HDTRA1-20-R-0005 Draft RFP Questions and Answers PA.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 57 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- HDTRA1-20-R0005_
- Issued by
-
Defense Threat Reduction Agency
About this file
This document provides answers to questions regarding a draft request for proposals from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency for scientific and technical subject matter expert advisory and assistance services. Key details include that the agency intends to release the final RFP following an opportunity for questions and answers, with proposals due 45-60 days after release. The services required include scientific and technical expertise across six departments and over ten technical areas to support various counter weapons of mass destruction missions. Offerors must demonstrate capability to effectively manage requirements and transition support services with no degradation. The document clarifies requirements around facilities, security clearances, past performance references, evaluation criteria, and seating arrangements at agency locations.
View the file
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Question and Comment Template
| Reference | Question Category | Question |
| dRFP; Section L, Table L.1.2 | Technical | In the Section L.1.2 table, the government mentions an Incoming Management Plan. Request the Government please provide instructions? |
| dRFP; Section L.3.3.3, Sub-factor B: Technical Approach | Technical | Can the government please provide instructions for the Sub-factor B: Technical Approach? |
| dRFP, PWS, Section 5.3 | Technical | The PWS goes from section 5.2 "Scientific and Technical Expertise" to 5.4 "Requirements Analysis Support". Can the Government please clarify whether there should be a section 5.3? |
| DD254 | Contract | DD254 states level of safeguarding is secret; however, SOW 9.0 states, The facility(s) shall include those associated infrastructure components necessary to manage and technically support the RD conference room/meeting activities. This includes reception, visitor control, security, audio-visual equipment, office space for resident support staff, a hoteling area, mothers’ room, restroom facilities, Top Secret storage, receiving/storage area, and free parking. |
Question: Does the offeror need to have Secret or Top Secret storage at their facility? Is the requirement at award or is it required within the first year after contract award given most new facilities need to be inspected by DSS prior to receiving storage facility approval?
Attachment L-3 Sample Resumes Technical First Job Description, Principal Research Engineering/Physicist Question: Will the Government provide the required clearance for this position and the required work location?
| L.3.2 Volume Organization | Technical | The Matrix under L.1.2 notes an Executive Summary, 2 pages; however, this section does not list an Executive Summary. Is an Executive Summary required? |
| General Comment | Contract | Recommend the government release the RFPs on a staggered schedule 30 days apart rather than at the same time. This will allow contractors to optimize resources. |
| General Comment | Contract | Recommend bidders be provided 45 days from rfp release to required submittal. |
| Challenge Tasks | Technical | Will the government please clarify if bidders will be required to respond to multiple sample challenge tasks within the 20 pages allotted? |
| L.4.3 | Technical | Please clarify that the maximum number of past performance references to be provided by the prime and subcontractors combined is eight (8). |
| H, Clause 252.204-9006 | Technical | Clause states "DTRA Will allocate xxx (number of )work spaces… Section L 6.6 states that 27 spaces are available at DTRC. Will the Government clarify number of spaces available for SME at DTRC? |
| H.3.d | Technical | States "A copy of the agreement (ACA) will be provided to the contracting officer for review before execution of the contract by the cooperating contractors." This implies that the KO will review to determine that the ACA is sufficient to "achieve integration and prevent unnecessary duplication of effort." |
– What criteria will the KO use to determine if the level of integration is sufficient?
– What actions will be taken if the KO determines that the ACA does not provide a sufficient level of integration?
– What avenues of adjudication are available if there are disputes?
– Can the govt. provide specifics regarding what has to be included in the ACA - more specifics about facility requirement.
– How should costs associated with ACA be priced?
| H.3.d | Contract | Incorrect formatting - There are two d's in this section |
| H.3.d (6) | Technical | States permit access to contractor facilities. What level of access is required to be provided? For how many? Is there a requirement to provide equipment/resources? |
| L.1.1.1 | Technical | Section L.1.1.1 instructs offerors to submit questions via email and to include in the subject line "Questions Concerning HDTRA1-20-R-0002". Should this be revised to reflect solicition number HDTRA1-20-R-0005 as indicated on the SF 33? |
| L.1.2 | Technical | Section L.1.2 provides 30 pages in the Technical Volume to address the M.2.2.2 evaluation criteria to "effectively manage and meet the requirements of the contract". The PWS covers efforts across six Departments and in over 10 distinct technical areas. Will the Government increase the page count to at least 50 pages to allow the proposer to address each of the PWS areas appropriately to support better evaluation of meeting the requirements by the government? |
