QA_Industry_Responses.docx

Questions and Answers November 13, 2014

Q1. Page 26, Section 252.223-9003 (a) All contractors requiring access to any Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) Facility shall have an Environment, Safety and Occupational Health Program and shall ensure that their personnel are aware of and comply with the program. Does a copy of the Environment, Safety and Occupational Health Program have to be submitted with proposal? If so, which Volume should it go in?

A1. No. We have not requested submission of Environment, Safety and Occupational Health Program information.

Q2. Page 76 “b. As shown in Table 1-2, the printed paper copy of Volumes I, II, III, and IV shall be submitted in separate 3-ring loose-leaf binders, which when open, lay flat.” Can the printed paper copies that are to be put in binders be printed two-sided?

A2. Double-sided. Please see 52.204-4 Printed or Copied Double-Sided on Post consumer Fiber Content Paper in Section I.

Q3. Page 79, Section L.2.7 REPRESENTATIONS, CERTIFICATIONS, AND OTHER STATEMENTS OF OFFEROR(S) (SECTION K AND L). The offeror is responsible to ensure that all representations, certifications, acknowledgements, and statements provided in accordance with Sections K and L are provided in the System for Award Management (SAM) site (http://www.sam.gov/portal/public/SAM) formerly the Online Representations and Certification Applications (ORCA) site and the Central Contractor Registration (CCR) site. Will the government allow an affirmative statement in accordance with the above reference in lieu of completing the representation & certifications (Sections K & L) and including them in the proposal response?

A3. No. The government will verify the eligibility of each offeror by way of the SAM system.

Q4. This will incur extra cost for printing if all pages of the representations and certifications must be submitted in the paper copies of Volume 1. If a statement will be allowed, can the government provide acceptable wording that the offeror should use?

A4. Please follow the instructions as stated in Section L.2.7.

Q5. Page 82, Section L.3.2.2 MINIMUM CROSS REFERENCING requires in part that, “The offeror shall fill out a Cross Reference Matrix (CRM) indicating where the proposal addresses the solicitation requirements.” The CRM requirement is called out as part of Volume II in Section L.3.2.2, but is also listed as a requirement of Volume I in Table L.1.2 – Proposal Organization. Can the government clarify in which volume(s) the CRM is required?

A5. Please refer to Volume I and see L.2.10.5.

Q6. Page 83, Section L.3.3.4 Reserved Can the government please clarify what is meant by “Reserved” and what information the offeror should provide for this section?

A6. The text from the previous L.3.3.4 section was removed in the current version of the RFP and replaced with the word “Reserved”. No information is requested under this section.

Q7. Page 83 L.3.3.3 Clearance Documentation (Page Limit 1) “The Offeror must provide documentation (Defense Security Service approval letter) that they hold a TOP SECRET facility clearance at the time of proposal submission. The offeror must certify that they have the required number of personnel who are U.S. citizens and who have the appropriate up-to-date security clearances. Security clearances must have been obtained or updated within the past 10 years for a TOP SECRET clearance. Personnel utilized in the performance of the contract must be U.S. citizens. For a current breakout of staffing data, see Section L.5.3.5.” Can the government clarify how the offeror is to include “The offeror must certify that they have the required number of personnel who are U.S. citizens and who have the appropriate up-to-date security clearances” in this section as the clearance document copy will be one page?

A7. Please refer to L.3.3.7 Right of First Refusal for Qualified Workers and FAR 52.222-17, Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers. It is possible for your company to meet this requirement by offering jobs to the personnel who are currently employed by Advantage SCI. If you communicate to the Evaluation Board that your company will offer jobs first to current Advantage SCI employees, then your company will meet this requirement. Offers are to submit a copy of their Defense Security Service approval letter (please re-read L.3.3.3 Clearance Documentation for the top secret facility clearance).

Q8. Page 83, Section L.3.3.1 Sub-factor 1A, last bullet item: “Provide a detailed plan for the establishment of a Quality Control Plan that demonstrates procedures to ensure services are performed in accordance with the Performance Work Statement, and”. Is there text missing after the word “and?”

