Security_Programs_Questions_and_Responses.pdf

Security Programs

Subject Location Reference Question Response 1 RFP Pages 4 -11 Are each of the program offices associated with these

CLINS providing funding to the contract?

Yes.

2 RFP Pages 5, 8, and 9 ITEM NO 0005 AB Labor Base period will be for 2 years after Date of

Contract.

ITEM NO 0006 BC Labor Option Period will be for 2 years after Date of Contract

ITEM NO 0019 IP Labor Option Period will be for 2 years after Date of Contract

ITEM NO 0021 SS Labor Option Period will be for 2 years after Date of Contract

Should CLINS 0006, 0019, and 0021 also read as Base

Year CLINS or do these CLINS not begin until an Option

Year?

CLINs 0006, 0019, and 0021 are considered option CLINs and can be incrementally exercised during the 2 year base period.

3 RFP Page 1 Page 1 of the Solicitation states the proposal is to be delivered to 5222 Martin Road, Redstone Arsenal, AL.

Which MDA building should the proposal specifically be delivered to – VB II, VB III or VB IV?

For hand delivery bring proposals to the main lobby of Von

Braun III, and call either Jeffrey McMillan at (256) 450-3431 or

Thomas Limmer at (256) 450-3339 to setup an appointment.

4 Section L Table L-1 and Section L-

11.0

If the offeror’s Volume II: OCI Management Plan includes OCI Mitigation techniques, and the offer has determined that no actual or perceived OCI exists, does the offeror need to submit a separate OCI mitigation plan as part of Volume VII: Contract

Documentation?

No. Section L-1.5e. 3) states "If an offeror determines that an actual or potential OCI does not exist, it shall include a statement to that effect as part of the proposal, and does not need to submit an OCI Mitigation Plan.

5 Section L Section L-4.7 Section L-4.5 states, “Page size shall be 8.5 x 11 inches, not including foldouts. Except for the reproduced sections of the solicitation document and any non-narrative sections (e.g. tables, graphs, charts, figures, etc.), the text size shall be no less than Microsoft

Word Times New Roman 12 point font, single-spaced”. Section L-4.7 discusses foldouts and states, “For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the font shall be no smaller than 10 point.”

Will the government allow 10 point font for all tables, graphs, figures, graphics and call-out boxes throughout the proposals? Will the government allow

10 point font or smaller in the headers and footers?

Yes. The font shall be no smaller than 10 point for tables, charts, graphs and figures, etc.. No. The font shall be no smaller than 10 point for headers and footers.

6 Section L Sections L-10.0 and L-

10.1

Section L-10.1 states” Past Performance Information (PPI)

(Attachment L-01) should be submitted only for the major subcontractors expected to perform aspects of the effort the offeror considers critical to the overall successful performance. As stated in

L-1.2, “Major Subcontractor” is defined as a subcontractor whose proposed effort provides at least 10% of the proposed total price of the contract and/or a subcontractor that performs a critical function in the performance of the resulting contract, whether it is technical or financial, and/or have important roles in any high or medium risk areas identified in the offeror’s proposal.”

Is it required to submit PPI for all Major

Subcontractors?

Yes. PPIs shall be submitted for all major subcontractors.

7 Section L Section L-11.1 Tab 1 L-11.1 Tab 1 – Model Contract (SF33) Section B states, “Offerors will populate the estimated cost and fixed fee values for CPFF CLINs.”

To meet the requirements of section L-11.1, Will the

Government allow pricing information in VOLUME VII:

CONTRACT DOCUMENTATION?

Only the estimated cost and fixed fee values for CPFF CLINs will be populated in Section B of the SF33.

8 Section L Section 14.3 The minimum requirement for fringe benefit costs is the $4.02 per hour prevailing health and welfare fringe benefits under the

McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act (SCA). While this acquisition is not covered by the SCA, the prevailing health and welfare fringe benefits will serve as the absolute minimum acceptable fringe benefit cost.

