the following Full-Time support:

Training Management Office Supervisor Pineland Area Managers (North & South) Pineland Lane Managers Exercise Support Cell Manager Two (2) Exercise Support Cell Teams – Camp Mackall & Range 37 Logistics Specialist Weapons Specialist – Range 37

Course Support. The sub-Contract Line Item Numbers associated with CLINs 0003, 1003, 2003, 3003, and 4003 are to provide the following course support:

◦ Guerilla Chiefs

◦ Role Players (Opposing Forces, Guerilla, Host Nation, Cultural, Ambassador)

◦ Log Runners / Drivers

◦ Point Sitters

◦ Outstation Communication Support

◦ Site Managers

◦ Observer Controllers

Intermittent course support is priced hourly and daily based on role. Prices are established on the contract to provide a basis for pricing future fixed-price task orders. Daily rates are based on 12-hour workdays.

Training Facility. The Contract Line Item Numbers associated with CLINs 0004, 1004, 2004, 3004, and 4004 are currently RESERVED as the Government is working on establishing a Memorandum of Agreement to provide the Training Facilities.

Future Growth. The Contract Line Item Numbers associated with CLINs 0005, 1005, 2005, 3005, and 4005 are established to provide for over and above support for future validated requirements up to the ceiling amount of $200 million.

ECMRA. The Contract Line Item Numbers associated with CLINs 0006, 1006, 2006, 3006, and 4006 are provided for the Contractor to separately price out its’ Manpower Reporting requirements, if required.

Performance will initiate with a phase-in period of 30 days to allow for an orderly contract transition.

Full performance will follow with an 11-month base ordering period, and four (4) 12-month ordering periods.

Traditional annual options will not be included and the guaranteed minimum will be met in the base ordering period.

Ordering Procedures:

Firm Fixed Price (FFP) task orders will be issued against this IDIQ contract.

For course support CLINS, the Government will provide the contractor a statement of objectives a minimum of 30-days prior to each training exercise that will result in a fixed price task order for that support.

A record of task orders will be maintained to ensure the contract ceiling of $200M, which includes any over and above CLIN amounts added, is not exceeded.

Proposal Organization and Format

The proposal shall consist of the following four (4) volumes:

◦ Volume I – Qualifying Criteria & OCI Mitigation (if applicable)

◦ Volume II – Technical Capability Subfactor 1 – Program Management/Staffing Subfactor 2 – Technical Understanding Subfactor 3 – Corporate Competencies

◦ Volume III - Past Performance

◦ Volume IV - Price

Basis for Award - This is a competitive, best value trade-off selection that will be conducted in accordance with (IAW) with FAR 15 and as supplemented by the DFARS and the

SOFARS.

This may result in an award being made to the higher rated, potentially higher priced offeror(s) where the decision is consistent with the evaluation factors. The Government will award a contract resulting from this solicitation to the responsible offeror whose offer conforming to the solicitation will be most advantageous to the Government, price and other factors considered.

• NOTE. The Government will conduct a trade-off of all proposals remaining in the competitive range. The Best Value Tradeoff Analysis gives the agency the ability to weigh proposal costs and benefits and award the contract to the offeror that will provide the “best value” to government. The trade-off may result in award to a higher rated proposal at a reasonably higher price or to other than the highest rated proposal at a potentially lower price.

Q & A Mrs. Carrie Nelson

QUESTION: Would the government clarify if margins can be ¾ or 1 inch on the sides?

RESPONSE: ¾ on the sides

QUESTION: Would the government clarify how many protected and unprotected CDs they would like that would add up to the total number of requested Digital CDs for Volume 1 Qualifying Criteria and Volume II Technical Capability referenced in Table 2.1.2?

RESPONSE: 5 protected, 1 unprotected

QUESTION: Would the government clarify if they would also like a protected version of Volume III Past performance?

RESPONSE: No, not required.

QUESTION: Would the government clarify if the protected version or unprotected version is the “original” copy?

RESPONSE: The unprotected version shall be the “original”.

QUESTION: Will the government please clarify what is meant by “A cover sheet should be bound to each CD…” Does the government intend to mean a label affixed to each CD with the required information? Or does the government mean that a digital cover sheet should be included in the digital copies?

RESPONSE: Each CD shall be labeled respectively.

QUESTION: Due to the complexity of this requirement and the 59 pages of PWS we request that the government please increase the page count from 25 pages to 75 pages?

RESPONSE: Revised to increase the page count from 25 to 35.