A8. The comma and the word “and” are hereby stricken from this sentence and replaced with a period.

Q9. Page 83, Section L.3.3.5 Minimum Qualifications Letter. There is a paragraph labeled (a)…are there additional paragraphs that are missing?

A9. No.

Q10. Page 87, L.4.1 VOLUME ORGANIZATION, Item d. Past Performance Questionnaire, Form L-2 Past Performance Questionnaires (Form L-2) are listed as a requirement in the referenced section and in Table L.1.2 – Proposal Organization. Are completed Past Performance Questionnaires to be included with the proposal, or emailed directly to the government?

A10. See revised section L.4.1.

Q11. According to the Table L.1.2 – Proposal Organization, Section 3 - Present and Past Performance Questionnaire, Attachment L-2. Do we need to include completed PPQ or just the PPQ with our contract information before we send it to our client reference? Can you please clarify?

A11. Completed L1s should be submitted, by the offeror, along with his/her proposals. Completed L2s should be sent directly to Admin.SupportSS@dtra.mil by references identified in the L1s.

Q12. In section L 1.3.5.1 it states the page size and the font size, however it does not specify a particular font. Is there a specified font?

A12. Yes. Times New Roman in 12 font size.

Q13. Section L.1.2 ORGANIZATION/DISTRIBUTION/NUMBER OF COPIES/PAGE LIMITS does not indicate a table of contents and other elements listed in L.2.1 VOLUME ORGANIZATION, L.3.2 VOLUME ORGANIZATION, L.4.1 VOLUME ORGANIZATION and L.5.2 VOLUME ORGANIZATION. Is it the government’s intent that we organize the proposal according to L.2.1, L.3.2, L.4.1 and L.5.2?

A13. Please see L.1.3.6 Indexing In which the following is stated “Each volume shall contain a more detailed table of contents to delineate the sections within that volume.”

Q14. Table L.1.2; Paragraphs L.2.1; L.3.2 Table L.1.2 lists the Cross Reference Matrix as part of Volume I — Proposal Documentation. However, paragraph L.2.1 does not include the Cross Reference Matrix as part of the Volume I organization. Paragraph L.3.2 does list the Cross Reference Matrix as part of the Volume II organization. Please clarify in which volume the Cross Reference Matrix goes.

A14. The reference to the “RFP Cross-Reference Matrix” was removed from the description of Volume II and L.3.2.2 is now reserved.

Q15. Reference L.1.2 – Organization/Distribution/Number of copies/Page limits. Under a. – ORIGINAL Copy, #4 “Printed head to foot so that each page can be read when placed in a standard 2 hole file folder. Question: By stating “printed head to foot,” is it the Government’s intent that the pages in the “ORIGINAL” folder be printed double sided?

A15. Double-sided. Please see 52.204-4 Printed or Copied Double-Sided on Post consumer Fiber Content Paper in Section I.

Q16. Reference L.1.2 – Organization/Distribution/Number of copies/Page limits. Under b. – Printed paper copies of Volumes I, II, III and IV. Question: Would the Government please clarify if the pages are to be printed one sided or double sided?

A16. Double-sided. Please see 52.204-4 Printed or Copied Double-Sided on Post consumer Fiber Content Paper in Section I.

Q17. Reference L.1.3.5.3 –Pages Not Counted Question: Is it the Government’s intent that the copy of the Defense Security Service approval letter (L.3.3.3) is to be excluded from the one page limit in that section?

A17. No.

Q18. Question: On reference L.1.2 it states in Section 2 - 2 pages per reference, yet the form is three pages long itself. Would the Government increase the page count, per past performance reference, to three pages each.

A18. L.1.2 was revised to 3 pages per reference.

Q19. On reference L.1.2 it states in Section 2 - 2 pages per reference, yet the form is three pages long itself. Would the Government increase the page count, per past performance reference, to three pages each.

A19. Refer to A18.

