HQ0516-18-R-0013_MOD_0003.pdf

AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION/MODIFICATION OF CONTRACT

Except as provided herein, all terms and conditions of the document referenced in Item 9A or 10A, as heretofore changed, remains unchanged and in full force and effect.

15A. NAME AND TITLE OF SIGNER (Type or print)

30-105-04EXCEPTION TO SF 30

APPROVED BY OIRM 11-84

STANDARD FORM 30 (Rev. 10-83) Prescribed by GSA

FAR (48 CFR) 53.243

THE PURPOSE OF THIS AMENDMENT IS TO ANSWER SUBMITTED QUESTIONS AND EXTEND THE SUBMISSION DATE OF THE PROPOSALS.

1. CONTRACT ID CODE PAGE OF PAGES

J 1 27

16A. NAME AND TITLE OF CONTRACTING OFFICER (Type or print)

16C. DATE SIGNED

BY 03-Jul-2018

16B. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA15C. DATE SIGNED15B. CONTRACTOR/OFFEROR

(Signature of Contracting Officer)(Signature of person authorized to sign)

8. NAME AND ADDRESS OF CONTRACTOR (No., Street, County, State and Zip Code) X HQ051618R0013

X 9B. DATED (SEE ITEM 11)

31-May-2018

10B. DATED (SEE ITEM 13)

9A. AMENDMENT OF SOLICITATION NO.

11. THIS ITEM ONLY APPLIES TO AMENDMENTS OF SOLICITATIONS

X The above numbered solicitation is amended as set forth in Item 14. The hour and date specified for receipt of Offer X is extended, is not extended.

Offer must acknowledge receipt of this amendment prior to the hour and date specified in the solicitation or as amended by one of the following methods:

(a) By completing Items 8 and 15, and returning copies of the amendment; (b) By acknowledging receipt of this amendment on each copy of the offer submitted;

or (c) By separate letter or telegram which includes a reference to the solicitation and amendment numbers. FAILURE OF YOUR ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO BE RECEIVED AT THE PLACE DESIGNATED FOR THE RECEIPT OF OFFERS PRIOR TO THE HOUR AND DATE SPECIFIED MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF YOUR OFFER. If by virtue of this amendment you desire to change an offer already submitted, such change may be made by telegram or letter, provided each telegram or letter makes reference to the solicitation and this amendment, and is received prior to the opening hour and date specified.

12. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA (If required)

13. THIS ITEM APPLIES ONLY TO MODIFICATIONS OF CONTRACTS/ORDERS.

IT MODIFIES THE CONTRACT/ORDER NO. AS DESCRIBED IN ITEM 14.

A. THIS CHANGE ORDER IS ISSUED PURSUANT TO: (Specify authority) THE CHANGES SET FORTH IN ITEM 14 ARE MADE IN THE

CONTRACT ORDER NO. IN ITEM 10A.

B. THE ABOVE NUMBERED CONTRACT/ORDER IS MODIFIED TO REFLECT THE ADMINISTRATIVE CHANGES (such as changes in paying office, appropriation date, etc.) SET FORTH IN ITEM 14, PURSUANT TO THE AUTHORITY OF FAR 43.103(B).

C. THIS SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT IS ENTERED INTO PURSUANT TO AUTHORITY OF:

D. OTHER (Specify type of modification and authority)

E. IMPORTANT: Contractor is not, is required to sign this document and return copies to the issuing office.

14. DESCRIPTION OF AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION (Organized by UCF section headings, including solicitation/contract subject matter where feasible.)

10A. MOD. OF CONTRACT/ORDER NO.

2. AMENDMENT/MODIFICATION NO. 5. PROJECT NO.(If applicable)

6. ISSUED BY

3. EFFECTIVE DATE

29-Jun-2018

CODE

HQ0516 DEFENSE MEDIA ACTIVITY RIVERSIDE

23755 Z STREET

RIVERSIDE CA 92518-2031

HQ0516 7. ADMINISTERED BY (If other than item 6)

4. REQUISITION/PURCHASE REQ. NO.

CODE

See Item 6

FACILITY CODECODE

EMAIL:TEL:

HQ051618R0013

SECTION SF 30 BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

SECTION SF 30 - BLOCK 14 CONTINUATION PAGE

The following have been added by full text:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES P00003

QUESTI

ON 9

In L-2(d) on page 56, the instructions state that the “offeror shall make a clear statement in Section A of the Proposal documentation” specifying the period through which the proposal is valid and it references Section A of the solicitation. We are unable to locate this section or this information; can the government please indicate where this information is to be found?

ANSWE

R 9

The anticipated period of performance is shown on page 12, Item 1 as July 2018 to Jun 2021. Actual period of performance will be from date of award extending 36 months.

QUESTI

ON 10

In L.5.1, Past Performance is listed as Factor 3, though L.4.0 used Subfactor 1 and Subfactor 2 to describe the elements of that volume. Should L.5.1 use Subfactor 3 in pace of Factor 3 since there are no Factors 1 and 2 listed?

R 10

Page 61, 5.0 Volume III Past Performance is incorrectly identified as Factor 3. This should be noted as factor 2.

QUESTI

ON 11

L-5.1 lists Past Performance as Factor 3 and again in L-6.1, Cost/Price is listed as Factor 3.

Should Past Performance is listed as Factor 2 in Section M (page 83), should it also be Factor 2 in L-5.1?

R 11 Yes. See answer to Question 10.

