FINAL_QA's_Amendment_1_HQ014715R0019_v1.pdf

Final RFP HQ0147‐15‐R‐0019 Amendment 1 Questions and Responses 7/28/2015

# Question Answer

In the Final RFP, Section L‐4.20 notes that the Proposal Due Date is August 10, 2015.

It also notes that the "Past Performance Volume" is due July 27, 2015. Can the Government kindly clarify if it requires offerors to submit their entire Past Performance Volume on July 27th or only to ensure that Past Performance Questionnaires are submitted on that date? If offerors are to submit the entire Past Performance Volume by July 27th, can the Government clarify the rationale for its submission prior to all other proposal volumes?

Amendment 0001 will revise Section L‐4.20 to delete the due date for PPQs. PPQ's must be submitted to assessors two weeks prior to the closing date of the solicitation. Past Performance volumes are due on August 17, 2015.

L‐14.4 Instructions for EPW pricing tabs, Cost Roll‐up Tab instrcutions: states to use RFP‐specified amounts are used for direct travel, direct ODC, and fully‐burdened Surge. The Table provided at the end of the L‐14.4 section is incomplete for Base and Option 1 and 2 Surge values. Further, the Travel total value in the table is non consistent with the Travel total on the Attachment L‐07 Excel Pricing Workbook (EPW), Cost Roll‐up Tab. Section L 14.4 table states Travel ($638k Base, $224K Option 1, $215K Option 2 with Total $ 1,078,000) and the Attachment L‐07 EPW Cost Roll‐up Tab shows a total of $1,090,000 (before G&A). Please provide Base and Option 1 and 2 Surge values and the Travel total value (before G&A) to be used for the solicitiation.

The travel values have been updated in this Amendment 1 to be consistent with the RFP instructions.

Please verify that the correct competency defintions and years' experience are in Attachment L‐10 Labor Competency and that the Attachment L‐07 Excel Pricing Workbook‐Labor Category Tab (ERI Results) will be updated

The labor competencies have been updated with this Admendment 1.

Please resolve the differences in the expereince in Attachment L‐10 Labor Competency and the experience used as the basis for developing the ERI driven Government Benchmark Range. Consistency is key to benchmark based evaluation.

The differences in the expereince in Attachment L‐10 Labor Competency and the experience used as the basis for developing the ERI driven Government Benchmark Range have been corrected in this Admendment 1.

Are the PPQ's required to be submitted 14 days prior to the Past Performance Volume due date on July 27th or the entire proposal due date on August 10th?

Amendment 0001 will revise Section L‐4.20 to delete the due date for PPQs. PPQ's must be submitted to assessors two weeks prior to the closing date of the solicitation. Past Performance volumes are due on August 17, 2015.

Would the Government consider allowing PPQ's to be received at the same time as the overall proposal due date? While the Government may want to encourage PPQ'2 to be received 14 days early, the requirement for compliance and evaluation is NLT that the due date for proposals.

Amendment 0001 will revise Section L‐4.20 to delete the due date for PPQs. PPQ's must be submitted to assessors two weeks prior to the closing date of the solicitation. Past Performance volumes are due on August 17, 2015.

Would the Government considred revising the PP due date so that all volumes are due on August 10th? Considering the contract start dates in July‐Sept of 2016, the Government would have ample time to review submission in advance of contract award.

Amendment 0001 will revise Section L‐4.20 to delete the due date for PPQs. PPQ's must be submitted to assessors two weeks prior to the closing date of the solicitation. Past Performance volumes are due on August 17, 2015.

8 Are the historical hours consistent with the PWS revisions?

The historical hours should not be confused with the PWS requirements. Offerors are asked to propose to the PWS and treat the historical hours document as reference only.

Can there be multiple technical leads bid as key personnel, or is there expected to be only one key personnel Technical Lead?

The number of key personnel is determined by the offeror's technical approach. There isn't a maximum number specified by the Government, nor a minimum.

10 Is there a maximum number of Technical Leads that can be bid?

The number of key personnel is determined by the offeror's technical approach. There isn't a maximum number specified by the Government, nor a minimum.