Q20. Reference L.3.3.5 - Minimum Qualifications Certification Letter. The Offeror must submit a signed letter in which the offeror asserts that they understand the requirements in the PWS and have the ability to provide staffing personnel who meet or exceed the minimum qualifications as stated below, in L.3.3.6, for each labor category. Question: Please confirm it is the Government’s intent for the offeror to provide signed contingency letters along with a matrix of qualifications for the proposed staff, as opposed to a generic letter stating that the offeror understands the PWS and has the ability to provide staffing personnel who meet or exceed the minimum qualifications as stated in Section L.3.3.6?

A20 We did not request a “…signed contingency letters along with a matrix of qualifications for the proposed staff...”. Please carefully consider sections L and M for a detailed description of what is required.

Q21. RFP L.3.3.2 Sub-factor 1B – Qualifications, Minimum Qualifications Certification Letter, and Clearances states that “…the Offeror must include job descriptions of all labor categories:…”. However, table L.3.3.6 on p84 provides the labor category minimum qualifications and standard job descriptions. Please clarify what the Government is expecting in offeror responses to L.3.3.6 Minimum Qualifications and Standard Job Descriptions.

A21. Table L.3.3.6 provides the minimal qualifications for each labor category contemplated for this requirement. Note the following guidance under L.3.3.5 pertaining to Table L.3.3.6: “… offeror asserts that they understand the requirements in the PWS and have the ability to provide staffing personnel who meet or exceed the minimum qualifications as stated below, in L.3.3.6, for each labor category.”

Q22. Page 37, Section 52.222-2 (a) reads in part, “The use of overtime is authorized under this contract if the overtime premium cost does not exceed 0…”. Will the government replace the “does not exceed 0” once the contract is awarded with the actual dollar amount since overtime is allowed?

A22. Overtime is rare and the Government does not anticipate overtime at this time; however, if needed overtime will be determined at the task order level.

Q23. RFP B1. Labor Categories, Labor Hour Rates, and Labor Overtime Rates – Firm Fixed Priced. As Task Orders are going to be issued as Firm Fixed Price, will there be a separate CLIN established for billing overtime hours?

A23. This will be determined at an individual task order level.

Q24. Page 38, Section 52.222-42. In the tables, General Clerk III & IV have the same Minimum Wage Rate. Secretary III & IV also have the same Minimum Wage Rate. Why do these positions carry the same Minimum Wage Rates?

A24. A wage determination was not provided by the Division of Wage Determinations for General Clerk IV; hence, the pay rate for the Clerk IV division is a replication of the rate for General Clerk III.

Q25. Page 84, Table L.3.3.6 Q: Secretary IV and V have the same duties and the same minimum experience requirements. Can the government explain the differences between a Secretary IV and a Secretary V besides the years of experience?

A25. The duties and the experience requirements are as described in the RFP.

Q26. Page 85, Table L.3.3.6 Q: General Clerk IV and V have the same duties and the same minimum experience requirements. Can the government explain the differences between a General Clerk IV and a General Clerk V besides the years of experience?

A26. Refer to Answer 25.

Q27. Paragraph L.3.3.6; Table L.3.3.6 Levels IV and V for labor categories Secretary and General Clerk require the same number of years of experience. Please confirm that this is correct.

A27. Refer to Answer 25.

Q28. Attachment 12, J-1-1 states, “the out-years need to be escalated to ensure that DOL minimum wage & minimum Health/Welfare amounts are met.”. Does the government intend not to honor equitable price adjustment in accordance with FAR 52.222-43 as included in the RFP?

A28. The Government will comply with applicable FAR references.

Q29. Are the rates in Attachment 12, J-1-1 row 16 provided as an example only?

A29. Yes.