QUESTI

ON 12

In L-5.1, the RFP states that to meet the requirement for recency, completed contracts must not exceed 5 years since completion. However, In L.5.2, the requirement states 3 years since completion. Further, in Section M on page 85 under recency assessment, the government says that efforts must have been “performed during the past three (5) years.” Can the government clarify which date is accurate?

R 12 Not to exceed 5 years since completion

QUESTI

ON 13

In Section M on page 85, the RFP states that on-going efforts must have completed at least 12 months prior to proposal due date whereas in L-5.1, it states that on-going contracts must have completed a minimum of 2 years of performance. Can the government clarify which range we are to use.

R 13

The on-going contracts requirement is specified so that a Contractor Performance Rating System (CPAS) report is available from the Government contracting office after the base year performance period. Completion of a 12 month performance period is acceptable.

QUESTI

ON 14

Per instructions in L.6.2, the offeror is to use the “format shown” which is the table of items and costs, but L.6.2.2 says we are provide “direct and indirect” costs by year whereas the table does not show out years. The evaluation criteria (page 89) states we are to show pricing “for a three year ordering period and a 6 month option. Can the government clarify if offerors are to propose:

A single price for 3 years and the option (no escalation) A single price for the 3 year ordering period plus a separate price for the 6 mo.

Option

R 14

A cost proposal is requested in the format shown inclusive of overhead. Volume price discounts should be shown if offered. If price escalation is anticipated during the performance period additional forms should provided to show new pricing and the period in which they will be effective.

QUESTI

ON 15

Attachment 3, first paragraph, references the “limitations set forth in paragraphs 5.3 and 2.2 of L-III.” However, there is no L-III listed. If L-III refers to L-2, Soliciation Response Requirements beginning on page 57, there is no paragraph 5.3, but there is 2.2 that includes limitations in Table 2.2. Is there an additional limitation beyond what is listed in Table 2.2 that offerors should be aware of?

R 15

The proposals should follow the limitations in page 61 Paragraph 5.0 and page 58 Section L 2.2 Organization/Number of Copies/Page limit

QUESTI

ON 16

In L.2.2, Table 2-2 lists a Volume VI – Resumes, but there are no instructions provided as to what is to be included here. Can the government provide clarification on whose resume(s) are to be included in this volume and how these will be evaluated?

R 16 A resume for the proposed project manager is requested to show management capability.

QUESTI

ON 17

In Section M.2 under Factor 3, the government provides a pricing matrix beginning on page

89. We have 4 questions regarding this table:

What is the difference between the 2 “Quantity Discount” columns? Is it the Government’s intention that the offeror provide 2 thresholds for quantity discounts or is one of the columns to be used to define the threshold (# of items constituting "bulk" order) and the other column to list the discount? Alternatively, is the government anticipating that we provide a percentage discount in one column and the discount rate in another?

For the total cost, should this use just the base “Cost Each” multiplied by the Annual Quantity?

There appears to be a discrepancy under ODCs as Identification/Tagging Supplies is number as #1 despite coming between #3 and #4. Can the government clarify the numbering of these items?

Items 13 and 14 under Still Images (Aerial Prints not to exceed 20x24” and Aerial Film 9.5” x 250’ are not listed in the version of the table appearing on page 12 (Section B). Can the Government confirm if offeror’s are to provide a price for these items?

R 17

Yes the pricing for Items 13 and 14 should be included if offered. The document at page 12 is a sample Contract Item line Number (CLIN) that would be awarded. See attachment to this modification and answer to question 14

QUESTI

ON 18

Can the government confirm that there is no Attachment 2?

R 18 See attachment to this modification

QUESTI

ON 19

In Table 2.2 (page 58) and in L.7.3.4.2.1 the government requires that the contractor propose a Performance Work Statement (PWS) based on the Statement of Objectives as part of Volume V: Contract Documentation. We have 2 questions regarding the PWS.

As the PWS is listed under 7.3.4.2, Required Attachment, can the government confirm that the PWS is intended to be an attachment and that it is not subject to the page limitations for the volume?

Elsewhere in the RFP under the evaluation factors (see paragraphs 2.A and 2.B on page 80; under Subfactor 1: Technical Capability on page 82), it is clear that the PWS will be evaluated as part of Factor 1: Technical, which is part of Volume II:

Technical/Management. Can the government clarify if the PWS should be part of Volume V or Volume II?

R 19 The PWS should be in Volume V

QUESTI

ON 20

In Attachment 3: Past Performance Information (pg 71), it states that offerors are to provide “current information on all three individuals” but only 2 names are listed. Can the confirm indicate who the third individual is or if the reference to three individuals was in error?

R 20

The names and contact information for the government Program Manager and contracting Officer are requested. The reference to a third individual is an error.

QUESTI

ON 21

Can the government clarify the units to be used in pricing the items for Still and Moving Media?

We have supplied units based on our historic experience conducting this work. However, for motion media, we have historically used both linear feet and hours as a measurement for invoicing.

ANSWE

R 21

The units for still media should be for each item whereas motion media should be expresses in running time to eliminate variances between formats. Corrective measures such as image stabilization or baking are for each media asset

QUESTI

ON 22

Can the government provide clarity on how offerors are to provide pricing for Other Direct Costs. Is the government seeking a Firm Fixed Price for the quantity of each or are offeror’s to provide the government with cost estimating relationships and the factors we will use when developing pricing for each ODC? If Offerors are to provide a single FFP, can we obtain more detail on the requirements for travel, shipping, courier, meeting, and working space? Please see specific questions below

ANSWE

R 22 See Attachment to this modification and answers to questions 23 – 32.

QUESTI

ON 23

Travel: Can the government clarify who is undertaking these 2 annual trips, their duration, and destination?

R 23

Travel will be to the DIMOC Facility in Riverside, CA for coordination meetings. Most meetings are anticipated to be telephonic or online for coordination of shipments and to resolve issues, etc.

QUESTI

ON 24

Shipping: Is the government able to provide offerors with average or expect weight and dimension of the boxes?

R 24

The dimensions of the boxes are 16”l x 12”w x 10”h or 16”l x 16”w x 10”h. Weight per pallet varies with media. The running average is 1,400 Lbs. per pallet. See page 6 Para 4.5 Notes and other pertinent information.

QUESTI

ON 25

Courier: Can the government provide offerors with information on the destinations for the courier trips? Are these solely between Fort Meade, MD and Riverside, CA or will there be other locations?

R 25

Courier trips are to/from the DIMOC facility in Riverside, CA if local delivery is used to pick up/deliver media on or off pallet.

ON 26

Identification/Tagging Supplies: Can the government provide specifications for identification/tagging supplies or is the government looking for vendors to propose a specific identification solution?

R 26

These supplies are for barcode/media identification in case the media has not been previously tagged by the Government. Vendors are welcome to propose identification solutions.

QUESTI

ON 27

Project Management: Is the government seeking a labor hour rate for our proposed project manager?

R 27

Yes hourly rate is requested. This is not anticipated to be a full time requirement dedicated to this contract.

QUESTI

ON 28

Meetings: Can the government clarify where these meetings are held and how often; who is attending them? Are we able to substitute virtual meetings for some or all of these or is in-person attendance mandatory?

R 28

Meetings will include a kickoff meeting and monthly coordination meetings. Meetings may be held telephonically or online.

QUESTI

ON 29

Archival Research/Hr: Can the government please clarify the level of experience and education desired or is up to the offeror to propose? Is the government seeking a labor hour rate?

ANSWE

R 29

The subject matter for research would be related to imagery era, location or general subject matter to add keywords to identify media. The nature of the record are archival. Offeror should propose the skill level and hourly rate. An online controlled vocabulary will be available for keywords.

QUESTI

ON 30

Working Space w/ntwork/wk: Can the government provide more detail on this ODC and what the billing unit is referring to? Is the vendor being asked to provide working space in its facilities for Government personnel or is the vendor being asked to provide a cost estimating relationship for networked working spaces as part of its overhead?

R 30

ODC is “Other Direct Costs” related to the digitization performance. The occasional working space can be a desk, telephone and network connectivity to reach Government databases for use by Government archivists or contracting officer’s representatives (COR) to assist with media identification when shipments are received, clarify requirements and inspections, etc. Dedicated office space is not required and proximity to working spaces is preferred.

QUESTI

ON 31

IT Support / Hr: As the SOO does not specify IT Support as an activity, can the government provide more detail on what IT Support the government is seeking?

R 31 Occasional IT support regarding media preparation, scanning, etc. if needed.

QUESTI

ON 32

Quality Control (HRS): Can the government provide clarity on this ODC? Is the Government seeking a labor hour rate for quality control reviews?

R 32 Yes labor rates are requested for these “other direct costs.”

QUESTI

ON 33

How should offerors indicate their indirect costs (e.g. as specified in negotiated rate agreements between parties and other federal agencies) in the Cost/Price Volume and in the cost/price summary worksheets that break down prices per item in various media formats?

R 33

The Government’s intent in this procurement is to reduce its costs. Submission of alternative rates will be examined and accepted if advantageous to the Government.

QUESTI

ON 34

For still image digitization, the Federal Agencies Digital Guidelines Initiative (FADGI)Technical Guidelines for Digitizing Cultural Heritage Materials (2016 < Caution-http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/guidelines/FADGI%20Federal%20%20Agencies%20 Digital%20Guidelines%20Initiative-2016%20Final_rev1.pdf > ) incorporates and extends the NARA (2004) Guidelines. We usually reference FADGI (2016) in our proposals, should we reference NARA (2004) instead?

R 34

Incorporating references is not necessary or desired. See RFP page 57, General instructions € and page 58 2.2 page limits

QUESTI

ON 35

P5. General questions Will you be providing us the inventory in an electronic format?

What are your file naming conventions? If you do not have a file naming convention, may we suggest one?

R 35

Yes, the inventory will be provided in electronic format. Proposals for naming conventions will be considered if compatible with NARA guidelines.

ON 36

P.5 Section 4.3.1 Will you be supplying barcodes for items without barcodes? If not, what size are the barcodes and how many digits. Where will we be applying these on the various media that you are sending us.

R 36

The DIMOC uses either 6 or 8 characters on barcodes. The labels should be sized appropriately to the media. Video cases are labeled on the case and on the cassette. Film cans are labeled on the can (film is normally de-spooled onto plastic core for digitization).

Photo prints are labeled on the back. Slides are labeled on the mount. Negatives are labeled on the package. Barcode ranges to be used will be provided with the media.

QUESTI

ON 37

P. 5 Section 4.3.3 What does archival research for subject matter entail? What level of expertise is required? BA, M.A., PhD?

R 37 See answer to question 29

ON 38

P. 6 Section 4.3.4 What type of white paper or academic research do you see coming from this work?

R 38

White papers or academic may be related to the archival preservation of the media records or other topics related to the media.

ON 39

P.6 Section What sort of package do they expect? One record per item? One record for multiple pieces?

R 39

Large media will be in individual cases. Slides, photos and negatives will be in packages or slide boxes. Shipping boxes will be as specified in answer to question 24.

QUESTI

ON 40

P. 6 Section 4.5 Do metadata needs vary by media type? If so, how?

R 40

Metadata may be key-wording and record number or it can extend to detailed description depending on the subject matter and the amount of information available with the media..

ON 41

P.6 Section 4.5 Will we be transcribing metadata from the physical objects?

R 41

Yes if not already accomplished by the Government. Frequently this is the only information available about the record.

QUESTI

ON 42

P. 6 Section 4.5 Do you want us to add the subject terms? What thesaurus do you use?

R 42

The DIMOC uses an online controlled vocabulary that will be made available to the vendor.

Nomination for additions can be made to the Government.

ON 43

P. 6 Section 4.5 What metadata standards do you want us to follow?

R 43

The Government uses the IPTC standard for stills with XMP with IPTC core schema for motion

QUESTI

ON 44

P. 6 Section 4.5 Please provide us an example of the most complex metadata record you have.

ANSWE

R 44

The most complex metadata could include title, description, synopsis, date shot, keywords, military operation, service diagraph, photographer, location, release status, public release authority, classification, command shown, Service shown, tape/slide/reel number, barcode

ON 45

P. 6 Section 4.5 Please provide us an example of the “average” metadata record you expect us to generate.

R 45

A typical metadata example would be keyword, location, date shot (may be by era, e.g., WWII if date unavailable). Extended metadata would be for unique collections.

QUESTI

ON 46

P. 6 Section 4.5 What percentage of the items listed do you anticipate will need to have metadata records create?

R 46

In most cases the metadata will be provided by the Government with digital file numbering referenced to barcode the single task requirement. Complex requirements will be coordinated by task order.

QUESTI

ON 47

P. 6 Section 4.5 What percentage of the items listed do you anticipate will need to have info added to the metadata records. What would that be?

R 47 At this time the addition of metadata will be under 5%.

QUESTI

ON 48

P.8 Section 10.2 What is your prefered way of receiving reports? Would a secure Web site with totals for each week be sufficient or do you require an email or other type of notification?

R 48

We would prefer electronically transmitted records for inclusion in contract documentation files.

QUESTI

ON 49

P 12 We are assuming that for all media listed that these are individual item counts, not box counts. Is that correct?

R 49 Yes, The represented numbers are for individual media.

QUESTI

ON 50

P 12 What are the age ranges for the media listed?

R 50

The media age varies based on the media type that was in use during the era. We still receive stills from the WW1 era, film from WWII on and video from the 70s to the 90s. We have on occasion received glass plate negatives.

QUESTI

ON 51

P12 We are assuming that all still media are in good condition is that correct?

R 51

The majority is in good condition. Certain types of media have some deterioration common to the media type such as sticking or shedding for U-Matic, high 8 or VHS and potential vinegar syndrome for film limited to less than 2% warpage.

ON 52

P 12 For color negatives and slides what percentage has had the color change due to aging?

R 52

Generally the negatives and slides are in good condition and should be rendered to closely match the media. Color correction will not be tasked at this time.

ON 53

P 12 Still Media Bound material Is the number listed page count or volume count? If it’s a volume count what are the average number of pages per volume? What types of materials are you including? Books, journals

R 53 The number for bound materials are page count

ON 54

P 12 Still Media Unbound/Bound materialWhat are the approximate ages for the materials listed? Are any of them fragile/brittle?

R 54 The age of bound materials are typically 20 -60 years and are typically in good condition.

QUESTI

ON 55

The tables onpage 12 and 89 for still media do not match. Which one should we use? P 89 under pricing item 14, it says Aerial Film 9 ½” x 250’. Each item is 9 ½ inches by 250 feet, is that correct?

R 55 The table on page 89 will be used. Aerial film reels are 9 ½” by 250’.

QUESTI

ON 56

NARA (Caution-https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/policy/transfer-guidance-tables.html < Caution-https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/policy/transfer-guidance-tables.html > ) prefers tiff files to jpegs for long term storage and preservation. Your DAMs supports JPEG. Do you want us to supply both file types tiff files for NARA and JPEG for

WAZEE?

R 56 The minimum acceptable standard is JPG 2000 or best industry standard in effect.

QUESTI

ON 57

Under the admin section, does “B” mean you want proposals via email on June 27 and then per “C” you want hardcopies by July 6th?

R 57 The due dates for the proposals was extended to 6 July by Amendment 2.

QUESTI

ON 58

How do you want the contractor to return digitized materials (into Wazee/AWS buckets, HDD, Aspera, etc.), ANSWE

R 58 See answer to Question 5, Amendment 2.

QUESTI

ON 59

Regarding transition in, is there an existing provider we need to transition from? Is that why the Wazee document was included?

ANSWE

R 59

The document was included in error as storage and media asset management system is not a part of this requirement.

QUESTI

ON 60

Can you clarify the PPE requirements?

• We already have 3 PPE’s we did through D&B in 2017. Can those be submitted or do we need to get new ones done?

• If the customer is to send those in on their own, what goes in the past performance section of our response?

• Do those also have to be submitted by deadline of June 28th?

R 60

See answer to question 7, amendment 2. The due date for responses was extended by amendment 2.

QUESTI

ON 61

Please confirm the page limit for Volume I – Executive Summary is not inclusive of the Master Table of Contents (Section L 3.2) and only applies to the Narrative Summary (Section L 3.1).

ANSWE

R 61

The page limit only pertains to the Narrative Summary.

ON 62

Statement of Objectives Item 4.3.2. Please clarify this requirement:

Captioning and key wording for digitized media assets (where caption information is provided with media)

Is the Government referencing an SCC file for closed caption data that may appear on video tape? If not, please clarify what captioning and key wording will be required for the digitized media assets and what caption information will be provided.

ANSWE

R 62

SCC files or closed captioning will not be tasked at this time. Key-wording would include who, what, where, when (era), etc. based on available information with the media. When captioning information is not available, keywording may be limited to essential information derivable from the visual content or notes on the media mount.

QUESTI

ON 63

Section L, 7.1 Annual Representations and Certifications If the Offeror has completed and maintains annual Representations and Certifications in the System for Award Management (SAM) (previously ORCA), is the Offeror required to complete and include the Representations and Certifications (52.212-3) provided with the RFP (pages 19 – 37). If so, do these Representations and Certifications included with the Contract Volume count against the identified page limitation of 25 pages?

ANSWE

R 63

A statement is required to be inserted in your proposal that the 52.212-3 on the SAMS webpage is the most up to date information. The page count of the Representation and Certifications (52.212-3) if submitted will not count towards the 25 page limit.

QUESTI

ON 64

Can you confirm that the due date has changed for submission has changed to July 6th?

R 64 The contract due date has been extended to 20 July 2018

QUESTI

ON 65

The site now says the RFP can be submitted through the FBO website. Is that correct?

R 65 Proposals can be submitted by email but hard copies must be received by closing date.

QUESTI

ON 66

Is there still a requirement for paper copies to be sent in addition to the electronic copy?

R 66 Yes

QUESTI

ON 67

In the RFP, electronic submittal is defined as being submitted by mailing a CD with separate volumes per section.

With the option to submit via the FBO now in place, do we still need to send a CD?

R 67 See answer to questions 2 and 65

QUESTI

ON 68

In the SOO, the Government forecasts the minimum and maximum workload estimates. In order that we might produce the most cost-effective proposal, can you forecast an average or normal workload estimate?

R 68

Proposals should provide basic cost and volume price breaks if offered.

QUESTI

ON 69

Would the Government grant a 30-day extension for submittal of proposals?

R 69

The due date cannot be extended thirty days however the dur date has neen extended to 20 July 2018.

ON 70

Will the Government accept a proposal to digitize and deliver 25% of the maximum monthly images?

R 70

Yes, all proposals will be evaluated based on the overall strength of the proposal. While the Government requirement is to have all media digitized, there is a possibility that multiple awards will be made based on the Offerors capability and the volume of Government requirements. See Page 49 of RFP, FAR Clause 52.216-27 "Single or Multiple Awards" And Page 65 of RFP

Section L, Para 7.2 "Exceptions to Solicitation Requirements."

QUESTI

ON 71

Section 7.0 Volume V, page 65 references section B, F, H, J and K. I don’t see where sections A, B, F, H, or J are identified within the RFP, can you please address what these sections are?

ANSWE

R 71

A – Solicitation Contract Form B – Supplies or Services and Price Costs F – Deliveries and Performance H – Special Contract Requirements J – List of Attachments

ATTACHMENT REFERENCED BY QUESTION #22

Item Number Item Description

Annual Quantity

Unit (Assumed)

Still Media

1 Still Photo (35mm B&W Neg) 500 Item

2 Still Photo (35mm Color Neg) 2,000 Item

3 35mm Slide B&W 1,000 Item

4 35mm Slide Color 185,000 Item

5 Still Photo (4/5 B&W Neg) 60,000 Item

6 Still Photo (4/5 B&W Neg) 12,000 Item

7 Photo Print B&W 150,000 Item

***************ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENT 03 ***********************

E. DATE OF SUBMISSION OF PROPOSALS IS EXTENDED TO 20 JULY 2018

The following have been modified:

SUMMARY OF CHANGES

AMENDMENT 002

Version 1 June 14

HQ051618R0013 DIGITIZATION

QUESTION #5 How do you want the contractor to return digitized materials (into Wazee/AWS buckets, HDD, Aspera, etc.).

8 Photo Print Color 20,000 Item

9 Bound Material 11x16 B&W 2,000 Item

10 Bound Material 11x16 Color 3,000 Item

11 Unbound print up to 11x14 10,000 Item

12 Photo print not to exceed 11 X 17 4,000 Item

13 Aerial prints not to exceed 20x24” 5,000 Item

14 Aerial Film 9.5” x 250’ 2,000 Item

Motion Media

1 SD Video / Hour 8,000 hour of video

2 HD Video / Hour 1,800 hour of video

3 Audio / Hour 200 hour of audio

4 Film / Hour 800 hour of film

5 Video Digital Image correction 8 Media Asset

6 Film Digital Image Correction 8 Media asset

7 Slate/Colorbars Removal 2,000 Media Asset

8 Video Cassete Baking 3,000 Item

Item Number Item Description

Annual Quantity

Unit (Assumed)

Other Direct Costs

1 Travel (Trips) 2 Trip

2 Shipping (Boxes) 400 Box

3 Courier (Trips) 24 Trip

1 Identification/Tagging Supplies 10,000 Item

4 Project Management 720 Labor Hour

5 Meetings 13 Per meeting

6 Archival Research/Hr 800 Labor Hour

7 Working Space w/ntwork/wk 6 Weekly rate

8 IT Support / Hr 400 Labor Hour

9 Quality Control (HRS) 400 Labor Hour

ANSWER#5: All digitized media is to be returned on hard drive of suitable capacity. No network based transfer will be accepted due to additional security and curation measures that will be taken by the government.

QUESTION #6 Regarding transition in, is there an existing provider we need to transition from? Is that why the Wazee document was included?

ANSWER#6: This transition document is not relevant to this procurement and has been deleted. (See below Administrative item A.

QUESTION #7 Can you clarify the PPE requirements?

a. We already have 3 PPE’s we did through D&B in 2017. Can those be submitted or do we need to get new ones done?

b. If the customer is to send those in on their own, what goes in the past performance section of our response?

c. Do those also have to be submitted by deadline of June 28th?

ANSWER#7:

a. Yes, these can be submitted if they meet the requirements in the RFP Page 62, Paragraph 5.2

b. Yes, These must be included in the response

c. Packages must be submitted fully completed by the deadlines. See

ADMINISTRATIVE #C

QUESTION #8 In “Other Costs”, is the shipping the cost of the boxes? And the cost of the transport to go under “Courier”?

ANSWER#8: Shipping of boxes will include courier or other shipment method required based on both distance from the DIMOC facility in Riverside, CA and the preference of the vendor. The media bill be provides in boxes as specified in the RFP, page 6, Paragraph 4.5

***************ADMINISTRATIVE***********************

A. Pages 90 Transition Plan thru page 101 is removed in its entirety from the solicitation.

B. Date of last RFI to be accepted will be on 27 June 2018.

C. Submission date of hard copies proposals has changed to 6 July 2018 close of business.

D. AMENDMENT 001, QUESTION #4 SEE ATTACHED TABLE BELOW: In lieu of an “INDUSTRY DAY” pictures of the media are furnished. The intent is to familarize you with the media’s transitions.

E. All amendments shall be acknowledge along with final submission.

AMENDMENT 002 TABLE ATTACHMENT 01

1. VIDEO – BAKING FORMATS 2. STILLS PACKING 3. STILLS - ENVELOPES

4. STILLS ENVELOP LABELS 5. STILLS – ENVELOP

CONTENTS

6. PACKING – FINISHED

PALLET

7 PACKING – BOXES ON

PALLET

8. PACKING – BOX MARKINGS 9. PACKING – BETA TAPE

10. PACKING – BETA IN BOX 11. PACKING – BARCODE 12. FILM – LABELS 2

13 – LABELS 1 14. FILM – 70 MM 15. FILM – 35 MM

16. FILM – 16 MM 17. AUDIO REEL LABELS 18. AUDIO - PACKING

19. VIDEO – ALL FORMATS

SECTION SF 1449 - CONTINUATION SHEET

The following have been modified:

SECTION M

SECTION M- EVALUATION FACTORS FOR AWARD

52.252-1 SOLICITATION PROVISIONS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

This solicitation incorporates one or more solicitation provisions by reference, with the same force and effect as if they were given in full text. Upon request, the Contracting Officer will make their full text available. The offeror is cautioned that the listed provisions may include blocks that must be completed by the offeror and submitted with its quotation or offer. In lieu of submitting the full text of those provisions, the offeror may identify the provision by paragraph identifier and provide the appropriate information with its quotation or offer. Also, the full text of a solicitation provision may be accessed electronically at this/these address:

https://farsite.hill.af.mil

1. AWARD BASED ON BEST VALUE TRADEOFF TO THE GOVERNMENT

The Government will award to the offeror whose proposal is the best value in terms of Technical, Past Performance and Cost/Price. The evaluation will be based on the demonstrated capabilities of the prospective Contractors in relation to the needs of the project as set forth in the Solicitation. The merits of each proposal will be evaluated carefully. Each proposal must document the feasibility of successful implementation of the requirements within the Statement of Objectives (SOO). In addition, the offeror should provide context to demonstrate their understanding of the overall project requirements; and a description of their approach to provide integrated support across the entire breadth of the proposal to meet all the requirements.

1.1 BASIS FOR CONTRACT AWARD

Unless all offers are rejected, award will be made to the responsible offeror whose offer, conforming to the solicitation, is determined to be the best overall value to the Government, price and other factors considered. In determining the best overall proposal, Technical and Past Performance factors are significantly more important than Cost/Price. Within the Technical factor, subfactors technical capability and management capability are approximately equal in importance. The Government intends to make an award to one or more offerors whose proposals provide the best overall value to the government.

https://farsite.hill.af.mil/

Offerors must satisfy the requirements described in the evaluation criteria, as well as all other RFQ requirements.

Offerors must submit information sufficient to evaluate their proposal based on the detailed factors listed below.

2. EVALUATION FACTORS AND RATING METHODOLOGY

TECHNICAL EVALUATION PROCEDURES.

A. The Government technical evaluation team shall evaluate the offerors’ technical proposal (including proposed PWS) utilizing the Combined Rating Method (Table 1).

B. The offeror’s proposal and proposed PWS shall address each of the subfactors comprising the Technical Factor. Detailed instructions are included in the proposal preparation instructions in 52.212-1 Addendum of the solicitation. Each subfactor will be given an adjectival rating which correlates to a color rating. (Table 1).

Table 1. Combined Technical/Risk Ratings Color Rating Description Blue Outstanding Proposal exceeds requirements and indicates an exceptional approach and in depth understanding of the requirements for public record archival processes. Proposal contains multiple strengths and no weaknesses. Proposal provides efficiencies, innovation and cost savings. Risk of unsuccessful performance is very low.

Purple Good Proposal meets requirements and indicates a thorough approach and understanding of the requirements for public record archival processes. Proposal contains at least one strength and few weaknesses. Risk of unsuccessful performance is low.

Green Acceptable Proposal meets requirements and indicates an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements for public record archival processes. Strengths and weaknesses are offsetting or will have little or no impact on contract performance. Risk of unsuccessful performance is no worse than moderate.

Yellow Marginal Proposal does not clearly meet requirements and has not demonstrated an adequate approach and understanding of the requirements for public record archival processes. The proposal has one or more weaknesses which are not offset by strengths. Risk of unsuccessful performance is high.

Red Unacceptable Proposal does not meet requirements and contains one or more deficiencies. Proposal is unawardable.

C. The Government will apply the terms listed Table 2 Definitions Relating to the Technical Evaluation Rating Process.

Table 2. Definitions Relating to the Technical Evaluation Rating Process

Deficiency is a material failure of a proposal/quotation to meet a Government requirement or a combination of significant weaknesses in a proposal/quotation that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance to an unacceptable level.

Risk, as it pertains to source selection, is the potential for unsuccessful contract performance. The consideration of risk assesses the degree to which an offeror’s proposed approach to achieving the technical factor or subfactor may involve risk of disruption of schedule, increased cost or degradation of performance, the need for increased Government oversight, and the likelihood of unsuccessful contract performance.

Significant Weakness in the proposal/quotation is a flaw that appreciably increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

Strength is an aspect of an offeror's proposal/quotation that has merit or exceeds specified performance or capability requirements in a way that will be advantageous to the Government during contract performance.

Uncertainty is any aspect of a non-cost/price factor proposal/quotation for which the intent of the offeror is unclear (e.g., there is more than one way to interpret the proposal/quotation or inconsistencies in the proposal/quotation indicating there may have been an error, omission, or mistake).

Weakness means a flaw in the proposal/quotation that increases the risk of unsuccessful contract performance.

EVALUATION FACTORS

Proposals shall be evaluated using the following factors and subfactors.

FACTOR 1: TECHNICAL

Subfactor 1: TECHNICAL CAPABILITY – Statement of Objectives The Offeror’s technical proposal to the Government must demonstrate the Offeror’s understanding of the Project. The proposal should demonstrate the company’s understanding and capability in a concise, logical manner and should not contain superfluous material not directly related to the solicitation. All information must be presented in sufficient depth to allow the Government to make a comprehensive evaluation of the Offeror’s understanding of the project and the Offeror’s capability for successful performance to meet these requirements. The Technical Proposal – PWS should also include the Offeror’s experience in providing similar services for the Government and/or commercial interests. This description should include key accomplishments, results, problems encountered and overcome, and the scope of various projects.

The Technical Elements for the section shall include each of the following:

Element 1. Demonstration of an understanding of the needs of the project. Demonstration of an understanding of DoD communications professional requirements. Demonstrated in depth understanding of the differences between public affairs and visual information archiving along with the methods and approach for accomplishing the specific training tasks outlined in the Task Orders.

Element 2. Describe and demonstrate a clear and comprehensive methodology for providing the technical and management needs of the SOO. Describe and demonstrate a clear and comprehensive methodology for providing the Government quality VI records.

Element 3. Demonstrated understanding of Quality Assurance (QA) methods, goals and objectives. Describe how quality will be determined and measured. Specific descriptions and designs (e.g. diagrams) of how the work performed will meet or exceed Quality Assurance goals shall be included. Demonstration of approach in the development of a QA plan, evaluation of activities covered in the QA plan, and method used to update the QA plan.

Element 4. Demonstrate a plan to optimize quality, timeliness of projects and tasks, and operational efficiencies illustrating capabilities in the area of the appropriate discipline(s) being solicited and ensuring that contractor can perform at satisfactory level commensurate with DIMOC standards. Include provisions of a quality assurance plan to demonstrate overall project efficiency, productivity and cost-effectiveness.

Element 5. Demonstration of a management plan which will provide DMA/DIMOC Project Officers up-to-date financial, project/subproject status, and personnel information. The plan should include methods to demonstrate cost of ownership and earned value management utilizing an enterprise unified process approach.

Element 6. Provide a transition plan that demonstrates a timely and smooth transition between contractors. The plan shall clearly demonstrate the contractor’s ability to assume full responsibility for all areas of operation in accordance with the terms and conditions of this contract. The transition plan shall clearly demonstrate the contractor’s grasp of phase-in problems and present reasonable solutions and rationale to these problems. The transition plan shall clearly demonstrate how the contractor will transition out by having personnel assigned to this contract present or available on or before expiration of the phase out period.

Subfactor 2 – MANAGEMENT CAPABILITIES

Offeror must describe the project management capabilities, organization and methodologies that will be used to meet the solicitation requirements as described in the SOO. At a minimum, the submission should include plan to maintain and enhance the contractor’s capability during life of the contract, subcontractor management plans, and project planning, monitoring, control, and execution plan.

FACTOR 2. PAST PERFORMANCE

Offerors will be evaluated on performance under existing contracts and performance on prior contracts. It is important to note the difference between past performance and past experience.

Past performance relates to quality and how well a Contractor performed, while past experience is about the type and amount of work previously performed by a Contractor.

In evaluating past performance information the following elements shall be considered: The currency and relevance of the information, the source of the information, the Context of the data, and general trends in contractor’s performance IAW FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(i).

A. Quality and Satisfaction Rating for Contracts Completed in the Past FiveYears:

Evaluators will assess past performance information currently available (letters, metrics, customer surveys, independent surveys, etc.) which demonstrates customer satisfaction with overall job performance and quality of completed product for same or similar type work. In addition, evaluators will consider offeror’s explanation of corrective actions taken in the past, if any, for substandard performance and any current performance problems. The Government does not assume the duty to search for data to cure the problems if it finds any in the information provided by the Offeror. The burden of providing thorough and complete past performance information remains with the Offeror.

B. The Offeror’s relevant past performance information: The Offeror will be evaluated to assess the demonstrated quality of performance on similar work, to include the ability to control the quality and cost of work, timeliness of performance, and effectiveness at accomplishing the goals of previous work. Offerors are required to provide the evidences and corporate resume of three (3) contracts performed during the past five years or currently in process for the relevant services to what is being solicited under this solicitation. Relevant contracts are those contracts that are of similar scope, magnitude, nature, and work. The Government reserves the right to use past performance information obtained from sources other than those identified by the Offeror. Other sources may include, but are not limited to, the Past Performance Information retrieval System (PPIRS), the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), and the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS). All past performance surveys must be submitted and received by the closing date of the RFP. If partnering, must identify the prime on the survey. Furnish the following information for each contract listed:

i. Company/Division name

ii. Product/Service

iii. Contracting Agency/Customer/Phone Number/Email Address

iv. Contract Number

v. Contract Dollar Value

vi. Period of Performance

vii. Verified, up-to-date name, address, FAX and telephone number of the contracting officer

viii. Comments regarding compliance with contract terms and conditions

ix. Comments regarding any known performance deemed unacceptable to the customer, or not in accordance with the contract terms and conditions.

A. If a teaming arrangement is contemplated, offerors will provide complete information as to the arrangement, including any relevant and recent past/present performance information on previous teaming arrangements with same partner. If this is a first time joint effort, each party to the arrangement must provide a list of past and present relevant contracts.

B. Subcontractor Consent: Past performance information pertaining to a subcontractor cannot be disclosed to the prime offeror without the subcontractor’s consent. Offerors will provide with the proposal a letter from all subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement, consenting to the release of their past performance information to the prime contractor.

C. Offerors may be asked to clarify certain aspects of their proposal (for example, the relevance of past performance information) or respond to adverse past performance information to which the offeror has not previously had an opportunity to respond.

Adverse is defined as past performance information that supports a less than satisfactory rating on any evaluation element or any unfavorable comment received from sources without a formal rating system. Communication conducted to resolve minor or clerical errors will not constitute discussions, and the contracting officer reserves the right to award a contract without the opportunity for discussions or proposal revisions.

Recency Assessment An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must have been performed during the past three (5) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation, or for ongoing efforts, must have been in place at least twelve (12) months before the proposal due date. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

Relevancy Assessment The Government will conduct an in-depth evaluation of all recent past performance information obtained. For each recent past performance reference reviewed, the relevance of the work performed will generally be assessed for similarity in scope to the current requirements, magnitude of effort (based on dollar value, contract length, and geographic scope), complexity, and contract type. In determining relevancy for a past performance effort, consideration will be given to the effort, or portion of the effort, being proposed by the offeror, teaming/joint venture partner, or significant subcontractor whose contract is being reviewed and evaluated. Greater relevancy will be assessed for contracts that are most similar to the effort, or portion of the effort, for which that subcontractor is being proposed. The Government is not bound by the offeror’s opinion of relevancy. A relevancy determination for each of the offeror’s past performance references will be made based upon the aforementioned considerations. The past performance information forms submitted by the offeror and information obtained from other sources will be used to establish the degree of relevancy of past performance. The Government will use the following degrees of relevancy (Table 3) when assessing recent contracts:

Table 3. Past Performance Relevancy Ratings Rating Definition

Very Relevant Present/past performance effort involved essentially the same Scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Relevant Present/past performance effort involved similar scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Somewhat Relevant

Present/past performance effort involved some of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Not Relevant Present/past performance effort involved little or none of the scope and magnitude of effort and complexities this solicitation requires.

Performance Quality Assessment The Government will consider the performance quality of recent and relevant efforts. For each recent/relevant past performance reference reviewed, the performance quality of the work performed will be assessed. The quality assessment consists of an in-depth evaluation of the past performance questionnaire responses, PPIRS information, interviews with Government customers, and if applicable, commercial clients. It may include interviews with Defense Contract Management Agency officials or other sources known to the Government.

The Government will use the following quality ratings (Table 4) when assessing quality of recent, relevant contracts:

Table 4. Past Performance Quality Ratings Quality

Assessment Rating

Description

Exceptional (E)

During the contract period, contractor performance meets or met contractual requirements and exceeds or exceeded most to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with few minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were highly effective.

Very Good

(VG)

requirements and exceeds or exceeded some to the Government's benefit. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed was accomplished with some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor were effective.

Satisfactory (S) requirements. The contractual performance of the element or sub-element being assessed contained some minor problems for which corrective actions taken by the contractor appear or were satisfactory.

Marginal (M)

During the contract period, contractor performance does not or did not meet some contractual requirements.