11 Is there a maximum number of Key Personnel that can be bid?

The number of key personnel is determined by the offeror's technical approach. There isn't a maximum number specified by the Government, nor a minimum.

12 Is there a minimum number of Key Personnel?

The number of key personnel is determined by the offeror's technical approach. There isn't a maximum number specified by the Government, nor a minimum.

Can subcontractor provide their disclosures as part of their sealed package to MDA, since some of this information will be proprietary in nature?

Offerors and their subcontractors are encouraged to submit the completed OCI Disclosure Form and supporting documentation before the proposal due dates via electronic mail to TEAMS_OCI@mda.mil to be provided a preliminary, written advisory approval.

In leiu of L‐05, can the Prime offeror provide a certification Memo from each subcontractor to indicate that they have no OCI with regards to this effort?

Offerors and their subcontractors must individually submit attachment L‐05.

For 3.4.1.g, 3.4.2.e and 3.4.3.i, is there an office or directorate responsible for SOP ownership, maintenance, and updates? If not for all SOPs, for financial SOPs?

SOPs relevant to Section 3.4 pertain to the Accounting Directorate.

For 3.4.1.a, at what frequency do audit readiness briefings and property progress reports occur?

The team assists with briefing chart preparation as needed.

Progress reports frequency is approximately 5 annually (refence Historical Product Table).

For 3.4.1.c, how is an SBR assessable unit defined? Could you please provide an example? As a follow‐on, what is the significance of defining this for two assessable units?

An SBR assessable unit is defined at the Agency level. An example is contractor payments, or civilian pay. Each assessable unit is determined by OSD.

For 3.4.1.e, what packages are being reconciled with DPAS? Packages in 3.4.1.d are being reconciled with DPAS.

17 For 3.4.3.a, at what organizational level are trading partner balances consolidated?

Trading partner balances are consolidated at the Agency level.

While Section L 10.1 indicates that “PPI can reflect experience at either the Prime contractor or subcontractor level,” we assume that to be considered a “very relevant” submission for the prime, the PPI would need to reflect performance as a prime versus a subcontractor. Please confirm that this assumption is correct?

The Government will evaluate PPI information and make a determination of relevancy during source selection.

Will the Government confirm that all PPQ’s are to be submitted to Government assessors, even if the firm requesting the PPQ was a subcontractor, and not the prime, on the referenced effort?

PPQs may to be completed by Government assessors for the prime or a subcontractor.

Because there is no reference to any macro OCI concern with regard to Business Operations versus any other specific TEAMS contract(s), may offerors make the inference that there is/are no real or perceived potential intra‐TEAMS OCI issues relative to Business Operations? Our assessment is that there are no OCI issues based on the content of Attachment L‐12 but we want/need the Government’s confirmation on this important question.

OCI determinations will be assessed on a case by case basis and offerors are encouraged to submit OCI disclosures in advance of proposal submissio. Offerors shall pay close attention to the instructions in Section L‐1.5 e.

Will the Government allow the offerors to insert and link additional worksheets within the Excel Pricing Workbook to help automate entry?

No. An updated Excel Pricing Worksheet is being provided as part of this Admendment 1that will resolve the automation issue.

LCATs as written in Attachment L‐07 (Excel Pricing Workbook for Business Operations) do not appear to require an increasing level of education or experience from Basic Analyst through SME. Please clarify LCAT Titles and matching Government Labor Competency Level Descrioptions.

The labor categories and labor compentency level descriptions have been updated with this Admendment 1.

“Procurement Overhead” as referenced in Section L 14.4 and Attachment L‐07 appears to be synonymous with the Prime’s pass‐through on subcontractor labor.

Please advise if this assumption is correct or please clarify the meaning of “Procurement Overhead.”

Procurement Overhead is synonymous with the Prime's pass‐ through on subcontractor labor.

Section L 14.4 states that the “Labor Resources ‐ Prime” tab of Attachment L‐07 “is required of all Prime, IWTAs, and major subcontractors. Are major subcontractors required to submit this tab or should they utilize the “Labor Resources – Subcontracts and IWTAs” tab when submitting to the EPW to the Government?