How will the Government evaluate the proposed fringe benefits to determine if they are reasonable, or fit within the minimum requirement of $4.02/hour?

Will the Government review this on an average rate basis or on an individual labor category basis?

Section L-14.3 requires offerors to demonstrate the proposed fringe benefits cost is reasonable and realistic. Section L 14.5 requires the offerors to explain how the proposed cost of fringe benefits meets or exceeds the minimum requirement of $4.27 per labor hour. Our evaluation will be based on an individual and combined labor categories. The evaluation will verify the reconciliation of the Indirect Build-up tab included in the Excel

Pricing Workbook (if this tab is required). Alternatively, if proposed indirect rates are substantiated by a FPRA or provisional billing rate agreement, the offeror must also explain how the indirect rates included in the FPRA or the provisional billing rate agreement cover at least this minimum fringe benefits requirement. In addition, the U.S. Department of

Labor has increased the minimum rate from $4.02 to $4.27.

The $4.27 rate will be our benchmark for evaluation purposes and will be updated in an amendment to the solicitation.

9 PWS PWS 1.1 Figure 2, 3.1, PO1, 3.2 PO2, 3.3 PO3,

3.4 PO4, 3.5 PO5, 3.6

PO6, 3.7 PO7, 3.8 PO8,

3.9 PO9, 3.10 PO10,

3.11 PO11

Each PO describes what organization the PO coordinates with, but none of the PO’s mention the Systems Protection or Direct Support

Organizations receiving support from any of the POs.

Do either of these organizations receive support though this contract? If so, please identify which PO(s) provide this support.

The figures in section 1 depict the functional organization and stakeholders for this PWS. In section 3 each major stakeholder who requires support within the PO (e.g., DIS, DSS, EIR or matrix program) is identified at the beginning of the PO.

10 PWS PWS 9.0 Transition

Staffing page 51, L 12.2

Subfactor T2:

Technical Staffing

Approach

The Key Personnel requirements state that we must propose a

Contract Program Manager and have the option to propose a

Contract Technical Lead and any Subject Matter Experts we deem necessary.

Is there a limit to the number of Key Personnel? No. There is no limit to the number of key personnel.

11 Section L L-10.3, Past

Performance

Information, Attachment L-01

We understand that the PPI template is required to be used “as provided” in the proposal. This form, as currently designed, consumes a lot of space, and does not allow us to maximize the inclusion of PWS relevant content.

The PPI form (without content), Attachment L-01, takes approximately 2 pages and contains significant extra lines. To take maximum advantage of the 25 pages for the PPI, would the government agree that offerors may reformat the PPI form — maintaining all the required information— to maximize our ability to include relevant past performance information.

Yes. Offerors may reformat the PPI Form as long as all the required information is maintained.

12 Section L L-9.1 – Subcontracting

Plan

The draft RFP stated an overall 6.6% of subcontracted dollars as the small business goal. The final RFP states a 60% of subcontracted dollars as the small business goal which is almost 10x the draft RFP requirement and could significantly impact teaming arrangements designed to bring low risk performance to MDA.

Would the government consider reducing the small business goals to be more in line with the draft RFP?

The small business subcontracting goals issued in the Draft RFP were incorrect. The correct small business subcontracting goals are in the final RFP and remain unchange. It should be noted that these goals are based on the "Subcontract Value", not the "Contract Value".

13 Section L Section L Page 24, L-

14.3

The minimum requirement for fringe benefit costs is the $4.02 per hour prevailing health and welfare fringe benefits under the

McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act (SCA). While this acquisition is not covered by the SCA, the prevailing health and welfare fringe benefits will serve as the absolute minimum acceptable fringe benefit cost. Fringe cost less than this benchmark is not compliant with these instructions and by default is unrealistic. Unrealistic fringe benefit costs often have a direct negative impact on the quality of services provided due to the contractor’s inability to retain and recruit qualified staff.