Q30. REF L.5.3.3 Pricing Information and Supporting Documentation. In the 1st paragraph, the 3rd sentence of this requirement states: “The offeror shall provide fully burdened rates and a breakdown of their unburdened rates as detailed in Section J, Attachment 12 (Price Model).” [underline emphasis added). However, at the 4th paragraph of the preceding L.5.1 GENERAL instruction, it correctly states: In accordance with FAR 15.403-1(b) and 15.403-3(a) and as detailed below, information other than cost or pricing data is not required.” [underline emphasis added]. It is apparent to this offeror that the statement within L.5.3.3 is in direct contradiction to the FAR citations at L.5.1. Since this acquisition is being conducted as a SDVOSB set-aside, the Government has already determined that it anticipates adequate competition. Accordingly, we request that the statement in L.5.3.3 that requires a breakdown of unburdened rates be deleted and we also request that the rate breakdown section within the Attachment 12 (Price Model) also be deleted.

A30. A breakout of unburdened rates, in the format specified in Attachment 12, are required.

Q31. REF L.5.3.3 Pricing Information and Supporting Documentation. In the 4th paragraph, the 3rd sentence of this requirement states: “Proposed first year rates that fall outside of the table ranges found in L.5.3.5 (Parts 1 – 3) will be deemed unrealistic.” This offeror considers that statement to be unduly restrictive and an unconscionable position for the Government to impose on offerors. The statement effectively requires that all offerors must be within a $1 pricing range for every labor category and, if any offeror is outside of that range they will not be considered for award. Although the Service Contract Act and DOL Wage Determinations establish ‘minimum’ compensation requirements, the Government’s inclusion of the above cited sentence and its restrictions cannot be supported under the FAR or DFARS. Accordingly, we request that the sentence be deleted.

A31. The price analysis procedure is as stated for all potential offerors. Range constraints were placed on the first year of rates as a mechanism to comply with successor contractor requirements specified with-in the Service Contract Act. Please see FAR Subpart 22.10 “Service Contract Act of 1965” for additional information.

Q32. REF L.5.3.3 Pricing Information and Supporting Documentation. In the 4th paragraph, the 4th sentence of this requirement states: “Overtime will not be considered in the price analysis.” In this offeror’s opinion, if the Government requires offeror pricing for overtime; then the overtime rates should be included in the evaluation for reasonableness and LPTA consideration. If the overtime rates are not evaluated for LPTA purposes, then an offeror could easily game the evaluation by proposing an overtime rate that is 3+ times the base rate to the Government’s and other offeror’s detriment. Accordingly, we request that the sentence be corrected to read: “Overtime will be considered in the price analysis and LPTA evaluation.”

A32. Overtime is not included in our pricing evaluation methodology; however, all pricing (including overtime rates) will be analyzed to determine reasonableness. Additionally, the overtime factor of time and a half (1.5) is implied for all potential offerors in Attachment 12.

Q33. REF L.5.3.5 Current Work Year Equivalent Data and Current Rate Ranges. In the paragraph following Table L.5.3.5 …(Part 3) on page 93, the paragraph states: “Each proposed labor rate, for the first year of performance, must be within the rate range…will be deemed unrealistic.” In other words, this paragraph contains the same restrictive and unconscionable wording as presented in the preceding L.5.3.3 statement. Accordingly, we request that the sentence be deleted.

A33. The price analysis procedure is as stated for all potential offerors.

Q34. REF M.2.2.3 Factor – Price. Within the first paragraph, starting with the 5 sentence and even including bolded type face it states: “Each proposed labor rate, for the first year of performance, must be within the rate range sets offered….will be deemed unrealistic.” In other words, this Section M evaluation paragraph contains the same restrictive and unconscionable wording as presented in the preceding Question #4 L.5.3.3 statement. Accordingly, we request that the sentence be deleted.

A34. Refer to Answer 33.

Q35. REF M.2.2.3 Factor – Price. This offeror notes that the Section M price evaluation fails to include overtime rates as part of the evaluated price for LPTA purposes. The Government’s failure to include the overtime rates in the evaluation may certainly result in an unfair LPTA determination and award. We request that the evaluation include overtime rates in order to ensure a fair competition.

A35. Refer to Answer 33.