QUESTION: The offeror shall submit a Past Performance Proposal (Volume 3) containing the following: TAB A, TAB B, TAB 3, and TAB 4. Will the government specify the tab labels consistently for clarity, either all letters or all numbers?

RESPONSE: Revised for consistency.

QUESTION: Are there requirements for 5.6 missing or is the PWS mis-numbered?

RESPONSE: Section 5.6 added and marked as RESERVED.

QUESTION: There is no DD 254 attached. Will the government please provide the

DD 254?

RESPONSE: Technical Exhibit 5, DoD Contract Security Classification Specification (DD 254) will be uploaded and attached with Amendment 0001 within the FedBizOpps website.

REFERENCE: RFP, para. 2.2.1.2., Facility Clearance

QUESTION: What are way(s) that we can provide explicit assurances of our ability to obtain a Secret Facility Clearance as accredited by the Defense Security Service?

RESPONSE: By clearly articulating the detailed steps taken to obtain a Secret Facility Clearance as accredited by the Defense Security Service prior to the start of the phase-in period, along with a good-faith estimate of the date the prime offeror expects to receive the Facility Clearance and supporting facts of their good-faith estimate.

QUESTION: To reduce Phase-In risk to the government and ensure continuity of operations, we request the page count be increased by 5-10 pages allowing for 11x17 inch foldouts providing a detailed phase in plan by day and task demonstrating the methodology for transition.

RESPONSE: The Technical Capability Volume Revised to increase the page count from 25 to 35.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 156, para. 2.2.3.2., Past Performance Sheets Our question regarding the Past Performance language specifically focusing on the following text:

"Submit information on contracts considered most recent and relevant in demonstrating the ability to perform the proposed effort. The offeror shall submit a maximum of five (5) and a minimum of three (3) Performance Information Sheets identifying active or completed contracts, either Government or commercial, for each prime“

QUESTION: Is the Government stating that the Offeror shall submit a maximum of five

(5) and a minimum of three (3) {sic} Performance Information Sheets for Prime Contracts that the Offeror is or has performed on over the past 3 years? Or is the Government requiring that the Prime Offeror shall submit a maximum of five (5) and a minimum of three (3) {sic} Performance Information Sheets on contracts either as a Prime or Subcontractor that the Offeror is or has performed on over the past 3 years?

RESPONSE: Refer to the RFP, Section L, para. 2.2.3.5., as “recency” is defined as an action within the past three (3) years.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 95, para. 2.1.19. Local Travel // 5.4.5 Language / Cultural Qualification

No Travel CLIN - Based on individuals / SMEs coming from distant locations to support the execution of ARSOF Training Support Contract.

QUESTION: Will the Government provide a travel CLIN to cover minimal travel costs?

RESPONSE: A travel CLIN will not be included in the contract.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 99, para. 5.8.10 Exercise and Pineland Area Management // 5.8.11.1

QUESTION: Does the government intend to create a CLIN for discretionary funds to maintain and support the auxiliary network within Pineland and continuing area development?

RESPONSE: All funds associated with operations, maintenance, and support of the Pineland area will be managed by Government personnel.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 99, para. 5.8.10 Exercise and Pineland Area Management // 5.8.11.1

QUESTION: What role does the area/lane manager play in developing a Realistic Military Training (RMT) package?

RESPONSE: Development of the RMT package is the responsibility of the training company Commander. Contract personnel may be called upon to provide information for the package.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 101, para. 5.8.11.7

QUESTION: Will the government provide current Area Manager Book, G Chief Book, Adjunct Role Player Book, and Land Use Agreement Book?

RESPONSE: Yes, all exercise and operational support documents will be provided upon contract award.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 100, para. 5.8.11.

QUESTION: Is the government going to provide transportation/fuel to maintain the area development within Pineland?

RESPONSE: Yes.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 101, para. 5.8.11.

QUESTION: For role player support while in field conditions, is the government going to provide food, water, other substance for health and welfare of personnel operating?

RESPONSE: Contract personnel must provide their own rations during the exercise. Government provides potable water and personal hygiene facilities (porta-pottys) at the exercise site.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 124, Civil Affairs (CA)

QUESTION: Can the Government specify the specific number of weapons by type and ammunition by type required by the contractor to support this effort. IE. 6 small arms weapons AK47 or other variation, with approximately 2520 blanks, and an appropriate number of associated magazines.