Given the staffing years of experience required for each labor category, the SCA fringe benefit cost of

$4.02 per hour as the minimum acceptable to pass the cost realism threshold seems exceptionally low.

Based on expected salaries, the $4.02/hour fringe minimum could result in a range of 6% - 12% fringe cost as a % of labor. In order to prevent aggressively low bidders from bidding unrealistic fringe cost rates, we recommend the government use a more appropriate benchmark that reflects a non-exempt professional workforce, which the SCA does not.

The Government will not use a different benchmark. Fringe cost less than the $4.27 (The updated Department of Labor

Minimum Fringe Benefit Rate) benchmark specified in Section L-

14.3 is not compliant with the RFP and by default is unrealistic.

However, $4.27 may not be realistic for every company or position. Section L-14.3 requires offerors to demonstrate the proposed fringe benefits cost is reasonable and realistic.

14 General

Question

Section L

Attachments

The Government indicated in DRFP Q&A #11 that

Section L attachments would be provided in Microsoft

Word in the release of the Final RFP. Will the

Government please post these files?

Yes. Section L attachments to be completed by the offeror will be posted in Microsoft Word format with the Final RFP

Questions and Answers.

15 Section L Section L Page 17, L-

10.2

Many companies have acquired, been acquired by, or otherwise merged with other companies, and/or reorganized their divisions, business groups, subsidiary companies, etc. In many cases, these changes have taken place during the time of performance of relevant present or past efforts or between conclusion of recent past efforts and this source selection. As a result, it is sometimes difficult to determine what past performance is relevant to this acquisition.

Offerors shall include a “roadmap” describing all changes in the organization of the offeror and any teaming partners. As part of this explanation, show how these changes impact the relevance of any efforts identified for past performance evaluation/performance assessment. The "roadmap" should be both specifically applicable to the efforts identified and general enough to apply to efforts on which the Government receives information from other sources.

This information will facilitate relevancy determination for contracts submitted for past performance. The organizational change roadmap is limited to a period of 3 years from the date of the Final

RFP release.

Please confirm that the Organizational Structure

Change History is required only from companies who are submitting past performance citations in the past performance volume (not from the entire team).

The organizational structure change history applies to the offeror and all teaming partners to include any subcontractors.

16 Section L & M Section L Page 17, L-

10.4 attachment L-02

Section M Page 6, M-

8.0

The offeror is responsible for, not later than 14 days prior to proposal due date, sending Attachment L-02 to respondents of their choice who will subsequently submit information to the

Government to be received by the proposal due date stated in L-

4.20.

The categories for performance evaluation in the

Government-provided PPQ form (Attachment L-02) for

TEAMS request the same type of information that is evaluated in a CPAR. Some Government contracting organizations will not provide PPQ responses because they complete CPARs that are available in the PPIRS system. Given that the PPQ form requests the same type of information, and that Section M-8.0 indicates information obtained from the PPIRS system will be used for the evaluation, will the Government waive the requirement to obtain PPQs in cases where CPAR information is available in PPIRS?

No. The requirement will not be waived. The evaluation team will determine if the PPQ will be needed during evaluations.

17 Section L Section L Page 18, L-

10.6 Attachment L-03

Past performance information concerning subcontractors will not be disclosed to a private party without the subcontractor's consent.

Because a Prime offeror is a private party, the Government will need that consent before disclosing subcontractor past performance information to the prime during exchanges. The offeror shall provide a consent letter for each proposed subcontractor using the format provided at Attachment L-03, Consent Letter.

Please confirm that Consent Letters are required only from companies who are submitting past performance citations in the past performance volume (not from the entire team).

The Consent Letters apply to the offeror and all teaming partners to include any subcontractors.