Q36. REF M.2.2.3 Factor – Price. This offeror notes that for LPTA determination, the Government is only evaluating a sampling of labor categories (primarily in NCR). In this offeror’s opinion: For an IDIQ Contract with a ceiling value of $50,000,000 over 5 years, and with today’s MS Excel spreadsheet capabilities to calculate the total price for all labor categories, at all performance site locations, for all 5 years of contract performance. If the Government persists in only evaluating a small LCAT sample for LPTA purposes, then there is the potential for an offeror to game the price evaluation to the Government’s and other offerors’ detriment. In fairness to all offerors and to the American taxpayer of whose money this contract will utilize, we request that the solicitation develop a pricing model that includes all labor categories, at all locations, for the full 5 years of performance including overtime so that an honest and fair LPTA determination can be achieved.

A36. Refer to Answer 33.

Q37. Page 93 Under Table L.5.3.5 – Labor Rate Ranges of Current Workforce (Part 3) – “ NOTE: The data in table L.3.4 (Parts 1-3) is for price analysis purposes only. Anticipated staffing projection data are found on page 33.” Where on page 33 is the anticipate staffing projection? Is this the correct page reference? If not, can the government please provide the correct page number for the information? “Data in table L.3.4” We do not see a “table L.3.4” in the RFP. Can the government please provide the referenced table?

A37. The following sentence is hereby stricken from the RFP: “The data in table L.3.4 (Parts 1-3) is for price analysis purposes only. Anticipated staffing projection data are found on page 33.”

Q38. Page 3 Section B ITEM NO 0001 Q. Is the offeror required to fill in the Unit Price and Amount for CLIN 0001? If so, what would the unit price be? Can the government provide clarification on what figures are required for this line item?

A38. This number will be blank at the time of award so there is nothing for offerors to write in this section for their proposals. This information will be negotiated at the individual task order level. Ensure that all pricing related data only appears in the pricing proposal and Attachment 12.

Q39. Reference RFP Page 38 and 39 of 98, Table of Wage Determination minimum wage. The last 3 titles – Media Specialist I, II, and III are references on page 39 in the notes to the Table to correspond to Desktop Publisher/Editor I, II, and III. However, on page 92 and 93, as well as in the Attach 12 Pricing Spreadsheet, there is only a Desktop Publisher/Editor II and III plus a new Labor Cat – Events Coordinator.

A39. The references to media specialist in clause 52.222-42 are correct. The references to Desktop Publishers and Editors on pages 92 and 93 are correct. Please see the following statement: “The Media Specialist occupation title is assumed to be the same as the Desktop Publisher/Editor and corresponding Levels I, II and III.”

Q40. Attachment 7; Attachment 11 We located more recent Wage Determinations (WDs) for two of the listings: (a) WD 2005-2070 Revision 14 (California) dated 06/19/13 (Attachment 11) has been revised to WD 2005-2069 Revision 14 dated 07/25/14, and (b) WD 2005-2104 Revision 15 dated 06/19/13 (Attachment 7) has been revised to WD 2005-2103 Revision 14 dated 07/25/14. Please confirm which Wage Determination listings we should use for pricing purposes — the WDs dated 07/25/14 or those listed in RFP Attachment 7 and Attachment 11.

A40. The wage determinations for Washington, DC (NCR); Florida, and New Mexico were updated (July 25, 2014). NOTE: Note the procedure for determining the correct wage determination is not as simple as searching for a document with the most recent date. For a more detailed explanation regarding wage determination relevancy and dates consult question number 15 on this Department of Labor webpage: http://www.wdol.gov/faqs.aspx

Q41. RE: Wage Determinations Attachments 7 – 11 The wage determinations supplied do not appear to be accurate. They show Health &Welfare benefit as $3.81 and the rate has increased to $4.02. Will the government provide updated wage determinations?

A41. Refer to A40.

Q42. Page 84 and 84 Table L.3.3.6 – The Service Contract Act (SCA) defines level of labor categories based on tasks. This table is defining labor categories based on years of experience. Q. Can the government please clarify labor categories and job descriptions, as currently they do not align with Department of Labor or SCA requirements?

A42. The needed labor categories and job descriptions are as stated. The provided categories and descriptions are derived from the needs of the Agency.