RESPONSE: Revised Enclosure 11 to remove any weapons to be provided by the Contractor, as the Government will provide all weapons and ammunitions.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 86, GOVERNMENT FURNISHED ITEMS AND

SERVICES

QUESTION: Can the Government, provide the required personal protective equipment (PPE) that the contractor will provide vs what the Government is providing?

RESPONSE: Revised to add “ear” protection to be provided by the Contractor.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 82, para. 2.1.18, and page 147, para. 5652.237-9001(a)

Quote: When proposed key personnel resumes are used as an evaluation factor in best value procurement, a letter of commitment may be required from the individual whose resume is provided.

Quote: Such personnel are defined as "Key Personnel" and are those persons whose resumes were submitted for evaluation of the proposal.

QUESTION: Sections C and I imply resumes and letters of commitment for key personnel are to be submitted with the proposal yet Section L and Section M do not provide instructions on the submission or evaluation of resumes and letters of commitment. Does the government require resumes and letters of commitment on proposed key personnel to be submitted with the proposal?

RESPONSE: Revised to require Resumes and Commitment Letters for Key Personnel.

REFERENCE: RFP, Section C.4.3.

QUESTION: Will the government eliminate or broaden the specific requirements, features and the 15 mile radius of the described training facility located near Camp MacKall as this will limit the number of compliant?

RESPONSE: There is no change to the Government’s stated requirement.

REFERENCE: RFP, Section C.1.6.9

QUESTION: Will the government consider authorizing the subcontractor to hold the valid facility clearance in place of the SB Prime?

RESPONSE: No, the prime contractor is responsible for the stated security requirements.

REFERENCE: RFP, Section L, Table 2.1.2 page 133 & Section L, para 2.2.3 page 135

The government states Vol III has a page count limit of 20. However, Section L, para 2.2.3.2. states the " offeror shall submit a maximum of five (5) and a minimum of three (3) Performance Information Sheets identifying active or completed contracts, either Government or commercial, for each prime, and a maximum of five (5) and a minimum of one (1) Past Performance Information Sheet for each major subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture". If a Prime offeror submits the maximum of 5 PPIS at 5 Pages (totaling 25 pages), this leaves no room for subs PPIS (potentially 25 more pages of PPIS per sub) or a summary page (TAB B).

Recommend Vol III remove total page limit, but maintain the Past Performance Information Sheets page limits as described in section L, para 2.2.3.2 (5 pages per) and apply a page limit to Tab B Summary Page.

QUESTION: Will the government increase the page limit on Vol III to equal potential eligible PPIS quantities allowed or delete total page limitation completely?

RESPONSE: Revised to increase the page count from 20 to 55, and apply a 5-page limit to the Summary Page.

REFERENCE: RFP, Section B Recommend the Government provide a plug-in amount or an estimated percentage increase in costs for "Over and Above" CLINs 0005, 1005, 2005, 3005, and 4005.

QUESTION: What Other Direct Costs should we assume in order to price the "Over and Above" CLINs 0005, 1005, 2005, 3005, and 4005?

Duplicate Question:

QUESTION: CLIN 0005 describes work to be performed over and above the FFP but does not define a requirement. Would the Government consider making this a Reserved CLIN to be negotiated at the task order level?

RESPONSE: Revised to RESERVE CLINs X005 to be negotiated at the task order level.

REFERENCE: RFP, Section L, Table 2.2.2 page 153

Recommend providing a standardized Pricing Worksheet. This will allow the Government a more even price comparison amongst competitors.

QUESTION: Will the Government provide a MS Excel Pricing Worksheet?

RESPONSE: No, the Offeror is responsible for the development of their own pricing spreadsheet.

QUESTION: Do Outstation Communications Support personnel need to have a SECRET clearance?

RESPONSE: Yes, Outstation Communications Support personnel need to have a SECRET clearance.

QUESTION: Do Observer/Controller with ASOT Level III personnel need SECRET clearance?

RESPONSE: IAW RFP, Section C, PWS, para. 1.6.16.4., personnel performing Observer/Controller duties require a SECRET clearance.

QUESTION: Do interpreter personnel need SECRET clearance?

RESPONSE: No, Interpreter personnel do not require a SECRET clearance.

QUESTION: Do the Pineland Area and Lane Manager positions require Secret clearances?

RESPONSE: Yes, both positions require a SECRET clearance.

QUESTION: Due to the high number of specialized non-key personnel such as Ambassadors, Observer/ Controllers, and G-Chiefs required to perform successfully on this contract within a short period of time, we request the government please require the offeror to provide a table identifying by name and position all non-key personnel an offeror has on their bench and their relevant knowledge, skills, and abilities?