| L.1.2 (Table); L.3.3.3.1.3 | Technical | Vol. II, Sub-Factor B - Technical Approach, sub-bullet Sample Challenge/Task, has a page limit of 20 pages. L.3.3.3.1.3 Sample Challenge Task indicates that there will be two Technical Challenges. Does the 20 page limit of Table L.1.2 apply to each Sample Challenge, i.e. 20 pages for each Task for a total of 40 pages, or is that a total of 20 pages for both Tasks? |
| L.1.3.5.1 | Technical | Page size is designated as 8.5 X 11 inches. Will the Government allow the use of fold-out pages (11 X 17 inches) for large tables and graphics? |
| L.1.3.9; L.6.6.1 | Technical | L.1.3.9 states "Offerors shall differentiate the Operations and Maintenance costs from the Research and Development." L.6.6.1 does not provide for an O&M CLIN. Does the government intend to provide O&M funding for this contract and if so what will be the CLIN designation? |
| L.3.3.2.1 Information Technology (IT) Requirement | Contract | Will the Government clarify that the IT requirements apply only to the contractor's proximate facility? |
| L.3.3.2.1 Facilities | Contract | Facilities. Does the Government intend to request shuttle service between the proximate facility and DTRC which would be available to the Government and contractors? |
| L.3.3.2.1 Facilities: | Contract | There is no requirement to provide office space/support to the PMO contract. Does the Government intend for the SME contractor to provide office facilities/space for the PMO A&AS personnel, and if so, for how many seats? Will the Government allow all associated costs in support of the PMO contract to be included with facility pricing? |
| L.3.3.2.1 Information Technology (IT) Requirement | Technical | Second sub-bullet is titled "SIPRNet Access to the DTRA Classified Network (SNET)" and requires "an approval to operate on the SIPRNet for the contractor’s facility". Access to and approval to operate on the SIPRNet does not provide access to the DTRA Classified Network (SNET). Does the Government intend to extend SNET connectivity to Offeror's facility in order to establish SNET access? |
| L.3.3.2.1; M.2.2.1 | Technical | Section L.3.3.2.1 - CBRNE WMD Expertise: Does the Government mean "accomplish the PWS" not "accomplish the SOO"? |
| L.3.3.3.1 | Contract | L 3.3.3.1 - Limiting Key Personnel to three does not provide the Government with an adequate understanding of how the offeror will "effectively implement the requirements of the contract PWS." Not requiring an Offeror to document their ability to provide key leaders and technical experts will increase the risk to both transition and execution. Will the Government increase Key Personnel to require that, as a minimum, the lead for each Department be considered Key and require that a resume be provided? |
| L.3.3.3.1 | Contract | RD A&AS, functioning as a "trusted agent" with the government must be able to successfully meet the requirements put forth in the PWS. Given that the "people are the product" not requesting a staffing plan will impact the ability of the governemt to determine if an offeror can effectively execute the contract, provide needed skills, experience and integration, and increase risk to both transition and execution. Will the Government include a requirement to provide a Staffing Plan to ensure that all offerors have sufficient understanding and capability to execute the PWS? |
| L.4.3 | Technical | Section L.4.3 allows past performance of up to 5 years old. The CWMD mission space is rapidly changing and has changed significantly over the last 5 years; corporate capabilities degrade significantly after 3 years. Will the Government reduce the limit to 3 years to more accurately evaluate a company's capability and past performance relevancy? |
| L.6.3.3 | Technical | L.6.3.3 states "The Government intends to provide up to 80 Notebook computers". This is inconsistent with the PWS 9.3 which states 139 DTRA-provided notebook computers. What is the correct number of government furnished notebook computers? |
| L.6.3.3 | Technical | "The Government intends to provide up to 80 Notebook computers and applicable peripherals as described in the GFP Attachment." Are we to make the assumption the Government will provide one laptop per SME contractor? |
| L.6.3.3 | Contract | "The contractor will be responsible for printers, scanners and all other necessary peripheral devices necessary to operate the notebooks in the contractor’s facility." Does the term "all other peripheral devices include providing these devices for only SME contractors or both SME and PM? |
| L.6.4 | Contract | Section L.6.4 indicates the offeror shall complete a proposal adequacy checklist. In accordance with DFARS 215.408 (5) the checklist shall be requested when certified cost and pricing data is required. Given that competition is anticipated, can the Government confirm offerors are still required to include the checklist in their proposal submission? |
| L.6.6 | Contract | Government Estimates. States that 29 desk stations are available for SME contractors at DTRC, Albuquerque and Eglin AFB. However, it also states this is 32% of SME S&T seats. Request the Government clarify if they are indicating the SME seat requirement is 91? |
| L.6.6.1 | Contract | % S&T SME Seats - are we to assume that 27 represents 30% of the total SME required seats between all locations, to include the contractor facility? |
| L.6.6.1 | Contract | SME RFP Section L.6.6.1 & PMO RFP L.5.6.1: Estimated A&AS Workforce |
RFP designated A&AS Seating at DTRA ABQ site - 2 Total SME. PWS and Clearance estimates indicate the total workforce at DTRA ABQ will significantly exceed number of contractually designated seats. If the additional necessary seats are not available in the DTRA ABQ spaces where will the additional A&AS staff sit as there is no requirement for a contractor facility in Albuquerque (PWS 9.2)?
