Attachment 9 Q A.pdf

Questions and Answers

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -1- Draft RFP

QUESTION 1. Nearly all of the Sub-CLINs on SSEB (B – E) of the Draft SF Form 1449 and Optional Form 336 call for the requests-for-vetting to be accepted by the Government. Currently the vast majority (approximately 85%) are not reviewed or accepted by the Government prior to posting. Will this change? Who will perform the task for the Government?

Answer 1: Requests-for-vetting are deliverables; as such, they must be accepted before the contractor can be paid. The Contracting Officer’s Technical Representative (COTR) or another government employee at NMC will accept/reject requests-for-vetting completed by the contractor.

QUESTION 2. Nearly all of the Sub-CLINs on SSEB (B – E) of the Draft SF Form 1449 and Optional Form 336 call for investigations to be reviewed in no more than 20 days.

Many investigations require obtaining additional information from other jurisdictions (courts, probation officers, etc.) which often takes longer than 20 days. How will the 20 days be calculated, and what “stops the clock”?

Answer 2: The 20 working days will commence immediately when the screening is complete. Each completed screening case which needs investigation shall be transferred to an investigator immediately following the completion of the initial screening portion of the vetting. The “clock” will stop when the contractor provides sufficient evidence to the government that an investigation has been completed with all available resources having been exhausted.

QUESTION 3. Section 1.17.1 of the Contract PWS, Attachment 1, requires that all contractors "sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement prior to commencing work on-site" and Section 1.17.2 requires that "all Contractor personnel having access to proprietary information sign a non-disclosure agreement (DHS Form 11000-6)." Paragraph 1 of the Attestation on the Non-Disclosure Form indicates that the individual acknowledges that they have received a "security indoctrination." When will the Government provide such instruction? Regularly scheduled or as requested by the contractor?

Answer 3: As requested by the contractor.

QUESTION 4A. On page 2 of Attachment #1 (Contract PWS) you describe training provided by the contractor. Are the training syllabi government property that the contractor maintains? Or will training materials have to be re-developed by the ensuing contractor?

Anwer 4A. The government will require a hand off of training materials and respective syllabi during transition. The ensuing contractor shall also be required to maintain and generate training materials as needed.

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -2- Draft RFP

QUESTION 4B. From the Contract Performance Work Statement (PWS) – Attachment 1:

Sections 1.2 and 1.3.2.2 mention the training of contractor staff. Who is responsible for doing the training, providing the trainers, and supplying the training reference materials?

Answer: The contractor will conduct all training of its staff in cooperation with the government. The government will supply all the needed reference materials (CFRs, Policy Information, NVIC’s, MSM, etc.) to train them. The term “contractor-provided training” will be inserted in sections 1.2 and 1.3.2.2.

The incumbent contractor is currently responsible for providing initial training and the Trainer, which is a Key position. Is the Government now assuming this responsibility and role?

Answer: No.

QUESTION 5. In the Contract PWS – Attachment No. 1, Section 1.17.3 states that “The contractor shall document for the government that all employees supporting this contract have a favorable background check which at a minimum includes a National and a Local Agency Check and a Credit Check.” This is an OPM suitability Level 5 background investigation. Would a National and Local Criminal Background check be sufficient/equivalent in lieu of the LAC/NAC in the absence of a DD 254? Will the Coast Guard reimburse the contractor for these expenses?

Answer 5: The equivalency issue will be addressed in the final RFP. No to reimbursement.

QUESTION 6. In the Evaluation Criteria section – Attachment No. 2, Factor 3:

Organizational Capability, d) Offer competitive employee compensation packages:

a. This seems to be a highly subjective assessment. No two companies are similar.