QUESTION: Can the government please require the offeror to demonstrate their knowledge of the ARSOF requirement by listing all the props and equipment required to support this contract as part of their response in the technical understanding section of the technical capability volume?

QUESTION: Will the government require the offeror show how they have surged to a capacity of up to 500 support personnel to meet surge requirements?

RESPONSE: Each prospective vendor is encouraged to provide as much pertinent information as possible in the proposal that will allow the Government to fairly evaluate each proposal.

REFERENCES: PWS 1.6.20., page 76, Technical Exhibit 7: Estimated Workload Data, page 111, Section I, 5652.237-9001 Key Personnel Requirements, page 147, and PWS 1.6.21-1.6.21.6, page 77

QUESTION: What positions are designated as Key Personnel? Sections within the RFP write to Key Personnel differently or ambiguously.

RESPONSE: Each area was revised to synchronize each reference of Key Personnel to reflect the following:

Program Manager Training Management Office Supervisor Alternate Program Manager Exercise Support Cell Manager Site Managers Logistics Specialist – Camp Mackall Pineland Area Managers Weapons Specialist – Range 37 Pineland Lane Managers

REFERENCE: RFP, PWS 5.2.4.1, page 92 TMO Management. Contractor shall provide one (1) full time equivalent TMO Supervisor. The TMO Supervisor will be responsible for all personnel that support the CTE in the TMO. The TMO Supervisor will be responsible for synchronizing training support as requested by lower units and assisting military personnel in developing future training plans.

QUESTION: What are the qualifications for this position? Is the TMO Supervisor considered Key Personnel? Are the terms “Program Manager (PM)” and “TMO Supervisor” being used interchangeably? Is the PM dual-hatted as TMO Supervisor?

RESPONSE: See Amendment 0001, H92239-19-R-0002: Section C, PWS, Section 1.6.20, Section C, PWS, Section 1.6.21., and Section I, SOFARS Clause 5652.237-9001. No, the TMO Supervisor and Program Manager terms are not used interchangeably. Whether the PM and TMO Manager positions are dual-hatted will be based on the Offeror’s approach.

REFERENCE: RFP, Section L.2.2.4.3.1, page 158 TAB A –Price Schedule. The pricing schedule in Section 1 of the RFP shall be submitted fully completed, including pricing on all Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs) identified. For each CLIN, the Offeror shall indicate the CLIN unit price and the resulting CLIN amount. The Offeror shall include other than cost and pricing data. All formulas, lookup tables, and links should be intact, and no links should exist to files not included with the proposal. Spreadsheets shall not contain hidden worksheets. The Offeror shall include totals for the base period (to include phase-in), each option, and overall total.

QUESTION: Can the Government please clarify what specific data is to be provided as part of “other than cost and pricing data”?

RESPONSE: Refer to RFP, Section L, 2.2.4.3.2., which states Offerors shall discuss the basis of price in terms of staffing proposed for the PWS (to include applicable task/service areas, rate determination methodology, productive work year, and number of Full Time Equivalents (FTEs)) for each performance period.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 68, para. 1.6.7

Quote: Due to these variations, contracted exercise support should be contracted on a daily basis in order to minimize costs.

QUESTION: Is the government encouraging the employment of 1099’s or independent contractors?

RESPONSE: Type of employment is to be determined by the Offeror.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 70, para. 1.6.12.9 & 1.6.12.9.1 Quote: All Contractor employees working IA/IT functions must comply with DoD, Army, USSOCOM and USASOC training requirements in DODD 8570.01, DoD 8570.01-M, AR 25-2 and published USSOCOM and USASOC requirements within 180 calendar days of employment.

Quote: Contractor employees supporting IA/IT functions shall be appropriately certified upon contract award.

QUESTION: The requirement in paragraph 1.6.12.9 (within 180 calendar days) seems to conflict with requirement in paragraph 1.6.12.9.1 (upon contract award). Will the government please clarify the requirement?

Duplicate Question:

QUESTION: Shouldn’t this requirement be for all contractor employees supporting IA/IT functions to be appropriately certified prior to start of performance on this contract?

RESPONSE: Revised, as no contractors will perform IA/IT functions under this contract.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 77, para. 1.6.21.1

Quote: Shall have a Special Forces background as a Command Sergeant Major or higher with a minimum total of 15 years of military/professional experience in program management related positions including at least five (5) years of experience as a program manager managing a contractor workforce in support of a USASOC contract of comparable size, scope, and complexity.