18 Section L Section L Page 18, L-

10.7 Attachment L-04

Each offeror, subcontractor, and/or joint venture shall execute a

Client Authorization Letter for commercial customers authorizing release to the Government of requested information on their respective performance using the format provided at Attachment L

Please confirm that Client Authorization Letters are required only from companies who are submitting past performance citations for commercial customers in the past performance volume (not from the entire team).

The Client Authorization letters apply to the offeror and all teaming partners to include any subcontractors.

19 Section L Section L Page 18, L-

10.7

Each offeror, subcontractor, and/or joint venture shall execute a

Client Authorization Letter for commercial customers authorizing release to the Government of requested information on their respective performance using the format provided at Attachment L-

04, Client Authorization Letter.

Client Authorization Letters are required to be submitted for commercial contracts. In cases where the commercial contract is with a government prime contractor who is also a competitor for a TEAMS program award, will the Government waive the requirement for the Client Authorization Letter if we are able to provide alternate Points of Contact (POCs) in our past performance citations?

No. The Client Autorization Letter will not be waived.

20 PWS PWS 4.2, 4.3, 4.4,

8.4.a, and 8.4.b, Pages

46 and 51

4.2 Monthly Status Report (CDRL A001);

4.3 Cost Report (by CLIN) (CDRL A002)

4.4 Travel Status Report (CDRL A002)

a. Physical Inventory Plan/Schedule and Reports for GFP (CDRL

A005)

b. Final Government Property Inventory Report (CDRL A006).

The PWS references four CDRLS which are not provided in the solicitation package. Please provide the referenced CDRLs.

CDRLS will be posted with the Final RFP Questions and

Answers.

21 Section M Section M Page 4, M-

4.0 2nd paragraph

"The team will evaluate how the offeror identifies, evaluates, and resolves actual and potential OCIs; the adequacy of its OCI training and oversight programs; the adequacy of its procedures for complying with MDA OCI Manual 5013.78-M, MDA Policy

Memorandum No. 51, and TEAMS OCI Policy and OCI Clause (H-09) and the soundness of its processes to protect proprietary and nonpublic information from unauthorized disclosure."

Please clarify the attachments to be addressed.

Specifically, a copy of "MDA OCI Manual 5013.78-M" was not provided with the RFP nor was it listed as available within the Bidders' Library (Attachment L-

11). Please provide access to the referenced document.

The Government will include MDA 5013.78-M, Organizational

Conflict of Interest (March 13, 2013), in the Bidders’

Documents Library.

22 Section L Section L Page 14, L-

6.0 2nd paragraph

"To the extent that the plan relies upon the OCI disclosures made pursuant to Section L prior to issuance of the RFP, the offeror’s plan may incorporate these disclosures and its pre-RFP submittals to the

PCO into its plan. The plan shall also address firewalls, separate corporate divisions, separate reporting chains and similar measures to ensure proprietary and nonpublic information is properly used and safeguarded consistent with MDA-OCI Manual 5013-78-M, MDA

Policy Memorandum No. 51, TEAMS OCI Memorandum, and Clause

H-09."

Please clarify the attachments to be addressed.

Specifically, a copy of "MDA OCI Manual 5013.78-M" was not provided with the RFP nor was it listed as available within the Bidders' Library (Attachment L-

11).Please provide access to the referenced document.

Yes. MDA OCI Manual 5013.78-M will be available in the bidders' library for offeror review.

23 Bidders'

Library and

MDA OCI

Manual

Section M-4.0, Page 4;

Answers to Questions

# 6 dated 15 July

FRFP Attachment L-11, Bidders' Library

Page 4, Reference RFP Language. Answer to question #6: The

Government intends on providing the MDA OCI Manual 5013.78-M in the Bidder's Document library.

Attachment L-11, Bidders' Library does not list the

MDA OCI Manual 5013.78-M. Offerors visiting the bidders' library are not allowed to take notes. Will

MDA make OCI Manual 5013.78-M available for

Offerors to take notes?

Yes. MDA OCI Manual 5013.78-M will be available in the bidders' library for offeror review.