| L.6.6.1 | Technical | SME RFP Section L.6.6.1: Estimated A&AS Workforce states that 93% of RD-EC workforce will require TS/SCI with Counterintelligence Scope Poly (CSP). None of the current staff in EC with TS/SCI have CSP, all are SSBI; is this requirement accurate? |
| L.6.6.1 | Contract | L.6.6.1 states "For the Surge CLINs, use the fully burdened plug numbers, with no deviation,". The table provides a range of values for each Surge CLIN but not a single number to be used in pricing. Will the government provide a single value for each Surge CLIN to be used in pricing? |
| L.6.6.1 | Technical | Section L.6.6.1: Estimated A&AS Workforce, Table 1 range of values does not support the level of effort (FTE) that would be required to fully execute the PWS. Will the Government increase the range of values to provide for the additional staff need to execute the PWS? |
| L.6.6.2 | Technical | Estimated Workforce Security Clearances table shows a requirement for 14-18% of personnel to have a TS/SCI CSP clearance. This is a significant increase in requirements and will incur additional costs to the Government. Does the Government feel this is a valid requirement? |
| L.6.6; PWS 4.0; PWS 5.1 | Contract | Government Estimates. Estimated start date for pricing is given as 1 Nov 2020, However, the PWS (4.0) states the tranistion is a minimum 120 days before contract start on 7 April 2021 which would be January 7 2021. Will the Government deconflict the guidance in para 4.0 that states transition is 120 days? |
| M.2.2.2.2.3 | Technical | This paragraph is titled Sample Challenge Task. It appears to also include the definitions of several evaluation factors and ratings. This last section should be applied to the entire M.2.2 Factor 1 - Mission Capability. Does the Government intend to insert a new section M.2.2.3 Evaluation Factors in order to indicate that it is applicable to the entire M.2.2 instead of M.2.2.2.2.3? |
| M.2.2.22 | Technical | Section M.2.2.22 The sample resumes evaluation does not adequately demonstrate a company's ability to recruit difficult CWMD technical skills by providing a sample resume that can be obtained of a current performer on the contract via Linked In or other means. A better measure of a company's strong ability to recruit in the CWMD domain would be identifying actual current employees that have similar knowledge, skills, ability, and expertise at the company as well as requesting recruiting statistics for the recent past (e.g. last 2 years). Will the Government require the submission of actual resumes with Letters of Commitment against the sample Job Descriptions provided? |
| M.2.3; L.4.3 | Technical | Section L.4.3 indicates that up to 5 past performances can be submitted, but does not specify a minimum number. Section M.2.3 does not indicate if proposals submitting more relevant past performances will be rated higher than those submitting fewer. In other words, with all other items being equal, will a proposal be scored higher or the same whether 3 or 5 past performances are submitted? |
| PWS 10.2 - 10.3 | Technical | PWS Section 10.2 and 10.3 are nearly identical. Will the Government confirm which version of the core Contractor Performance measures are correct? |
| PWS 4.0 | Technical | "Any question or issue regarding interaction with the PMO A&AS contractor should be brought to the attention of the contracting officer’s representative (COR)." Given that there is already a Contracting Officer approved ACA in place, what authorties will the COR have when issues regarding interaction are brought to their attention? |
| PWS 4.0 | Contract | 4.0 Scope states that "There is a planned minimum 120 day transition phase from contract award to program activity start date on 7 April 2021." Will the government authorized pre-contract costs in order to accomplish required transition activities prior to contract start date and if so how should those costs be identified in the Cost Volume? |
| PWS 4.1; PWS 5.2 | Contract | Section 4.1 Disciplines: Why is Systems Engineering in the PMO Contract instead of the SME Contract? Systems engineering is an interdisciplinary field of engineering and engineering management that focuses on how to design and manage complex systems over their life cycles. At its core, systems engineering utilizes systems thinking principles to organize this body of knowledge. The individual outcome of such efforts, an engineered system, can be defined as a combination of components that work in synergy to collectively perform a useful function. SE is a key S&T discipline for RD capability development. It is not a programmatic function. Several requirments of the SME PWS, for example paragraph 5.2 sub bullets 2 and 3, are clearly Systems Engieering functions/tasks/requirements. However, Systems Engineering is not a Discipline listed in paragraph 4.1 Disciplines. PMO PWS lists System Engineering as a Discipline but does not have requirements that would be addressed by System Engineers. Will the Government move Systems Engineering from the PMO PWS to the SME PWS to properly align the Discipline with the technical required tasks? |
| PWS 4.2 | Technical | Will the Government include the contractor facility as location in the place of performance? |
| PWS 5.1 | Technical | Section 5.1, bullet 1: Will the Government change the program start date to 7 Apr 21 vice 7 Apr 19? |
| PWS 5.11 | Technical | SME PWS Section 5.11, Bullet 1 - Many of these TT functions are no longer within DTRA mission (i.e. sub-bullet 7). Are these still valid? |
| PWS 5.11 | Technical | SME PWS Section 5.11, Bullet 1, sub-bullet 8 - Is this duty within TT? |
| PWS 5.1-5.5 | Technical | There are numerous CIED and CUAS tasks addressed. How will the PWS be updated if CIED/CUAS mission transitions to the Army based upon DWR? |
| PWS 5.2 | Technical | 5.2 states "The contractor shall provide scientific and technical expertise as defined in PWS 4.2". PWS 4.2 is "Place of Performance". What is the correct reference for the scientific and technical expertise required by this paragraph? |
| PWS 5.2; 5.4 | Technical | Paragraph 5.3 is missing. |
| PWS 5.7 | Contract | SME PWS Section 5.7, bullet 1 |
The text infers the SME A&AS will support the PMO A&AS. This contradicts stated guidance that they are in an associative relationship. Will the Government clarify the relationaship between the SME contractor and the PMO contractor?