QUESTION: Several aspects of this requirement are overly restrictive, preventing the candidacy of some very talented individuals. For example, a Sergeant Major who has experience working in a Brigade (SF Group) 3 shop or higher should have the experience needed. Would the government consider changing the requirement to “Shall have a Special Forces background as a Sergeant Major or higher…”?

RESPONSE: Revised to remove “as a Command Sergeant Major or higher” from the qualification requirement.

QUESTION: Can the government please require the CORs contact information, for substantiated claims made in the Corporate Competencies Section, to verify such claims?

RESPONSE: The Government does not require COR contact information to verify corporate competencies.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 77, para. 1.6.21.1

Quote: Shall have a Special Forces background as a Command Sergeant Major or higher with a minimum total of 15 years of military/professional experience in program management related positions including at least five (5) years of experience as a program manager managing a contractor workforce in support of a USASOC contract of comparable size, scope, and complexity.

QUESTION: A: Several aspects of this requirement are overly restrictive, preventing the candidacy of some very talented individuals. For example, at least five (5) years of experience as a program manager managing a contractor workforce in support of a USASOC contract of comparable size, scope, and complexity. How many USASOC contracts are there of comparable size, scope, and complexity?

B: Would the government consider changing the requirement to “at least five (5) years of experience as a program manager managing a contractor workforce in support of a contract of comparable size, scope, and complexity”?

RESPONSE: Revised to replace “USASOC” with “DoD”.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 157, para. 2.2.3.4

Quote: “Offerors are required to complete and send questionnaires with a cover letter and Technical Exhibit 6”

QUESTION: Will the government provide a standardized cover letter for transmission of the questionnaires?

RESPONSE: No, the appropriate cover letter is to be determined by the Offeror.

QUESTION: Question: Are the Pineland Supervisors in Paragraph 5.2.4.2 the Pineland Area Managers referenced throughout the rest of the RFP? If so, will the government please edit section 5.2.4.2 to use the same terminology?

QUESTION: Are the Pineland AO Managers in Paragraph 5.2.4.2 the Pineland Lane Managers referenced throughout the rest of the RFP? If so, will the government please edit section 5.2.4.2 to use the same terminology?

RESPONSE: The terminology at Section 5.2.4.2. has been updated for consistency throughout the solicitation.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 76, para. 1.6.20.2

Quote: Site Manager will normally not serve in a role player capacity except in the case of the CULEX Robin Sage where the Guerrilla Chief (G-Chief) role player will execute Site Manager's duties for each of the base camp training sites.

QUESTION: This statement leads in with the “Site Manager will not normally serve in a role player capacity except” leaving the impression that the Site Manager WILL serve in a role player capacity in the exception. However, the statement continues by stating the G-Chief role player will execute Site Manager duties, which is not an exception to the Site Manager not serving in a role player capacity. Is this statement intended to say the G-Chief role player will execute Site Manager's duties for each of the base camp training sites during CULEX Robin Sage and that the Site Manager will act as one of the G-Chiefs? Please clarify this statement.

RESPONSE: The G-Chief is considered a Site Manager and is expected to supervise the other role players in the Guerrilla Base Camp.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 76, para. 1.6.20.3., page 92, para. 5.2.4.3.2.

Quote: The Contractor shall provide an Exercise Support Cell Manager Quote: one (1) full time Support Element Manager at Camp Mackall

QUESTION: Is the Support Element Manager in this paragraph the same individual as the Exercise Support Cell Manager elsewhere in the RFP? If so, will the government please update this paragraph to keep the terminology consistent?

RESPONSE: Yes, this cite references the same individual and has been revised for consistency.

REFERENCE: RFP, page 76, para. 1.6.20.3., page 77, para. 1.6.21.6, & page 92, para.

5.2.4.3.2.

Quote: …provide an Exercise Support Cell Manager that will supervise the … Camp Mackall Logistics Specialist…

Quote: Logistics Specialist Qualifications

Quote: The Contractor shall not exceed manpower support of: …one (1) full time Warehouse Manager at Camp Mackall…

QUESTION: Is the Warehouse Manager in this paragraph the same individual as the Logistics Specialist elsewhere in the RFP? If so, will the government please update this paragraph to keep the terminology consistent?

RESPONSE: Yes, this cite references the same individual and has been revised for consistency.

U.S. Army Special Operations Command DCS, Contracting

Thank you for your participation!