24 EPW Section L Attachment L-07 Excel Pricing Workbook FAR Clause 52.229-10 State of New Mexico Gross

Receipts and Compensating Tax (NMGRT) is included in the solicitation, however there is no mechanism in the Electronic Pricing Workbook to account for the pricing of this cost. Typically this tax is calculated at the end of the pricing (i.e., after profit). Would the

Gov’t consider modifying the spreadsheet to include

NMGRT for efforts performed in New Mexico?

No. The cost associated with the State of New Mexico Gross

Receipts and Compensating Tax will be included as part of the

RFP-specified amounts listed for ODC CLINs 0002, 1002, 2002, and 3002 in Section L.

25 RFP & PWS Section B, page 6 of

105;

Attachment J-01 PWS

Technical Intelligence (DEI). This Contract is issued on a Cost Plus

Fixed Fee (CPFF) basis for non-personal advisory and assistance

(A&AS) services for Security Programs as defined in the Performance

Work Statement (PWS) excluding Performance Objectives # 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5.

"Performance Objectives 2, 3, and 5 identify DEI as a stakeholder. The only CLINs identified for DEI labor, 0009 and 0024 and their associated option years, exclude charges for these Performance Objectives.

Please identify a valid CLIN for collecting DEI charges for Performance Objective 2, 3, and 5."

Excluded Performance Objectives 2, 3, and 5 will be removed from CLINs 0009, 1009, 2009, and 3009 extended descriptions with an amendment to the RFP.

26 RFP & PWS Section B, page 7 of

105;

Attachment J-01 PWS

Security and Emergency Management (DSS). This Contract is issued on a Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) basis for non-personal (A&AS) services for Security Programs as defined in the Performance Work

Statement (PWS) excluding Performance Objectives # 1, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 11.

Performance Objective 9 identifies DSS as a stakeholder. The only CLINs identified for DSS labor, 0012 and its associated option years, exclude charges for this Performance Objective.

Please identify a valid CLIN for collecting DSS charges for Performance Objective 9.

Excluded Performance Objective 9 will be removed from CLIN

0012, 1012, 2012, and 3012 extended descriptions with an amendment to the RFP.

27 RFP & PWS Attachment J-01 PWS, Section 1.5, page 6;

Section 3.0, Table 3.0, Section 3.6, page 26

"Aegis BMD locations require engineering support in Dahlgren, Virginia, and throughout the National Capital Region (NCR), including Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia and the John Hopkins

University Applied Physics Laboratory (JHU/APL), Laurel, Maryland.

6. Classification Management and Security Reviews - HSV

3.6 - The stakeholders for this PO are DEI, AB, DVL, SN, TC and TH."

Section 1.5 of the Performance Work Statement indicates that Aegis BMD(AB) activities “require engineering support in Dahlgren, Virginia, and throughout the National Capital Region (NCR), including Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia and the John

Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory

(JHU/APL), Laurel, Maryland”.

Table 3.0 (PWS page 9) indicates Performance

Objective 6 activities are conducted in Huntsville.

However, the work statement for Performance

Objective 6 (PWS section 3.6, page 26) indicates AB as a stakeholder.

Please identify all worksites for AB efforts and specifically clarify whether Huntsville is included.

Regarding Section 1.5:

This statement refers to external AB partners in the greater

Washington D.C. area that interact with Aegis BMD offices located at Dahlgren, VA. The TEAMS security expertise/support would be provided from Aegis BMD facilities in Dahlgren.

Regarding Table 3.0 and PO 3.6:

Overarching agency Classification Management and Security

Reviews are performed at HSV. Stakeholders referenced (AB, DVL, SN, TC and TH) are those organizations that currently fund matrixed security personnel embedded within their program.

Embedded personnel would provide direct support to programs and interact with HSV Classification Management and

Security Review personnel to obtain appropriate clarifications and any applicable classification determinations and/or decisions.