| PWS 9.0 | Contract | PWS 9.0 Facilities states "The Facility(s) shall include…Top Secret storage…". Section L.2.7 requires "a TOP SECRET facility clearance at the corporate level…". Does the Government require that the proximate facility have Top Secret storage or can this requirement be met at the corporate level? |
| PWS 9.0 | Contract | Bullet 2 states "Technical and Scientific staff not otherwise provided work space in DTRA and other DoD offices and locations." Is there a requirement/expectation that this includes PMO contractors? How many? Whose responsibility will it be to provide resources for them? |
| PWS 9.0 | Contract | Facilities. States that all programmatic support and subject matter expertise personnel not physically located at DTRA NCR. Will the Government clarify if this directs all PMO contract personnel not physically located at DTRA NCR to be located at the SME proximal facility? |
| PWS 9.2 | Contract | 9.2 States "There is no requirement for establishing contractor facilities at DTRA locations inside or outside of Fort Belvoir." Please clarify this statement since para 9.0 describes a facility the SME contractor must provide within a 6 mile radius from DTRC building at Fort Belvoir. Is it's Governments intent to say that there is no requirement to establish contractor facilities other than the required proximate facility outside of Fort Belvoir? |
| PWS 9.3; L.6.3.3 | Technical | Facilities. Last bullet directs that 139 DTRA-provided notebook computers will be provided. Would DTRA confirm this number is correct given that the L.6.3.3 states that DTRA will provide 80 notebook computers? |
| Seciton K | Contract | The RFP includes FAR 52.222-56, Certification Regarding Trafficing in Persons Compliance Plan. Does the Government require a Plan to be submitted with the proposal? |
| Section- H.1.b; L.2.11.b | Contract | L.2.11 PREAWARD ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST (OCIs) AND OCI MITIGATION PLAN For the purpose of this requirement, Systems Engineering and Integration (SE&I) services performed in support of the RD Directorate are considered to be non-A&AS services, and are acquired under separate contract vehicles. The DTRA SE&I support service is defined as the contractor’s capability to integrate diverse and emerging technologies to meet customer needs with a verified product via a systems engineering process. Is it Government's intent to highlight that SE&I performance would be a conflict of interest? |
| L.6.6.1, Table 3; HDTRA1-20-R-0002 DD 254 | Contract | L.6.6.1 Estimated A&AS Workforce, Table 3, indicates that 14-18% of the workforce will requiree TS/SCI CSP clearances. Will the Government modify the contract DD-254 to address the requirement for TS/SCI CSP clearances? |
| L.2.4 | Contract | In paragraph L.2.4, Government Offices the instructions require the offeror to provide information for their DCMA and DCAA offices to include the prime contractor and major subcontractors. Can the Government define what constitutes a major subcontractor? |
| One-on-One meeting | Contract | Based on the feedback from Offerors during the One-on-One meetings with DTRA, there may be significant changes to the Final RFP that will impact the offeror's teaming strategy and technical approach. In the event there are significant changes will the Government consider providing a revised draft RFP prior to the release of the final? |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 PWS and L.6.6.1 | Technical | The PWS references RD-TT at least 8 times. Counter Improvised Threats (CIT) and Counter Threat Networks (CTN) are each mentioned over 25 times. Recent organizational announcements by DTRA indicate that the RD-TT organization is being dissolved and the majority of its functions are being transferred out of DTRA. Will the Government please review the language in the draft PWS against the organizational changes that are now taking place in DTRA and determine what magnitude and scope of support will actually be required in FY2021 and beyond? For instance, |
| · Will 43 Technical SME A&AS positions in Crystal City still be needed? If so, what functions will those SMEs perform and for which organization within RD? | ||
| · What CTN functions will remain within DTRA and approximately how many Technical SME A&AS personnel are required? What types of work will they be expected to perform in terms of the PWS Section 4 language? |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 L.6.6.1 | Technical | Will the Government please include a table analogous to that which appears in the RD PMO A&AS DRFP just prior to Section L.5.6.2. The table shows the number of FTEs by security clearance level by RD Department (e.g., CB, CX, NT, etc). |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 Draft L/M | Contract | Currently the Facility Plan is part of the evaluation criteria and strongly favors award to the incumbent due to the timelines associated with establishing the infrastructure necessary for classified meetings and work. These timelines are not under the full control of the proposing prime contractor. I.e., the prime is dependent on approval by Government entities such as DISA. Would the government consider removing the facility requirements from the evaluation criteria and leaving it as a performance requirement similar to security clearances |
| (L.3.3.2.1 and M.2.2.1) | ||
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 Draft L/M | Contract | If the Government chooses to leave the Facility requirement in Sections L and M, will DTRA please clarify that the 6-mile requirement applies to conference rooms only, as opposed to conference rooms and office space for offsite staff? If the limit includes office space for offsite staff, would Govt consider increasing the limit to 10 miles? |
| (L.3.3.2.1 and M.2.2.1) | ||
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 Draft M.2.3 | Contract | Will the Government clarify how Past Performance will be evaluated in a manner that does not favor large businesses? For example, large businesses have many more contracts of greater magnitude and broader scope than mid-size or small businesses. Can primes achieve a Substantial Confidence assessment by using a mix of five Past Performance references that collectively address scope and vary in magnitude from below the $17M to $27M range to well above it? |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 Draft L(L.5.0) | Contract | Re:”Offeror’s socio-economic commitment will be evaluated relative to meeting the Small Business and socioeconomic subcontracting requirement, based on total contract value, in the chart below” .In order for the prime to provide the government with the optimum team, would the Govt consider changing the socio-economic category small business goals to percentage of subcontracted revenue? |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 PWS and Draft L/M | Technical | Will the Government please post on the betaSAM website the slides that were presented by RD-CX, EC, NT, CB and other RD organizations at the first industry day? Access to these slides helps enable competition. |
| PWS Section 5.0 Task | Contract | The tasks discuss cooperation between PMO and S&T Contractor. Will there be a contractual relationship between the PMO A&AS contractor and the S&T A&AS contractor? |
| L.6.6.1 Estimated A&AS Workforce | Contract | What does % S&T SME Seats column mean in table on contractually agreed to A&AS seating at DTRA locations? |
| L.6.6.1 Estimated A&AS Workforce | Contract | Can the government provide additional information about the intent of the surge CLINs? Are they to provide a routine means to incrementally augment the A&AS workforce for special studies or emergent projects? Or will the government only execute as a whole? |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 Draft L/M L.4.3 | Contract | Will the Government please delete the last three sentences in L.4.3: “Task orders issued against Indefinite Delivery / Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts may be included as references. Each task order shall be counted as a separate reference. The base ID/IQ shall not be cited as a reference.” Rationale: Department-wide ID/IQs exist that are similar to the scope, magnitude and complexity described in this solicitation (HDTRA 1-20-R-0005). To exclude such ID/IQs from consideration as relevant Past Performance citations limits the ability of small and mid-sized businesses to compete with large primes. |
Section L.4.3 Contract Ensure DTRA has competition by broadening the past performance requirements related to magnitude.