The revised Excel Pricing Workbook that is included with this Amendment 1 will eliminate the "Labor Resources‐Prime" tab and all labor resources (i.e. Prime, IWTAs, and major/minor subcontractors) will be input all on one tab.

Section B of the Solicitation lists “LRDR” as a stakeholder in Performance Objective #2, however in Attachment L‐07 the “Data Validation” tab lists the stakeholder as “SN‐ LRDR.” May offerors update Attachment L‐07 to match Section B?

Attachment L‐07 will be updated in Amendment 1 to match Section B.

Will you please provide guidance on how major and minor subcontractor rates and FBLRs should be entered?

The IWTA or major subcontractor may elect to copy the FBLRs in columns V:AA and paste as values before submission to the prime contractor. Minor subcontractor FBLRs should be directly entered on Labor Resources Tab in columns V:AA. As stated in Section L‐ 14.4, FBLRs include direct/Indirect rates that are carried forward (linked) from the prime's, IWTA's or major subcontractor's rates tab.

Is it acceptable to create an additionally FBLR tab for subcontractor unsanitized rates or add an additional column within the FBLR tab to identify the subcontractor company name within the current FBLR tab?

No. Minor subcontractor FBLRs should be directly entered on Labor Resources Tab in columns V:AA. The major subcontractor unsanitized rates should be identified in the major subcontractor

EPW.

In the response to draft RFP question #63 regarding experience requirements for labor categories, the Government stated that “the ERI experience level column will indicate a minimum experience level.” In Attachment L‐07 of the final RFP the Government has provided degree and experience requirements for each labor category; however, these differ significantly from the ERI experience level for corresponding labor categories. Should offerors use the experience requirements added to the Labor Competency Description of Attachment L‐07 or the ERI experience level corresponding to the mapped ERI Position Title?

The labor categories and labor compentency level descriptions have been updated with this Admendment 1.

Please clarify the intended allocation of the target incentive fee between the cost incentive and performance incentives (reconciliation and budget submission).

The Incentive Fee Plan has the correct allocation. All other tables will be updated in Amendment 1 to the RFP.

In attachment L‐09 Historical Hours by Stakeholder, are the Historical hours by stakeholder an annual estimate of hours or a total estimate of hours over the 5 year period?

Attachment L‐09 "Historical Hours by Stakeholder" are the historical hours by stakeholder over the last five years.

In the draft RFP, the Period of Performance or Delivery Dates had staggered start dates. In the final RFP, the CLINs say 3 yrs., 4 yrs., or 5 yrs. After Date of Contract (ADC). Does the Government intend to have all base year CLINS begin on the same date? And is ADC defined as award date or will there be a defined start of Period of Performance that follows the award date?

The current CLINs Period of Performance is based upon the current Task Order's PoP end. The intent is to have a staggered start date for each CLIN series. Please refer to Section L‐14.0 for the CLIN estimated start dates. If this solicitation is not awarded on time, the intent is to adjust the start date accordingly.

33 Is there a specific time that day the Volume is due such as Close of Business/5:00 PM CT

Amendment 0001 will revise Section L‐4.20 to delete the due date for PPQs. PPQ's must be submitted to assessors two weeks prior to the closing date of the solicitation.

34 Are there specific core work hours defined to support the helpdesk such as 7:00 – 18:00Yes (i.e. 6:00‐18:00 more applicable).

35 How many calls/trouble tickets does the Helpdesk handle on average per month? Approximately 354.

36 Does the MDA Helpdesk use automated tools such as Remedy for Incident tracking? Yes, automated tools are used.

In the draft RFP, there were several tasks involving Manpower reporting. These were removed from the final RFP, but there were no reductions or changes in the Historical Hours provided in Attachment L‐09. Does the Government have an estimate of the time that should be reduced by removing these tasks?

A revised table of hours will be provided in the Amendment 1.

Attachment L‐04 is specifically for Subcontractors. Is there a template to be used by the Prime?

Attachment L‐04 is only needed for subcontractors and authorizes release to the Government of requested information on the subcontractor’s performance. Primes will not need to submit this form.

