PELSS Question Tracker PELSS 050809.docx

HSTS04-09-R-CT8108

Questions on PELSS Amendment May 8, 2009

1) Number 225 of the Question Tracker: Question: C 3.9 states the Contractor is to identify in its proposal what "elements" required Secret clearance. Is this correct or will the government tell the contractor when TOs require cleared personnel? Government Response: Amendment 0001 will correct. The government will tell the contractor which areas require secret clearances.

The government included clarification in C 3.9 of the amended RFP stating what might require cleared personnel. The amended RFP section C.9 still states, “The Contractor shall identify the statement of work elements that will be staffed by cleared personnel in the proposal.” What does the TSA want the contractor to propose?

Answer: Based on the description of the work elements anticipated to require technical efforts by cleared personnel, the Offeror can identify the statement of work elements by citing subsections of Section C.4 that the Offeror proposes to staff with cleared personnel.

2) Amended RFP, Page 33 of 88, section 4.6.2.7 states, “The Contractor's plan for preparing and maintaining this database shall be documented in the PMP. The term PMP is not found anywhere else in the document. Does this term refer to the project plans identified in section 3.8.1 Project Plans and is required only by the contractor awarded the task under section 4.6.2.7?

Answer: Amendment 0003 will correct. Section C.4.6.2.7 should read as follows:

The Contractor's plan for preparing and maintaining this database shall be documented in a Project Plan, according to the requirements of Section C.3.8.1.

3) Amended RFP, Page 82 of 88, section L.6.4 Factor 4. Technical Proposal Task Order 001 states, “The offeror shall provide a technical approach that includes a Project Plan to meet the requirements of each task area for Task Order 001 SOW. The plan shall address schedule, milestones, and the critical activities necessary to meet the requirements of the Task Order. The Project Plan is not include (sic) in the 12-page limit for the Task Order 001 technical proposal.” Section 3.8.1 Project Plans, defines what is to be included in a project plan, but nowhere is a page limit defined for a project plan. Is it the government’s intent to allow the Project Plan for Task Order 001 to be an unlimited number of pages?

Answer: The Project Plan to be submitted as part of the Task Order 001 technical approach is not included in the 12-page limit for the Task Order 001 technical proposal.

4) Section L.6.2 Factor 2. Business Management states, “Quality Assurance – The offeror shall submit its Quality Management System Plan (QMS) as defined in Section C, paragraph 3.6 in the format specified in the deliverable table.” In the amended RFP, the Quality System Plan requirement was deleted from the deliverable table. There is no CDRL or DID providing further guidance. Please clarify format requirement and when the Quality System Plan is due.

Answer: Amendment 0003 will correct. The Quality System Plan is a component of the Proposal Volume I Factor 2. It is not a deliverable under the contract. The QSP can be provided in any format consistent with the Offeror’s Volume I. The QSP must be provided within the 60 page limit. Section L.6.2 Factor 2 should read as follows:

5. Quality Assurance – The Offeror shall submit its Quality System Plan addressing the requirements contained in Section C, paragraph 3.6.

5) 4.6.2.5.1 Configuration Management states, “The Contractor shall identify a single focal point, under the Program Manager, who will serve as the primary point of contact for all communication on CM-related issues.” Is this person to be identified only in the project plan by the contractor that is award the task order for this section?

Answer: No. The primary point of contact should be identified in the Offeror’s proposal.

6) 4.2.2.2. Technical Requirements Management, the following has been added: “A Requirements Database shall be prepared.” Will the government provide the contractor with the current database being utilized by TSA as GFE or will the contractor be required to perform market research and recommend a database solution to the TSA then purchase the database under ODCs?

Answer: See response to Question #102.

7) In section 4.5.1. Integrated Logistics Support (ILS) Planning and Requirements Development, the following was added, “A Management Control Objective Plan shall be prepared.” The Management Control Objective Plan was deleted from the deliverable table and replaced with a “Management Action Plan”. There is no reference to a “Management Action Plan” in section C.1 through C.9. Please clarify.

Answer: Amendment 0003 will correct. The requirement is for the preparation and delivery of a Management Action Plan, in accordance with CDRL L002. Section C.4.5.1 should read as follows:

A Management Action Plan shall be prepared.

8) Is the PELSS contract definition of “control” of the test articles referenced in section 4.6.2.2 Test Article Development, to include maintaining inventory and location control? Is the PELSS contractor required to “control” the shipping and receiving of the test articles to FAT, SAT and iSAT sites? Is the contractor required to maintain an inventory and ship and receive the items identified in section 4.3.1.6 Security Screening Equipment Test and Calibration Article? If the answer is yes to any of these questions, would it be in the governments best interest to combine the 4.3.1.6 requirements under section 4.6.2.2 thereby requiring only one database for maintaining “control” or “inventory”? Over the 5 year life of the contract (if all options are exercised) it may be possible that the special test articles referenced in section 4.6.2.3 Special Test Article Development may be useful in more than one scenario or test. Should these articles also be “controlled” or inventory maintained? Will the PELSS contractor be required to ship and receive these articles?

Answer: Yes. Contractor must maintain inventory and location control.

Yes. Contractor must control shipping and receiving to and from FAT, SAT, and iSAT sites.

The Contractor will be required to maintain an available supply (inventory) of items identified in Section C.4.3.1.6 and to ship these items to field locations, as directed by the TSA. It is not anticipated that items, once shipped to the field, will be returned.

The requirement to control test articles and test kits in Section C.4.6.2.2 does not apply to the items identified in Section C.4.3.1.6.

Yes. Contractor must maintain inventory and location control and control shipping and receiving to and from test sites identified by the TSA for Special Test Articles developed in accordance with Section C.4.6.2.3.

9) There is still a reference to the FAA FAST guidelines in section C.2.4 Source Documents. Is there an expectation by TSA that the contractor is to follow these guidelines for testing as required under the SOW or is the contractor free to follow other guidance such as DoD?

Answer: Amendment 0003 will remove the paragraph.

10) Does the TSA want the schedule developed for the Project Plan for TASK Order 001submitted in pdf format or does the TSA want the actual MSProject file submitted?

Answer: Please refer to CDRL A014.

11) In order to quantify the FFP work for TO 001, and to have comparable proposals, what criteria and assumptions should be applied to pricing? For example: list of airports, facilities (e.g. terminals or concourses) and specific design reviews (e.g.30%, 70%, 100%).

Answer: The number and frequency of efforts and deliverables are indicated throughout the SOW and particularly in Section C.10. TSA cannot specifically identify airport locations at this time. Offerors are free to provide their underlying assumptions as part of their proposal, if they choose to do so.

12) Please note that amendment 3 is a PDF file which cannot be used to fill in information on coversheet, Section B and K. Will a new RFP package be issued that is not redlined and is in a version that can be filled out by us?

Answer: Tables are provided as examples. Offerors are free to generate their own tables for submitting their data as part of their proposal. The .pdf provided can also be used to enter data and submit to the Government. A new RFP package will not be issued; however, the model contract will contain a final version of the RFP Sections A-through J.