· Current phrasing: Task orders issued against Indefinite Delivery / Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts may be included as references. Each task order shall be counted as a separate reference. The base ID/IQ shall not be cited as a reference.
· Alternative phrasing: Task orders issued against Indefinite Delivery / Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts may be included as references. One of the required Relevant Experience (Primary) Projects may, at the discretion of the Offeror, be a “Collection of Task Orders” awarded under a U.S. Federal Government SA-IDIQ contract or SA-BPA only. Under a single Project, all minimum requirements and scored evaluation criteria are based on the entire Task Order collection submitted as a whole. The base ID/IQ shall not be cited as a reference.
Section L.4.3 Contract Ensure DTRA has competition by limiting the number of past performance references which must meet the $17M-$27M magnitude standards for past performance for the SME RFP.
• Current phrasing: The offeror shall identify a maximum of five references for the prime offeror as well as a maximum of three references for other divisions, subcontractors, teaming contractors, or joint venture partners for which utilization is proposed. The references shall represent recent contracts/task orders* (within the past five years) that the Offeror considers most relevant in demonstrating the Offeror’s ability to perform the proposed effort. For each reference, the offeror shall provide a narrative describing the effort and the results of the Offeror’s performance. For each reference, the Offeror shall complete a Present and Past Performance Information Form (attachment L-1). For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining relevance, see Section M, Paragraph M.2.3, Factor 2: Past Performance.
• Alternative phrasing: The offeror shall identify a maximum of five references for the prime offeror as well as a maximum of three references for other divisions, subcontractors, teaming contractors, or joint venture partners for which utilization is proposed. Of these references, at least one reference from the prime offeror must meet the magnitude standard of $17M-$27M per year. The references shall represent recent contracts/task orders* (within the past five years) that the Offeror considers most relevant in demonstrating the Offeror’s ability to perform the proposed effort. For each reference, the offeror shall provide a narrative describing the effort and the results of the Offeror’s performance. For each reference, the Offeror shall complete a Present and Past Performance Information Form (attachment L-1). For a description of the characteristics or aspects the Government will consider in determining relevance, see Section M, Paragraph M.2.3, Factor 2: Past Performance.
Section M.2.3 • Current Phrasing: For magnitude, the cost per year for each referenced effort will be compared to the estimated cost per year for this effort (approximately $17-27M per year excluding surge options).
• Alternative phrasing: For magnitude, the cost per year for each referenced effort will be compared to the estimated cost per year for this effort (approximately $17-27M per year excluding surge options) for one primer offeror reference, which will be identified as the key reference. For remaining prime offeror references and subcontractor references, the cost per year will be compared to a value of approximately $8M-$16M.
Section M.2.3 Currently, scope, magnitude and complexity are equally weighted for evaluation. For non-primary past performance, We recommend that the government add weight to scoring scope and complexity over magnitude. Recommended changes “alternative version”.
Very Relevant - Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. ALTERNATIVE VERSION:
*Key present/past performance effort involved essentially the same scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
*Additional present/past efforts involved essentially the same scope and complexities this solicitation requires. Magnitude of effort involved is similar to the level this solicitation requires.
Relevant - Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires. ALTERNATIVE VERSION: *Key present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.
*Additional present/past performance effort involved similar scope and complexities this solicitation requires. Magnitude of effort involved some of the level this solicitation requires.
Contract Contract Recommend that parallel consideration be given to the PMO RFP. The small business size standard of $16.5M will limit the magnitude below the $25-34M range, but that scope and complexity are more relevant. Several companies that meet the $16.5M size standard, we believe DTRA will have significant competition for the contract.
| Contract | Regarding the selection of the NAICS code and size standard for the S&T SME procurement, given this procurement is smaller, would DTRA consider making it a small business set-aside? There is significant competition at the small business size with a number of companies which have the qualifications | |
| PWS | Contract | In reviewing the Section L&M and your statement in Section 5.1 of the ST SME PWS that “The contractor shall ensure a smooth transition of support services with no degradation in capabilities during transition”, it appears DTRA is placing an emphasis on continuity of operations. We also understand that issues with retaining personnel and recruiting new talent as well as obtaining clearances can cost the government time and money. Would DTRA be open to including a factor that focuses on retention of personnel as doing so will help lower the risk to the execution of the mission. |
| Section L | Contract | Similar to the question regarding retention, for the key personnel, it is noted that letters of commitment are required. Would the government also consider adding in there a signed contingent offer letter that states the salary, benefits, and current clearance level for that individual? |
| page 64 of “HDTRA1-20-R-0005 1-27-20” draft solicitation document: | Contract | a. Section 252.216-9000 LEVEL OF EFFORT (AUG 2010), page 12, the CLINs covering Contract Data Requirement List (CDRL) ending in “…003” are not included in the table. Is that because it is NSP? |
b. Section 252.215-7009 PROPOSAL ADEQUACY CHECKLIST (JAN 2014).