Would the Government consider modifying this clause to make it clear that the successful offeror’s proposal will be incorporated into the final contract?

The Government does not intend on modifying the language of H‐

30. Potential offerors should pay close attention to Section L‐3.3 which states " Offerors are advised that the Government may incorporate into the final contract enhancing features included in the offeror’s proposal deemed beneficial to the Government."

With the exception of the Cost and Price Volume, no cost or pricing information should appear in any other volume.

Why is FAR 52.216‐26 Clause included? Does the Government expect to issue a letter contract?

FAR clause 52.216‐26 will be removed from Section I via amendment 1.

Given this is a Small Business Set Aside and the prime is required to perform over 50% of the work would the Government consider removing the Small Business Plan and Compliance Plan?

The requirement is only for the offeror to submit a Small Business Compliance Plan. This Plan is used to determine if the offeror has identifed a sound process to meet the 50% rule, contained in FAR 52.219‐14(c)(1), and demonstrate the Small Business Prime’s total labor cost is at least 50% as identified in Table L‐3 in Section L.

On the PPI form, question 7b references contract values including Original Contract value and Current Contract Value (excluding unexercised options). In the following example, how would the Government suggest completing these values? Base contract is awarded for $30 million over 5 years. Immediately after award, the contract was expanded to include additional scope/level of effort to $50 million over 5 years. Contractor is in year 2 of the contract, so only $ 20 million has been obligated. How should we accurately reflect the size/scope of the contract?

The value of the contract would be the estimated value based on the originally awarded value and any increase in value. It is not based on the amount of funds obligated.

The Technical Lead is called out in the PWS, was a labor competecny for the Technical Lead intended in the Final RFP?

No, there is no labor competency titled "Technical Lead".

The instructions in both the EPW and Section L direct that the Prime tab is required of all Prime offerors, IWTA’s and major subcontractors. Is this an error?

Yes; the instructions and the EPW have been updated with this Amendment 1.

How many days are planned for the notification period between award and period of performance start date?

Once an award is announced, there will be approximately 14 calendar days before the Period of Performance begins. This timeperiod includes notification to unsuccessful offererors, debriefs and the protest period.

While most manpower‐related PWS elements were removed from the draft to the final RFP, the final PWS contains still sections 3.1.1.l, 3.1.1.k, and 3.1.2.l, which appear to reflect manpower‐related tasks. Were these intended to be removed in the final RFP or does this work remain in scope?

The tasks contained in 3.1.1.k are no longer in scope and have been removed from the PWS, but the other tasks remain.

None of the documents in the "bidder's library" for Earned Value has this name. The documents that appear to be similar are: 3.3.2.a,c 5003.01‐INS Ballistic Missile Defense System Earned Value Management Instruction (dated 7/26/2011) 3.3.2.a,c 5004.01‐INS Ballistic Missile Defense System Integrated Baseline Reviews Instruction (dated 7/6/2011) Addl REf ‐ 5003.01‐M Ballistic Missile Defense System EVM Contract Rqmts Manual 3.3.2a (dated 2/17/2012) Addl REf ‐ 5004.01‐M Ballistic Missile Defense System Integrated Baseline Reviews Manual 3.3.2a (dated 2/17/2012).

Questions: 1. None of the documents contains the same name of the document listed in the PWS. Can we obtain a copy of MDA instruction 5025.01?

2. These documents are all dated before 6/23/2012. Have newer versions been created?

MDA Instruction 5025.01 is a document prescribing the process for updating an issuance to ensure consistency across the Agency and the Government does not believe this document is required to provide a response to this RFP. It is not specific to the tasks/products of this PWS.

Newer versions of the documents in the bidder’s library are not available at this time.

Table L‐1 (Proposal Organization and Content) states that there is a 50 page limit for the past performance information (PPI) forms. Question: Since there is a possibility that some PPIs may not require the full 5 pages for content, would the government confirm if they will allow offerors to take 2 pages from the total of 50 and provide an overview of the team and the quals provided?

Offerors should use the page limit for PPIs only.