Q43. Page 41, 252.211-7003 ITEM UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION AND VALUATION How does this requirement apply to this solicitation? In what instances would the contractor be required to provide a unique item identifier under the awarded contract? If required, will the government pay any costs associated with this requirement? Or, How will any costs the contractor incurs be covered under the contract?

A43. It is not anticipated that this clause will not be utilized during the life of this contract; however, this clause must remain in the basic IDIQ contract.

Q44. REF L.2.6 Department of Defense (DD) Form 254 Security Requirements. The solicitation requirement states: “Contractor (prime, subcontractors, teaming partners, etc.) shall have a Top Secret facility clearance at the time of proposal submission…” [underline emphasis added]. This offeror does not dispute the requirement for the Prime to hold a TS Facility Clearance at time of proposal submission, however may we suggest that the requirement for subcontractors and teaming partners to hold a TS facility clearance is unnecessary and a needless restriction on competition. For personnel clearance purposes, the Prime can hold the personnel clearances for the subcontractor personnel; so there will not be any degradation of services to the Government. Essentially, the current restriction presents a ‘chicken and egg’ scenario wherein there is no avenue for a non-FCI subcontractor entity to gain a facility clearance. Accordingly, we request that the restrictive inclusion of subcontractors/teaming partners having to hold a TS facility clearance be deleted.

A44. Please see the revision to L.2.6.

Q45. Page 79 L.2.6 Department of Defense (DD) Form 254 Security Requirements and Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Draft DD 254 box 1.b. says “SECRET” will the government remove SECRET and replace with NONE?

A45. No.

Q46. Based on our understanding of reciprocity within the federal security programs, we understand that the DOE access level clearance of S/RD with a “Q” clearance is equivalent to a DOD level Top Secret. Please confirm that a DOE clearance of S/RD is acceptable.

A46. A DOE clearance of S/RD is not acceptable.

Q47. Or, will “Level of Safeguarding” be required, will the contractor be required to “receive and generate classified material” under this contract?

A47. This will be determined at an individual task order level.

Q48. If safeguarding of classified material will be required, is this referenced in the RFP and where?

A48. Refer to Answer 47.

Q49. Why will the government never consider accepting proposals and sponsoring the company awarded anymore?

A49. The security requirements are as stated.

Q50. Page 79 L.2.6 Department of Defense (DD) Form 254 Security Requirements “Provide information relative to Offeror’s facility clearance and the contact information for the Offeror’s security office. Information relative to subcontractor security requirements shall also be included. Contractor (prime, subcontractors, teaming partners, etc.) shall a have final Top Secret facility clearance at the time of proposal submission and must maintain it throughout the contract period of performance.” Does the government require a narrative response for this section?

A50. No.

Q51. Does the offeror need to provide a copy of a subcontractor’s facility clearance documentation?

A51. No.

Q52. Page 96, Sub-factor 1B – Qualifications, Personnel, and Clearances, (a) Clearance Documentation states in part, “All personnel utilized in the performance of the contract must be U.S. citizens and have at minimum a secret clearance.” Is secret clearance required at the time of proposal submittal? Is interim secret clearance acceptable?

A52. A top secret facility clearance is required at the time of proposal submittal. An interim secret clearance is not acceptable. Due to FAR 52.222-17, current personnel being utilized already have the clearances required.

Q53. I would like to have clarification on the FCL level required for this solicitation – Secret or Top Secret? Does the Prime have to have the clearance at the time of the due date of submission?

A53. A top secret facility clearance is required at the time of proposal submittal by the prime. A secret clearance is not acceptable for contractors (prime, sub-contractors, team members, etc).

Q54. Reference L.3.3.3. – Clearance Documentation (page limit 1 Page) The Offeror must provide documentation (Defense Security Service approval letter) that they hold a TOP SECRET facility clearance at the time of proposal submission. The offeror must certify that they have the required number of personnel who are U.S. citizens and who have the appropriate up-to-date security clearances. Security clearances must have been obtained or updated within the past 10 years for a TOP SECRET clearance. Personnel utilized in the performance of the contract must be U.S. citizens. For a current breakout of staffing data, see Section L.5.3.5. Question: Is it the Government’s intent that Offerors to provide JPAS reports, by name of proposed personnel, to certify they have the appropriate up-to-date security clearances? If so, will the Government be willing to make the JPAS report exclusive of the page count?