i. Is that exact checklist expected to be replicated within the response?
ii. Within which volume should the checklist be included and is there a particular location within that volume where it is expected?
iii. Does the checklist count towards the page count?
| PWS_1_22_20_TW changes” (Attachment 1) | Contract | Section 4.2 Place of Performance states: “At Crystal City, the contractor staffs using Government provided office space, shall support end-of-day security checks in DTRA workspaces, escort duties for trash and cleaning activities, burn bag duties and open and closure of the 6th floor suites, per DTRA Security standard operating procedures.: Given that the personnel may be moving, is the requirement still applicable and/or it is applicable until such time as the move occurs? |
| PWS_1_22_20_TW changes” (Attachment 1) | Technical | Section 5.1, Bullet 1: “7 April 2019” is used. |
| PWS_1_22_20_TW changes” (Attachment 1) | Contract | Section 9.0 Facilities, Section 9.1 indicates that “The contractor shall provide proximal facility(s) (not to exceed a 6-mile radius from the DTRC building at Fort Belvoir, VA) to support efforts that occur outside of DTRA facilities with a detailing of activities.” Section 9.2 indicates that “There is no requirement for establishing contractor facilities at DTRA locations inside or outside of Fort Belvoir.” We would like to confirm that such facilities are only for the S&T SME contract and cover all requirements within the bulleted section; e.g., a 75-person auditorium, five meeting spaces (minimum), 1 space with configurable seating for a minimum of 50 persons, etc.? |
| L.2.13 | Contract | SECTION 508 COMPLIANCE of both the SME and PMO Section LM ver 1-27-20_final to post documents, “Solicitation respondents must describe how their proposed information content deliverables meet at least those requirements identified as applicable in the attached L-5 Government Product/Service Accessibility Template (GPAT).” Is information regarding compliance with GPAT and 36CFR part 1194 Subpart B and C (Attachment L-5 and Attachment S-1) part of the Volume I response following the documents listed in paragraphs L.2.2 through L.2.6? |
| L.4.2 DESCRIPTION OF TEAM | Contract | Please confirm whether there is a template or particular format for the consent letter to be executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information. |
i. Does the letter need to identify from whom the adverse past performance was received?
ii. Or should this letter be a blanket, open letter for DTRA?
b. Please confirm whether you wish a letter confirming that there are no adverse past performance issues.
L.4.3 Contract PRESENT AND PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCES
a. Please confirm whether you will accept CPARS in lieu of or in addition to the past performance questionnaires (Attachment L-2).
b. Please confirm whether the Present and Past Performance Questionnaires should be returned in the word processing document format or whether pdf versions are acceptable.
L.5.0 Volume IV Contract SOCIO-ECONOMIC COMMITMENT requires a summary list of proposed subcontractor information and references Attachment S-1, calculation of Socioeconomic Commitment and a small business subcontracting plan. In Section L.6.1 GENERAL, the last sentence in paragraph 3 of that section states, “The Socio-Economic Commitment table required by L.5.0 is excepted from this provision and shall be included in Volume I”. Please confirm whether the Socio-Economic Commitment Table required by L.5.0 is to be included in Volume I, Volume IV, or both.
HSHQDN-17-Q-0007 - Attachment 5 Question/Comment Template
Section L
| Reference | Question Category | ? | Answer | |
| Attachment L-3 Sample Resumes | Technical | First Job Description, Principal Research Engineering/Physicist | ||
| Question: Will the Government provide the required clearance for this position and the required work location? | The Government will include language providing desired clearance in the sample resumes. | |||
| dRFP, PWS, Section 5.3 | Technical | The PWS goes from section 5.2 "Scientific and Technical Expertise" to 5.4 "Requirements Analysis Support". Can the Government please clarify whether there should be a section 5.3? | The paragraph numbering wil be corrected. | |
| dRFP; Section L, Table L.1.2 | Technical | In the Section L.1.2 table, the government mentions an Incoming Management Plan. Request the Government please provide instructions? | The table will be updated to reflect the latest proposal requirements | |
| dRFP; Section L.3.3.3, Sub-factor B: Technical Approach | Technical | Can the government please provide instructions for the Sub-factor B: Technical Approach? | Yes, the final RFP will reflect instruction specific to a "technical approach." This will be expanded upon. | |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 Draft L(L.5.0) | Contract | Re:”Offeror’s socio-economic commitment will be evaluated relative to meeting the Small Business and socioeconomic subcontracting requirement, based on total contract value, in the chart below” .In order for the prime to provide the government with the optimum team, would the Govt consider changing the socio-economic category small business goals to percentage of subcontracted revenue? | No. The Small Business Participation evaluation factor, titled "Socioeconomic Commitment" by DTRA, must always be expressed in terms of total contract value in order to do an adquate evaluation. (Example: 1 contractor can promise to subcontract 50% of all subcontracted dollars to Small Business (SB) but only plan to subcontract $1M ($500k to SB) and another can promise 25% of all subcontracted dollars to SB and subcontract $2M to SB (still $500k to SB. Using a % of only the subconracted dollars would not provide a good basis to evaluate.) | |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 Draft L/M | Contract | Currently the Facility Plan is part of the evaluation criteria and strongly favors award to the incumbent due to the timelines associated with establishing the infrastructure necessary for classified meetings and work. These timelines are not under the full control of the proposing prime contractor. I.e., the prime is dependent on approval by Government entities such