Their infrastructures, financial arrangements with financial backers and institutions, negotiated agreements with insurance institutions, etc. all contribute to the overall compensation package that a company is able to offer. Is the Government prepared to state that one company’s compensation package which combines vacation and sick time as Personal Time Off is better than a company that keeps them separate? Or is a company that pays for both Short Term and Long Term Disability, but does not fully vest an employee in the 401(k) plan on Day 1, better than a company that does not pay for these Disabilities but fully vests an employee in his 401(k) plan on Day 1? Or if a company can show that their 401(k) plan has yielded consistent high returns (sic) than the S&P 500 Index, is it better than a company with a 401(k) plan that only matches the S&P 500 Index?

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -3- Draft RFP

b. How does the Government intend to evaluate ‘competitive employee compensation’ from one corporation to another considering differences in infrastructure, financial arrangements, and negotiated agreements with insurance institutions? All affect a company’s overall compensation package and don’t contribute towards an equitable apples to apples comparison.

c. Does the government intend to account for non-compensation factors such as benefits in its overall employment package or does it intend to only evaluate compensation figures?

Answer 6: Evaluation sub-factors 3b, 3c, and 3d will be combined. With respect to evaluation, refer to the provision at FAR 52.222-46 “Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees” which will be incorporated in full text in the RFP to provide specifics relative to the evaluation of any employee compensation package.

QUESTION 7. In the Evaluation Criteria section – Attachment No. 2, Factor 3:

Organizational Capability, c) Retain qualified personnel with written/signed proposed commitments:

a. Obtaining a signed commitment from current and perspective employees is not difficult. If that is what the Government wants, it will be done. But does the Government realize that these are right-to-work states, and such commitment letters hold little legal value?

Answer 7.a.: Yes.

b. What will the Government’s action be if individual(s) sign letters of commitment with more than one company?

Answer 7.b.: The Government would not object.

QUESTION 8. In the Task Order PWS – Attachment No. 3, Section 1.9.1, it states that contractor travel may include travel to Federal Advisory Committee Meetings nationwide. Section 1.9 of the Contract PWS (Attachment 1) states that “destinations include Washington, DC and the cities listed on page 1-2.” For pricing purposes, should the contractor assume that these meetings will take place in Washington, DC or one of the sites listed in Section 1.2 of the Contract PWS (Attachment 1), or is there another location or locations that should be priced in addition to those identified in Attachment 1?

Answer 8: Assume that these meetings will take place in Washington, DC or one of the sites listed. The exact locations are to be determined.

QUESTION 9. The Monthly Pricing Structure in Section B – implies that if an evaluation of any type takes longer than 5.0 days – for even just one (1) infraction that month of ALL evaluations conducted - then the government will only pay the price in

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -4- Draft RFP

CLIN 00001A and CLIN 00002A. Is that the intent? The PWS (of the initial task order – Attachment 3) states if unable to complete within 5 days, contractor shall notify the reviewer of the reason why(5.1.3.4.1) – does reporting this stop the clock and allow the contractor to be paid from the other CLINS based on “cycle time”?

Question 9: Yes, that is the intent. Notifying the Government of an excessive cycle time will remove that evaluation from consideration in determining CLIN status only if the Government determines the cause for delay was not due to the evaluators action or lack of action.

QUESTION 10. Does the MLD MMS track the cycle time? If not who does?

Answer 10: Merchant Mariner Licensing and Documentation Program (MMLD) tracks cycle time.

QUESTION 11. Please define “cycle time” as it is used as a performance metric for payment standards as annotated in the Monthly Pricing Structure. As the Mariner Licensing and Documentation Program Restructuring and Centralization Update dated April 14, 2008, published by the Commanding Officer of NMC, has a figure #2 on page 3, shows a “cycle time” around 43 days – is this cycle time different than what is in the RFP? As the worst standard in the RFP is a cycle time of 3 days? (If you don’t know what document I am referring to I can send it to you)

Answer 11: Cycle Time is the period required to complete a task from start to finish. For Professional Qualification Evaluations and Safety, Security, and Suitability Evaluations;

cycle time is the period from when the contractor pulls a credential or request-for-vetting to when the Contractor delivers its evaluation of same. Cycle time as it applies to the RFP is different than the application in the NMC document referenced in this question.

The latter is total processing time for the U.S. Coast Guard.

QUESTION 12. Does the call center have to be located in Martinsburg, West Virginia?

Can it be located in a different state?

Answer 12: The call center must be located in Martinsburg, WV. Co-location with Mariner Evaluations Division and in particular Professional Qualification Evaluations Branch is deemed critical for training and understanding of evaluation process in order to best assist callers.

QUESTION 13. On page 2 of Attachment #1 (Contract PWS) you state that you anticipate the Project Manager “shall be” one of the senior level employees. In the incumbent workforce, is the role of Project Manager and Alternate Project Manager covered by the On Site Supervisors? If not, can you please explain the full roles of these two people?

Answer 13: The incumbent’s roles vary depending on the current contract and are expected to be consistent in this contract. The Project Manager is expected to manage the

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -5- Draft RFP overall contract; plans, organizes and controls overall activities and related projects with a focus on management of personnel. The Alternate Project Manager performs these functions in the absence of the Project Manager. Each branch has an On-Site Supervisor who will focus on contract performance for that branch, and where appropriate or necessary assist in the work or training of that branch.

QUESTION 14. On page 3 of Attachment #5 (Supplemental Instructions) paragraph (f), the only instructions for preparing Volume III (Organizational Capability) is to provide a PDF or resume for “each person proposed” for the initial task order. However, the evaluation factors for Organizational Capability are more extensive. We suggest this instruction be amplified appropriately. Further, the requirement to submit PDFs or resumes of “all persons proposed” is somewhat irregular. Based on the evaluation criteria, offerors could be evaluated on the basis of how many incumbent contract personnel they are able to secure employment agreements with. This places undue advantage on the incumbent contractor. We recommend this verbiage be stricken and replaced with more appropriate factors relevant to the contractor’s ability to attract and retain personnel throughout contract execution with applicability to the entire IDIQ contract. The requirement to include compensation and fringe package information is entirely appropriate for this volume.

Answer 14: The sub-factors under Organizational Capability and supplemental instructions for Volume III will be revised in the final RFP.

QUESTION 15A. Att. 1, page 2, para. 4: Will you provide by labor category the current number of FTEs and their average wages or billing rates for PQE, for SSE, and for

MICC?

Answer 15A: No.

QUESTION 15 B. What is the current breakdown of personnel in each division (MICC, SSE, PQE)?

Answer 15B: Contractor employee FTE is: 54 FTE for PQE, 25 FTE for SSE, and 13 FTE for MICC. See also the discussion of reorganization in attachment 1, section 1.2.

QUESTION 16. Additionally, is our MICC quote supposed to be a fixed price per month regardless of the number of monthly hours that might be required as request volume increases?

Answer 16: Yes.

QUESTION 17. Att. 5, page 5, para. 1: If PQE and SSE should be progressively priced, with sub-CLIN E the highest, why are the average evaluation cycles for PQE sub-CLINs 1C, 1D, and 1E listed in Form 336 as 1.0, 4.0, and 3.0 days respectively, with all other cost inputs constant? Similarly, why are SSE’s average evaluation cycles listed as 1.5 days for Initial Screening & Review and 5.0 days for Investigation & Review for sub-

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -6- Draft RFP

CLIN 2C, 1.0 days and 4.0 days respectively for sub-CLIN 2D, and 2.0 and 3.0 days respectively for sub-CLIN 2E, with all other cost inputs constant? These cycle trends seem to go up and down from one sub-CLIN to the next.

Answer 17: The average evaluation cycles for PQE sub-CLINs 1C, 1D, and 1E cited in this question do not accurately reflect the RFP. As stated in the RFP, they are 1.0 day,

4.0 HOURS, and 2.0 hours. SSE sub-CLIN 2D and 2E are hours not days.

QUESTION 18. Does MMLD accept attachments to records?

Answer 18: No.

QUESTION 19. Reference attachment 1, page 3, section 1.3.1.2. Would the government consider a Program Manager with extensive CMMI experience in lieu of ISO9000 if the company could show how CMMI and ISO are similar and also show the added benefits of CMMI and have the PM enrolled in ISO certification within 90 days of contract award date or would this be deemed non-compliant?

Answer 19: USCG COMDT has stated that ISO 9000 is our standard, and will be used to comply with STCW. USCG will not shift to CMMI. PM with ISO9000 will receive preference over CMMI in proposal evaluations. If contractor offering PM with CMMI receives contract, then that PM will be expected to have ISO training within 30 days of award, and ISO certification within 180 days of award (at no additional cost to the USCG). Section 1.3.1.2 will be revised accordingly.

QUESTION 20. What is the maximum capacity (people) of the building? (This question was asked at industry day)

Answer 20: 264 cubicles; 290 including offices.

QUESTION 21. Reference Attachment 1, page 2. How are metrics currently captured? Is it a government proprietary system or is it simply an excel spreadsheet or other COTS product used by the incumbent(s)?

Answer 21: MMLD – which is a government proprietary system. Data is collated and displayed using various tools available on the Coast Guard standard workstation.

QUESTION 22. Are there currently SOPs, work instructions, and standards in place for every division of the NMC affected by this RFP (MICC, SSE, PQE)? Are any areas lacking?

Answer 22: Yes, there are SOPs. They are available upon request.

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -7- Draft RFP

QUESTION 23. The Task Order Performance Work Statement, Attachment 3, contains no specifics regarding SSE and MICC processes or requirements. Will these be issued later?

Answer 23: Yes, as separate task orders. Draft PWS will be provided for SSE and MICC as attachments to the final RFP.

QUESTION 24. In the Evaluation Criteria section – Attachment No. 2, the Relative Order of Importance section lists the evaluation factors in order of descending importance, and when Factors 1 through 4 are combined, they are significantly more important than Factor 5 (Price).

a. Does this not imply that if a contractor does not max the “score” on Factors 1 through 4, if Factor 5 (Price) is either deemed not the “Fairest” or “Most Reasonable” among the competition, that the contractor would not be awarded the contract?

Answer 24.a.: No.

b. Accordingly, does the Government intend to provide a weighting and/or assign a maximum number of evaluation points to be earned in each of the five factors?

Answer 24.b.: No. Evaluations are adjectival.

QUESTION 25. In the Task Order Performance Work Statement (PWS) – Attachment No.

3, Section 7.0 Deliverables, Item 4 Progress Reports, it states that the Progress Reports are due “not later than the 5th of the following month.” Should this be “not later than the 5th business day of the following month?”

Answer 25: Yes. Attachment No. 3 will be revised.

QUESTION 26A. In the Task Order PWS – Attachment No. 3, Section 1.6, Period of Performance, it lists the Period of Performance as one (1) year from date of award. Our assumption is that this Attachment No. 3 is the Task Order PWS for the initial task order referenced in Supplemental Instructions (Attachment No. 5). Pricing for the initial task order in Attachment No. 5 requests only 5 months and only for PQE.

Please clarify both the initial task order period of performance and MMLD Program support required to be provided.

Answer 26: Approximately 5 months of PQE Attachment 3 will be revised.

QUESTION 26B. Additionally the Task Order PWS (Attachment 3) does not include any mention of Transition In activities. Does this not imply that the winning contractor need not be concerned with providing a plan to the Government of how they intend to

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -8- Draft RFP

“assume” responsibilities for support services? A Transition In Plan from the winning contractor should help ensure a smooth transition.

Answer: This issue will be addressed in the final RFP.

Question 27. In the Supplemental Instructions section, Attachment No. 5, page 5, Initial Task Order Price, it requests a separate price proposal for the initial task order (only for the PQE) with a period of performance of approximately five (5) months. Page 3 further requires the inclusion of a completed SF-1449.

a. Should the separate price proposal follow the instructions given on pages 3-5 for Volume 5, Price Proposal?

Answer 27a: No, those instructions apply to the IDIQ contract.

b. Will an SF-1449 be required for the separate five-month price proposal? If so, will the Coast Guard provide the form as they have done so for the five-year period?

Answer 27b: No, the initial task order proposal will not require a SF-1449.

c. Is it the Government’s intention to only fund PQE support for this initial five-month period, and not include SSE and MICC support?

Answer 27.c.: Yes.

QUESTION 28. Att. 5, page 5, para. 5: Where should we propose Initial Task Order pricing?

Answer 28.: A separate page in Volume V will suffice.

Question 29. In the Draft Solicitation, page 15 of 42, CLIN 40005 lists the Units (Column D) as one (1) month. Supplies/Services (Column B) for the same CLIN identifies the Transition/Phase Out in accordance with Section 1.6.2 of the PWS and identifies the Period of Performance as 6/2/08 to 6/1/09. Section 1.6.2 of the Contract PWS (Attachment No. 2) states that the Transition Out period will take place during the last 30 days of the last task order awarded under the IDIQ contract. Please clarify the Period of Performance for the Transition Out activities.

Answer 29: The period of performance for transition out activities will be 30 days;

however, the exact dates won’t be determined for as much as 5 years. The dates in the CLIN will be revised.

QUESTION 30. In the PWS (Attachment 1) paragraph 5.1 - It appears that there could be some non-exempt labor categories used in the performance of this contract… “clerical

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -9- Draft RFP support services..” (General Clerk), “enters all pertinent data and records into the Merchant Mariners Licensing and Documentation System..” (Data Entry Operator), “sending mail” and other references, have you evaluated this PWS for possible inclusion of the Service Contract Act clauses in the RFP and including the appropriate Wage Determination? Or have you determined that the Service Contract Act does not apply – and subsequently all employees are exempt?

Answer 30: Based on the preponderance of the tasks and labor categories expected, we have determined that the Service Contract Act does not apply.

QUESTION 31. In the Supplemental Instructions (attachment 5) paragraph (h) (2) – outlines the procedure to calculate the monthly cost of operating the MICC, does this paragraph imply that these calculations (which has a T&M flavor) are to be provided as back up to the fixed price bid entered on the SF 1449 is to be part of the cost proposal?

Answer 31: Yes.

QUESTION 32. Who is the current vendor for this contract?

Answer 32: There are two separate contractors – Potomac Management Group (a division of ATSC) performs PQE and MICC; Protection Security Inc. performs SSE.

QUESTION 33. What is the current contract value?

Answer 33: The current PQE task order has a period of performance of 04/01/2008 – 07/31/2008; the total task order value is $1,636,190. The current MICC task order has a period of performance of 09/22/2007 – 07/31/2008; the total task order value is $514,344.

The current SSE task order has a period of performance of 04/07/2008 – 08/29/2008; the total task order value is $1,126,078.

QUESTION 34. Reference Attachment 5, pg 1 paragraph 1. The referenced paragraph states the font should be 12 pitch or equivalent. Pitch is typewriter font and the equivalent computer font would be 13 point font. Can the government clarify the font size in terms of Point (for example, text would be no smaller than 11point and graphics would be no smaller than 9 point).

Answer 34: Font size should be not less than 12. This text is font size 12.

QUESTION 35. Will the contractor be responsible for developing workflow and processes around NMC’s “new online system” - or does the Coast Guard already have that process defined? Will the training for this new system be provided by the Coast Guard or will the contractor be responsible for this training (if it falls within the 5 year window of this contract)?

HSCG23-08-R-MMZ339 -10- Draft RFP

Answer 35: While contractor is required to suggest process improvements, the Government retains ownership of process and process changes. The process improves and changes as each piece of the new system comes online. The Contractor is required to hold regular training and should coordinate its training with the Government.

QUESTION 36. What is the current backlog at the NMC for each Functional Area?

Answer 36: The MICC and SSE do not have significant backlogs. The PQE has a backlog of about 2,000 credentials (or 2 weeks).

Note: Other feedback was received, but not in the form of questions. Comments will be reviewed and may result in edits to the RFP package.