A54. No. The Government will not require actual JPAS reports as part of the proposals.

Q55. Page 80 Section L.2.9.3 OCI Mitigation Plan Will the government remove the requirement for the OCI Mitigation Plan to be included in Volume 1 at time of proposal and make it a requirement at Task Order Level if there is any OCI identified? Does the government anticipate that OCI will be an issue? What part of the work/tasks does the government anticipate might cause OCI issues?

A55. The Government sees no valid reason to omit the OCI Mitigation Plan from Volume 1. Potential OCI is a concern due to the work environment that will expose Administrative-Service employees to potential acquisition decisions on a regular basis.

Q56. As an FFP contract, will the “Financial and Man-Hours Expenditure Report” CDRL be required?

A56. Yes.

Q57. Paragraph L.3.3.2 Does the Government want a separate job description for each labor category, i.e., Secretary I different from Secretary II?

A57. Yes.

Q58. Paragraph L.3.3.1; Attachment 1, Paragraph 6.4 Does the Government desire a full transition plan and a complete quality control plan or only a summary of how we will accomplish each? Attachment 1, paragraph 6.4 requires the complete documents be delivered with the PMP 10 days after contract award.

A58. The Government anticipates sufficient detail in the proposal to determine if the transition and quality control plans are reasonable and executable.

Q59. Do Offerors need to pre-arrange delivery since it is hard copy delivery, or is it acceptable to hand deliver it the day it is due?

A59. Please see: “252.204-9000 Notice to Potential Offerors-Official DTRA Addresses in the NCR” in which the following is stated: “Due to heightened security measures, hand-carried proposals cannot be accepted, therefore offerors are to select one address below based on the method of mailing.”

Q60. Referencing section L.1.3.5.3; if offeror chooses to submit resumes, can they be included can they be added as an appendix or will they be included in the page count?

A60. No. The Government will hold all Offerors to the page limits stated in the solicitation. However, there is no requirement to submit resumes.

Q61. On page 93 of 98, the second sentence reads: “Anticipated staffing projection data are found on page 33.” In reviewing page 33, this data is not found. Please clarify.

A61. The following statement is hereby stricken from the RFP: “Anticipated staffing projection data are found on page 33.”

Q62. Page 5 of 9, paragraph 6.3 states “the contractor shall support the program during core government hours”. Please specify core hours.

A62. Core business hours for the Defense Threat Reduction Agency are from 9 am to 3 pm Monday through Friday. However, work hours on individual task orders will be determined at the task order level.

Q63. Can I be added to the list of interested vendors on this solicitation?

A63. You may add yourself to the list of interested vendors by way of the “Federal Business Opportunities” (www.fbo.gov) website.

Q64. I have attached our one page capabilities brief for your review but would really appreciate the opportunity to speak either in-person or over the phone. Please let me know when the best time is for me to call.

A64. Please see L.1.3.4: “Untailored or generic Approach Statements and Capability Statements are not desired.” Please do not call. Please see L.1.1.1 “Questions received via telephone or an email address other than Admin.SupportSS@dtra.mil will not be addressed.”

Q65. REF L.3.3 Mission Capability. The second paragraph states: “Offerors are reminded the prime must perform at least 51% of the effort in terms of number of hours and pricing.” In this offeror’s opinion, that statement is not correct and results in an unnecessary limitation and restriction on competition. FAR 52.219-27 states that at least 50% of the cost of contract performance must be incurred by employees of SDVOSB concerns. Accordingly, we request that the incorrect and restrictive statement be corrected IAW 52.219-27.

A65. This statement was revised to state the following: “Offerors are reminded the SDVOSB prime must perform at least 50% of the effort in terms of number of hours and pricing.”

HDTRA1-14-R-0018-0001