as DISA. Would the government consider removing the facility requirements from the evaluation criteria and leaving it as a performance requirement similar to security clearances | The Government will consider this, as a performance requirement rather than part of the evaluation criteria. | |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 Draft L/M | Contract | If the Government chooses to leave the Facility requirement in Sections L and M, will DTRA please clarify that the 6-mile requirement applies to conference rooms only, as opposed to conference rooms and office space for offsite staff? If the limit includes office space for offsite staff, would Govt consider increasing the limit to 10 miles? | The language will be clarified to reflect the 6 mile radius applies to the conference room facility only | |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 Draft L/M L.4.3 | Contract | Will the Government please delete the last three sentences in L.4.3: “Task orders issued against Indefinite Delivery / Indefinite Quantity (ID/IQ) contracts may be included as references. Each task order shall be counted as a separate reference. The base ID/IQ shall not be cited as a reference.” Rationale: Department-wide ID/IQs exist that are similar to the scope, magnitude and complexity described in this solicitation (HDTRA 1-20-R-0005). To exclude such ID/IQs from consideration as relevant Past Performance citations limits the ability of small and mid-sized businesses to compete with large primes. | The Government is considering a change in wording (for example, "Department or Agency specific ID/IQs may be cited as a reference, but not to include Federal Supply Schedule or Government Wide Acquisition Contracts.") | |
| HDTRA 1-20-R-0005 L.6.6.1 | Technical | Will the Government please include a table analogous to that which appears in the RD PMO A&AS DRFP just prior to Section L.5.6.2. The table shows the number of FTEs by security clearance level by RD Department (e.g., CB, CX, NT, etc). | This table will be provided. | |
| L.1.1.1 | Technical | Section L.1.1.1 instructs offerors to submit questions via email and to include in the subject line "Questions Concerning HDTRA1-20-R-0002". Should this be revised to reflect solicition number HDTRA1-20-R-0005 as indicated on the SF 33? | The RFP number will be revised to HDTRA1-20-R-0005 | |
| L.1.2 | Technical | Section L.1.2 provides 30 pages in the Technical Volume to address the M.2.2.2 evaluation criteria to "effectively manage and meet the requirements of the contract". The PWS covers efforts across six Departments and in over 10 distinct technical areas. Will the Government increase the page count to at least 50 pages to allow the proposer to address each of the PWS areas appropriately to support better evaluation of meeting the requirements by the government? | The goernment is considering increase to the page count. | |
| L.1.2 (Table); L.3.3.3.1.3 | Technical | Vol. II, Sub-Factor B - Technical Approach, sub-bullet Sample Challenge/Task, has a page limit of 20 pages. L.3.3.3.1.3 Sample Challenge Task indicates that there will be two Technical Challenges. Does the 20 page limit of Table L.1.2 apply to each Sample Challenge, i.e. 20 pages for each Task for a total of 40 pages, or is that a total of 20 pages for both Tasks? | Each sample challenge/task will be a maximum of 4 pages each. | |
| L.1.3.5.1 | Technical | Page size is designated as 8.5 X 11 inches. Will the Government allow the use of fold-out pages (11 X 17 inches) for large tables and graphics? | The Government will accept 11X17 foldout sheets for tables, charts, and graphs. | |
| L.1.3.9; L.6.6.1 | Technical | L.1.3.9 states "Offerors shall differentiate the Operations and Maintenance costs from the Research and Development." L.6.6.1 does not provide for an O&M CLIN. Does the government intend to provide O&M funding for this contract and if so what will be the CLIN designation? | The language will be updated to delete the reference to Operations and Maintenance costs within this effort. | |
| L.2.13 | SECTION 508 COMPLIANCE of both the SME and PMO Section LM ver 1-27-20_final to post documents, “Solicitation respondents must describe how their proposed information content deliverables meet at least those requirements identified as applicable in the attached L-5 Government Product/Service Accessibility Template (GPAT).” Is information regarding compliance with GPAT and 36CFR part 1194 Subpart B and C (Attachment L-5 and Attachment S-1) part of the Volume I response following the documents listed in paragraphs L.2.2 through L.2.6? | The PWS is for the purchasing of subject matter expertise and does not include the purchasing or developing of any items or deliverables that include information and communication technology. Based on this, Section 508 does not apply and the 508 reference will be removed for the final RFP. | ||
| L.2.4 | Contract | In paragraph L.2.4, Government Offices the instructions require the offeror to provide information for their DCMA and DCAA offices to include the prime contractor and major subcontractors. Can the Government define what constitutes a major subcontractor? | A major subcontractor is one that will be a team performer / partner rather than vendor / supplier or minor consultant. | |
| L.3.2 Volume Organization | Technical | The Matrix under L.1.2 notes an Executive Summary, 2 pages; however, this section does not list an Executive Summary. Is an Executive Summary required? | The two sectons will be reconciled. | |
| L.3.3.2.1 Information Technology (IT) Requirement | Contract | Will the Government clarify that the IT requirements apply only to the contractor's proximate facility? | The government will clarify that the IT requirements apply only to the contractor's proximate facility. | |
| L.3.3.2.1 Facilities | Contract | Facilities. Does the Government intend to request shuttle service between the proximate facility and DTRC which would be available to the Government and contractors? | No, the Government does not intend to request a shuttle service between the contractor facility and DTRA Headquarters. |
Wentworth, Tracy L. CIV: Wentworth, Tracy L. CIV:
| L.3.3.2.1 Facilities: | Contract | There is no requirement to provide office space/support to the PMO contract. Does the Government intend for the SME contractor to provide office facilities/space for the PMO A&AS personnel, and if so, for how many seats? Will the Government allow all associated costs in support of the PMO contract to be included with facility pricing? | There is no requriement for the S&T SME to provide office space/support to the PMO contract. |
| L.3.3.2.1 Information Technology (IT) Requirement | Technical | Second sub-bullet is titled "SIPRNet Access to the DTRA Classified Network (SNET)" and requires "an approval to operate on the SIPRNet for the contractor’s facility". Access to and approval to operate on the SIPRNet does not provide access to the DTRA Classified Network (SNET). Does the Government intend to extend SNET connectivity to Offeror's facility in order to establish SNET access? | Access to the DTRA Classified Netowrk (SNET) is not a requirement. This language will be clarified to reflect access is required to provide for Secret VTC capability. |
| L.3.3.2.1; M.2.2.1 | Technical | Section L.3.3.2.1 - CBRNE WMD Expertise: Does the Government mean "accomplish the PWS" not "accomplish the SOO"? | Yes the SOO remark with be revised to PWS. |
| L.3.3.3.1 | Contract | L 3.3.3.1 - Limiting Key Personnel to three does not provide the Government with an adequate understanding of how the offeror will "effectively implement the requirements of the contract PWS." Not requiring an Offeror to document their ability to provide key leaders and technical experts will increase the risk to both transition and execution. Will the Government increase Key Personnel to require that, as a minimum, the lead for each Department be considered Key and require that a resume be provided? | TThe Government is updating this section of the RFP to the higher maximum number of 9. |
| L.3.3.3.1 | Contract | RD A&AS, functioning as a "trusted agent" with the government must be able to successfully meet the requirements put forth in the PWS. Given that the "people are the product" not requesting a staffing plan will impact the ability of the governemt to determine if an offeror can effectively execute the contract, provide needed skills, experience and integration, and increase risk to both transition and execution. Will the Government include a requirement to provide a Staffing Plan to ensure that all offerors have sufficient understanding and capability to execute the PWS? | The Government does not intend to require a staffing plan; rather, the requirement for a management plan, to include transition needs, is a part of the evaluation criteria. |
| L.4.2 | Please confirm whether there is a template or particular format for the consent letter to be executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information. |
i. Does the letter need to identify from whom the adverse past performance was received?
ii. Or should this letter be a blanket, open letter for DTRA?
b. Please confirm whether you wish a letter confirming that there are no adverse past performance issues.
| There is no template or particular format. Any content requirements (e.g., past performance) will be stated in the final RFP. | |||
| L.4.3 | Technical | Please clarify that the maximum number of past performance references to be provided by the prime and subcontractors combined is eight (8). | The language will be clarified; the intent is to allow the prime to provide up to five references of past performance and each subcontractor to provide up to three. This means the total can be more than eight if there is more than one subcontractor. |
| L.4.3 | Technical | Section L.4.3 allows past performance of up to 5 years old. The CWMD mission space is rapidly changing and has changed significantly over the last 5 years; corporate capabilities degrade significantly after 3 years. Will the Government reduce the limit to 3 years to more accurately evaluate a company's capability and past performance relevancy? | The Government will consider this, however at this time (as drafted), relevancy will cover up to 5 years. |
| L.4.3 | PRESENT AND PAST PERFORMANCE REFERENCES |
a. Please confirm whether you will accept CPARS in lieu of or in addition to the past performance questionnaires (Attachment L-2).
b. Please confirm whether the Present and Past Performance Questionnaires should be returned in the word processing document format or whether pdf versions are acceptable.
| a. The usage of CPARS as a submittal is under consideration; the final decision will be reflected in the final RFP. b. The format should be in .pdf, however word will be accepted as well. | ||||
| L.5.0 Volume IV | SOCIO-ECONOMIC COMMITMENT requires a summary list of proposed subcontractor information and references Attachment S-1, calculation of Socioeconomic Commitment and a small business subcontracting plan. In Section L.6.1 GENERAL, the last sentence in paragraph 3 of that section states, “The Socio-Economic Commitment table required by L.5.0 is excepted from this provision and shall be included in Volume I”. Please confirm whether the Socio-Economic Commitment Table required by L.5.0 is to be included in Volume I, Volume IV, or both. | The socioeconomic commitment table should be submitted in the Socioeconomic Commitment volume. | ||
| L.6.3.3 | Technical | L.6.3.3 states "The Government intends to provide up to 80 Notebook computers". This is inconsistent with the PWS 9.3 which states 139 DTRA-provided notebook computers. What is the correct number of government furnished notebook computers? | The intent is to ensure that each A&AS has a DTRA imaged, CAC enalbled laptop that meets DTRA IT2S speciications to access the DTRA NIPRNet either on set or via telework. The language will be clarified to reflect the intent. | |
| L.6.3.3 | Technical | "The Government intends to provide up to 80 Notebook computers and applicable peripherals as described in the GFP Attachment." Are we to make the assumption the Government will provide one laptop per SME contractor? | The Government will either issue a Government-imaged laptop to each SME contractor or the Government will pay the contractor to procure each laptop, provide to the Government for imaging, then receive the laptop configured with necessary security requirements. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .