B08.16 - HT942525R0005 Amend 0001_Attachment 16 - Offerors Questions and Answers_04.29.2025.pdf

Page/Section Question Response Is the current incumbent Chenega Professional and Technical Services, LLC, an Alaskan 8a permitted to recompete and submit a proposal for this RFP?

Yes, given this is a competitive 8(a), the current incumbent is permitted to submit a proposal in response to this

RFP.

Pg. 44-45 -- Solicitation - B08- HT942525R0005_Science Support Services” Section L, 3. Volume Instructions, iii Section 3 – Experience

Pg. 29-134 -- B08.01 - Attachment 01 - Performance Work Statement, pages 29-134 (key personnel mentioned throughout)

B08.05 - Attachment 05 - Historical LOE Key Personnel and BPRP_CS- PRP Requirement

B08.04 - Attachment 04 - Labor Categories and Descriptions

The Key Personnel position listings are the same in (1) the Solicitation pages 44-45, (2) Attachment 01 - PWS, pages 29-134, and (3) Attachment 05 - Historical LOE, Key Personnel and BPRP/CS-PRP Requirement.

Attachment 04 - Labor Categories and Descriptions does not align to the listing of the Key Personnel in the other three (3) documents and also includes additional key personnel positions that are not provided in the other three (3) documents.

Will the Government review all four (4) documents referring to Key Personnel and ensure consistency throughout.

For example, Attachment 4 provides 7 additional key personnel positions that are not indicated in the other 3 Solicitation documents (e.g., Computational Biologist 2, Computational Biologist 4, Licensed Nurse 2, Physician 3, Physician 4, Physician 5, and Scientist 5).

Attachment 04 provides Labor Categories and Descriptions that are active or have historically been activated as surge under this requirement and, identifies of those, which are anticipated to be Key Personnel should they be activated under Surge. There are additional descriptions listed in Attachment 04 that do not map to Attachment 01 or 05. Updated language in Attachment 04 to provide clarity.

Pg. 44-45 -- Solicitation - B08- HT942525R0005_Science Support Services” Section L, 3. Volume Instructions, iii Section 3 – Experience

Pg. 29-134 -- B08.01 - Attachment 01 - Performance Work Statement, pages 29-134 (key personnel mentioned throughout)

B08.05 - Attachment 05 - Historical LOE Key Personnel and BPRP_CS- PRP Requirement

B08.04 - Attachment 04 - Labor Categories and Descriptions

Will the Government provide a revised Attachment 04 that harmonizes the labor category descriptions for Key Personnel positions outlined in the Solicitation, Attachment 01 – PWS; and Attachment 05, and the PWS?

Attachment 04 provides Labor Categories and Descriptions that are active or have historically been activated as surge under this requirement and, identifies of those, which are anticipated to be Key Personnel should they be activated under Surge. There are additional descriptions listed in Attachment 04 that do not map to Attachment 01 or 05. Updated language in Attachment 04 to provide clarity.

Pg. 44-45 -- Solicitation Section L, 3. Volume Instructions, iii Section 3 – Experience

The RFI on December 6, 2024, provided 23 key personnel positions and has been preparing for this level of key personnel for this proposal response for several months. The Solicitation includes a 70% increase to 39 key personnel positions. This increase of key personnel positions puts small businesses at a significant disadvantage to compete and the incumbent at an unfair competitive advantage. We respectfully request the Government reconsider this increase of key personnel positions to ensure a fair competition.

Would the Government consider revising the Solicitation list of key personnel to the list contained in the December 6th RFI in order to mitigate an unfair competitive advantage to the current incumbent?

Many of the tasks outlined in the PWS are considered highly specialized, as a result, the total number of key personnel will remain unchanged.

Pg. 48 -- 2 Volume Instructions. c. Volume III: Cost/Price, Supplemental Cost/Price Worksheet

In accordance with the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) and our Disclosure Statement, General & Administrative (G&A) is an allowable indirect cost applied to ODC/Travel. G&A is not a fee/profit. FAR 31.203 Indirect Costs states “(d) Once an appropriate base for allocating indirect costs has been accepted, the contractor shall not fragment the base by removing individual elements. All items properly includable in an indirect cost base shall bear a pro rata share of indirect costs irrespective of their acceptance as Government contract costs. For example, when a cost input base is used for the allocation of G&A costs, the contractor shall include in the base all items that would properly be part of the cost input base, whether allowable or unallowable, and these items shall bear their pro rata share of G&A costs."

Will the Government please revise page 48 language to allow G&A on ODCs/Travel during execution of this contract?

This requirement is exempt from Cost Accounting Standards (CAS).

Page 48 language has been revised to allow G&A on top of the actual cost of travel. Offerors are advised that all ODC's submitted, inclusive of G&A, shall not exceed the pre-determined ceiling of $80,000.00 per year. It is the Offeror's responsibilty to monitor and track costs to ensure the $80,000.00 per year ceiling is not exceeded.

Pg. 47 -- 2 Volume Instructions. c. Volume III: Cost/Price, Supplemental Cost/Price Worksheet

If a contractor has submitted rates for DCAA review and approval but has not yet been provided with a response, can submission of the rate package provided to DCAA be used to meet this requirement instead?

If DCAA approval has not yet been received, Offerors may submit preliminary rates including evidence of submission to DCAA.

Pg. 44-45 -- L.2.iii

The instructions require each offeror to provide with their proposal a resume, named individual, and letter of intent (as required) for each Key Personnel identified in the table on pp. 44-45.

We believe asking 8(a) offerors to recruit 39 highly specialized personnel in 30 days unreasonably restricts competition. Will the Government consider removing or scaling back this requirement?

Instructions to Offerors have been updated to remove the requirement for signed letters of intent from Key Personnel. Many of the tasks outlined in the PWS are considered highly specialized, as a result, the total number of key personnel will remain unchanged.

All

The RFP contains several requirements regarding demonstration of the offeror’s experience and capability with BPRP/CS-PRP procedures.

Given the procedural, regulatory, and vetting similarities between high-level security clearance recruiting and recruitment of BPRP/CS-PRP enrolled professionals, would the Government consider this type of experience highly relevant and low risk for the purposes of evaluation? Furthermore, can this experience be considered sufficient to achieve a “Very Relevant” evaluation rating for this factor, especially when combined with strong capability to quickly align with PRP-specific onboarding and documentation protocols? We have concerns that this requirement may unnecessarily restrict competition given the 8(a) set-aside status of this procurement.

The Government's determination of Relevency and Risk is based on the information submitted in an Offeror's proposal. Offerors are advised to carefully review the requirement and clearly demonstrate its experience and capability with the BPRP/CS-PRP, or equivalent personnel reliability program, procedures.

Pg. 47 -- L.2.c

The RFP states, “Defense Contract Auditing Agency (DCAA) Audit: Include a copy of any DCAA audit that supports the proposed contract rates or costs.”

If the Offeror is a joint venture, do both partners need to be DCAA audited to satisfy this requirement?

Depends how JV is structured. Populated JV would be required to be DCAA audited. If unpopulated then both partners need to be DCAA audited for the audit to support the proposed values.

Pg. 47 -- L.2.c

The RFP states, “In accordance with FAR Part 15.402 and Part 15.403-1, certified cost or pricing data is not required because adequate competition is expected for this procurement.”

Is provision of DCAA audit documentation with the proposal mandatory or preferred?

If the Offeror possesses a DCAA Audit, it shall be submitted with the Offeror's proposal.

All

The RFP requires the offeror to carry Organizational Disease insurance coverage.

If the offeror is an unpopulated joint venture, will it suffice to have this type of coverage on our Workers’ Compensation insurance when all partners have added this to their coverage?

Organizational Disease insurance coverage is not a requirement of the solicitation.

Pg. 46 -- Volume II: Past Performance. Section 3 - Subcontracts

The Solicitation calls for information regarding our subcontractors (company information and type of work to be performed by citing the applicable PWS subparagraph number).

Does this section apply to the 10-page limit within the Past Performance Volume?

Yes, Section 3 - Subcontracts does apply to the Past Performance page limit which has been increased to 15 pages.

Only letters from subcontractors (letters of commitment and written consent), cure notices and show cause letters would be exempt from the Past Performance page limit.

Pg. 46 -- Volume II: Past Performance. Section 4 - PPQs PPQs are required for all cited past performance examples from the offeror and its subcontractors.

Are we to provide copies of the PPQs we are sending to our customers in this section?

PPQs shall be completed by and emailed to the contracting office, by the POC completing the PPQ, as specified in Volume II: Past Performance, Section 4 - PPQs of the solicitation.

Pg. 41, 45-46 -- Volume II: Past Performance

A team with multiple subcontractors each providing a past performance reference will greatly increase the pages needed to submit all of our past performance.

Would the Government consider expanding the page limit for this section?

The page limit for Volume II: Past Performance has been increased to 15 pages.

Pg. 40 -- Volume I: Technical, Section 3 - Experience/Key Personnel

The instructions say : (1) For all Key Personnel positions, provide an attachment naming the individuals proposed to fill Key Personnel tasks/positions along with a description of the portion of the solicitation’s PWS that each individual is being proposed to perform.”

Does this count towards the 50-page limit in the technical?

The Key Personnel attachment is not subject to the page limit for Volume I - Technical. The Instructions to Offerors have been updated accordingly.

All

The RFP does not appear to indicate how many hours each labor category is anticipated to work.

In order to facilitate an equitable evaluation of offerors’ price proposals, will all labor categories have 1,920 working hours per year?

Section L.2.c of the solicitation has been revised. For purposes of FTE hours, full time is established as 1,912 hours.

Pg. 44 -- Section 3 - Experience

The RFP asks to provide information regarding:

• Experience with staffing and providing services in support of the BPRP and CS-PRP program or an equivalent personnel reliability program.

• Experience with recruiting and getting qualified personnel through the BPRP process (or equivalent personnel reliability program) and retaining those qualified personnel.

As recruiting, qualifying/credentialing, and retaining personnel are key components of staffing and service in support of this program, can the Government provide greater clarity to differentiate between these two criteria being requested?

Recruiting and getting qualified personnel through the BPRP process (or equivalent personnel reliability program) and retaining the personnel revolves around the processes used to identify and recruit qualified individuals and what is offered to help retain those individuals.

Staffing and providing services is looking for information on experience with actually providing the services in a BPRP and CS/PRP (or equivalent) program and ensuring services are provided continually and successfully.

Pg. 46 -- Section 4 - PPQs

Many relevant agencies have been substantially affected by administrative changes, restructuring, and efficiency orders. As a result, customer POCs are inundated and may not be available to complete PPQs.

Will the Government accept previously completed PPQs with valid e-signature?

No, previously completed PPQs with valid e-signatures will not be accepted. PPQs are specific to this requirement and should be current.

Pg. 48 -- Compenstation for Professional Employees

FAR 52.222-46 requests a compensation narrative inclusive of “Supporting information will include data, such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, used in establishing the total compensation structure.”

Is the Government requesting this supporting information inclusive of data, as part of the proposal response? If so, can the Government please clarify the format in which it requests to receive this information?

The compensation narrative shall include the information as required by FAR 52.222-46 and shall be submitted as part of Volume III: Cost/Price, following the formatting requirements specified in the "Instructions to Offerors".

Section 3: Attachment 0001 - PWS & Attachment 0004 - Labor Category and Description

Will the Government consider accepting years of directly relevant experience in lieu of the specified degree requirements for certain labor categories, provided the candidate can demonstrate equivalent knowledge, skills, and abilities?

Yes, the Government would consider accepting years of directly relevant experience in lieu of suggested degree requriements. However, it is the Offeror's responsibility to demonstrate equivalent knowledge, skills and abilities.

Section 3.1.3.1: Attachment 0001 - PWS For positions that require a PhD, can relevant experience gained during a candidate’s time as a PhD student—such as research, teaching, publications, or internships—be considered acceptable toward meeting the experience requirements stated in the solicitation?

Yes, the Government would consider accepting years of directly relevant experience in lieu of suggested degree requriements. However, it is the Offeror's responsibility to demonstrate equivalent knowledge, skills and abilities.

Section 3: Attachment 0001 - PWS & Attachment 0004 - Labor Category and Description

After reviewing Attachment 0001 and Attachement 0004, there are many labor categories that do not list the education and experience requirements. Can the government provide education and experience qualification requirements for each position?

If a labor category does not specify an education or experience requirement, then the Government does not have a specific education or experience qualification requirement for that labor category.

Section 3 - Experience: Request for Proposal Will the Government accept a single consolidated attachment that includes all Key Personnel resumes and associated Letters of Intent, or are offeror's allowed to add them as an appoendix to the technical volume?

Yes, the Government would accept a single consolidated attachment that includes all Key Personnel resumes. The Government would also allow Offeror's to add the Key Personnel resumes as an appendix to the Technical Volume.

Pg. 48 - Section L.2.c and Attachment 14 - Pricing Sheet "Cost Detail" tabs for each contract year

Would the Government please confirm whether the "Surge" pricing requirement should be detailed in Attachment 14-Pricing Sheet for each Labor Category or be based on the Total for CLIN x001 and multiplied by 10%? If the latter, which column should the "cost" for Surge be included (there is no column title in this section for the cost - only for "Fixed Fee" and "COst Plus Fixed Fee".

"Surge" pricing shall be equal to 10% of the total price for CLIN x001. Attachment 14 - Pricing Sheet has been updated to automatically calculate this amount.

Attachment 14 - Pricing Sheet: Indirect Rates and Escalation Tab - Subcontractor

If the subcontract is proposed as Fixed Price Labor Rates (FPLR), is the Offeror still required to submit the subcontractor’s indirect rates as part of the cost/price proposal?

Yes, the subcontractor's indirect rates are required. The subcontractors data can be submitted directly to the Government POCs listed in the solicitation, to protect company procurement sensitive information. It is the responsibility of the Prime contractor to ensure all subcontractor information is submitted to the Contracting Officer by the proposal due date specified in the solicitation.

Attachment 14 - Pricing Sheet: Indirect Rates and Escalation Tab - Subcontractor

If subcontractor indirect rates are required regardless of subcontract type, may the subcontractors submit their proprietary rate information directly to the Government under separate cover, rather than through the prime contractor?

The subcontractors data can be submitted directly to the Government POCs listed in the solicitation, to protect company procurement sensitive information. It is the responsibility of the Prime contractor to ensure all subcontractor information is submitted to the Contracting Officer by the proposal due date specified in the solicitation.

Section 3: Attachment 0001 - PWS & Attachment 0004 - Labor Category and Description

Does the degree/education have to be from an institute in the United States?

While degree/education are not required to be from an institute in the United States, any degree/education obtained from an institute outside the United States must be credentialed through a recognized organization that specializes in foreign degree comparisons at no additional cost to the Government. PWS Section 3 has been revised to include clarifying language under 3.0.

Volume II: Past Performance; ii.Section 2 – Performance Given the volume of information required in Section 2 – Performance, would the Government consider extending the page limit for the Past Performance Volume to a total of 15 pages?

The page limit for Volume II: Past Performance has been increased to 15 pages.

Pg. 48 -- Volume Instructions Section c.

The addition of G&A or profit/fee on top of the actual cost of travel is not allowed.

If contractor’s standard accounting practice is to apply G&A to all allowed billable costs, would the government agree to G&A being invoiced on actual travel and ODC costs?

Page 48 language has been revised to allow G&A on top of the actual cost of travel. Offerors are advised that all ODC's submitted, inclusive of G&A, shall not exceed the pre-determined ceiling of $80,000.00 per year. It is the Offeror's responsibilty to monitor and track costs to ensure the $80,000.00 per year ceiling is not exceeded.

Pg. 45 -- Volume I: Technical Section 3 (2) Experience

The solicitation states that a signed letter of intent is required for Key Personnel who are not current employees of a prime contractor.

Please confirm a signed letter of commitment also acceptable for Key Personnel.

Instructions to Offerors have been updated to remove the requirement for signed letters of intent from Key Personnel.

Pg. 46 -- Vol. I: Technical Section 3 (2) Experience pg. 45; and Vol. II:

Past performance Section

The solicitation references both a letter of intent (“A signed letter of intent is required for those individuals proposed as Key Personnel …”) and a letter of commitment (“In addition, letters of commitment shall be included for all subcontractors …”).

Please confirm that letters of intent are required for Key Personnel, while letters of commitment are required for subcontractors.

Additionally, please confirm there are no templates for the letters of intent or letters of commitment.

The requirement for Letters of Intent for Key Personnel has been removed. The Letters of Commitment are still required for subcontractors.

The Government does not have a template for the Letters of Commitment.

Industry practice has shown that incumbent contractors often use restrictive internal agreements that prevent their employees from signing LOIs or providing resumes to competitors during competition. This effectively blocks access to qualified personnel for non-incumbent bidders and creates an unfair competitive advantage, in conflict with the FAR’s requirements for fair competition (FAR 9.505(b), FAR 6.101(b), and FAR 1.102-2(b)).

Given this competitive imbalance, will the Government consider modifying the solicitation to

a. Remove the LOI requirement

b. Remove or reduce Key Personnel requirement

c. Changing the evaluation criteria to place more emphasis on the Offeror’s Transition Plan and Compensation Plan

Response a: The requirement for Letters of Intent for Key Personnel has been removed.

Response b: Many of the tasks outlined in the PWS are considered highly specialized, as a result, the total number of key personnel will remain unchanged.

Response c: The evaluation criteria will remain unchanged.

Are there any non-reimbursable supplies or materials for which the contractor will be responsible?

No, the Government does not anticipate any non-reimbursable supplies or materials for which the contractor would be responsible.

Can the Government confirm whether Other Direct Costs (ODCs) beyond travel—such as medical surveillance, certifications, and training—should be included in the base price or proposed as separately reimbursable items?

ODCs do not include medical surveillance or certifications. Specialized training may be covered based on the government need. Offerors shall utilize the plug number of $80,000.00 for ODCs.

If medical surveillance is not considered an allowable ODC, can the Government please provide historical cost data from the incumbent(s)?

Medical surveillance is at no additional cost to the government. Offerors should reach out to their Occupational Health Providers to determine costs of medical surveillance.

Can the Government identify which labor categories are classified as Service Contract Act (SCA) positions by the incumbent(s), along with the associated SCA anniversary dates? This information is needed to account for vacation accrual requirements that may impact pricing.

Historically, it has been determined that professional employees were required to fulfill the specified requirements and job duties. However, Offerors are advised that it is their responsibility to review the performance work statement, including referenced attachments, and compare the tasks/labor categories and descriptions to the Service Contract Act (SCA) Directory of Occupations to determine the appropriate SCA classification for each employee.

The SCLS paragraph under Section L.2.c of the solicitation has been updated to include a requirement to submit a statement that SLCS would not apply, if so determined by the contractor.

The solicitation requires offerors to submit 39 Key Personnel Resumes and signed Letters of Intent (LOIs) for each of the 39 Key Personnel positions listed in Attachment 05 and described in PWS Sections 3.1–3.4. Incumbent contractors often use restrictive employee agreements—such as corporate NDAs and internal LOIs, or policies—explicitly prohibiting staff from providing resumes or signing LOIs for the purpose of supporting a competitor’s competition efforts. These constraints prevent qualified incumbent personnel from participating in proposals by other offerors, even when those individuals are willing to transition post-award.

Will the Government consider removing the requirement for key personnel and requirement for LOIs? Or limit to critical Key Personnel—such as the Program Manager—and allow technical personnel to be proposed post-award?

This approach would reduce the unreasonable pre-award burden, mitigate the anti-competitive impact of restrictive employment practices, and ensure fair access to the requirement for all qualified offerors?

Instructions to Offerors have been updated to remove the requirement for signed letters of intent from Key Personnel. Many of the tasks outlined in the PWS are considered highly specialized, as a result, the total number of key personnel will remain unchanged.

Are all positions full time positions? Historically, all positions have been supported by full time equivalent contractor staff.

Pg. 137 -- Attachment 1 – PWS, Section 5.5 Deliverable/Delivery Schedule, Deliverable 7 & RFP Section 2. VOLUME INSTRUCTIONS and PWS Section 2.7.3.1

PWS 2.7.3.1 states that a Quality Control Plan (QCP) be submitted after contract award. PWS 5.5 states that it shall be submitted with the proposal. There is no requirement for a QCP contained within RFP Section 2 Volume Instructions.

Can the Government please confirm that a QCP is not required with proposal submission and revised PWS 5.5 to reflect a timeframe for submission after contract award?

The initial Quality Control Plan (QCP) is not required to be submitted with the proposal. Paragraph 2.7.3.1 and the deliverable table in Paragraph 5.5, of Attachment 01 - PWS, have been updated to reflect submission of a QCP 15 days after contract award.

Pg. 43 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(a)(ii) bullets 4, 5, and 7 And Section M Evaluation Factors for Award – Section 2(b)(iv, v, vii)

Three of the bullets listed under Section 2/Factor 2 – Management/Staffing Approach read similarly:

• Plan for program management and scheduling for coverage of required tasks outlined in the PWS.

• Offerors management practices for establishing and maintaining a cohesive team that ensures completion of all tasks, managing subcontracts and managing budgets.

• Approach to managing cost, schedule, and performance.

The items highlighted above appear to be requiring same/similar things.

Could the Government please provide additional direction as to the specific items they would like to see covered for each of these requirements and how they differ from each other? Specifically, can the Government clarify the difference between “program management” and “management practices”, “scheduling” versus “managing schedule”, and “managing budgets” versus “managing cost”?

The Offeror shall discuss its process for program mangement which would include scheduling for coverage of required tasks outlined in the PWS; process for establishing and maintaining a cohesive team; approach for managing costs/schedule/performance to ensure compliance with the contract.

Pg. 43 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(a)(ii), Section 2 – Management/Staffing Approach, bullet 10

Can the Government please confirm that the Transition-In Plan is not included within page limitations? Yes, the Transition-In Plan is excluded from the Volume I - Technical Proposal page limit.

Pg. 44 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(a)(iii), Section 3 – Experience

This Section requires that “Offeror’s relevant experience shall support and substantiate that the organization (to include support contractors, consultants, key personnel, and business partners) has current capabilities for assuring performance of this requirement.”

While Offeror’s (to include support contractors, consultants, key personnel business partners) are to demonstrate Experience in each of the bullets contained under Section 3; can the government please confirm that the Prime (alone) must (at least) be able to demonstrate experience getting qualified personnel through the BPRP process and bring experience within a highly regulated laboratory environment, as the Prime holds ultimate responsibility for ensuring the entire team can perform these tasks?

The Offeror shall demonstrate, through however it deems necessary for both prime and subcontractor, its experience to meet the elements requested in the solicitation.

Pg. 44 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(a)(iii) bullets 1 and 2 And Section M Evaluation Factors for Award – Section 2(c)(ii), bullets 1 and 2

Two of the bullets listed under Section 3/Factor 3 – Experience read similarly:

• Experience with staffing and providing services in support of the BPRP and CS-PRP program or an equivalent personnel reliability program.

• Experience with recruiting and getting qualified personnel through the BPRP process (or equivalent personnel reliability program) and retaining those qualified personnel.

The items highlighted above appear to be requiring same/similar things.

Could the Government please provide additional direction as to the specific experience they would like to see covered for each of these requirements, and how they differ from each other? Specifically, can the Government clarify the difference between “experience with staffing” versus “experience with recruiting and getting qualified personnel?”

Recruiting and getting qualified personnel through the BPRP process (or equivalent personnel reliability program) and retaining the personnel revolves around the processes used to identify and recruit qualified individuals and what is offered to help retain those individuals.

Staffing and providing services is looking for information on experience with actually providing the services in a BPRP and CS/PRP (or equivalent) program and ensuring services are provided continually and successfully.

Pg. 44 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(a)(iii), Section 3 – Experience; bullet 3 And Section M Evaluation Factors for Award – Section 2(c)(ii), bullet 3

Given that BSL 2 and BSL 3/4 laboratories carry different requirements in both regulatory oversight and operational requirements, and BSL 2 labs handle hazards that are not typically life threatening, where in contrast, BSL 3 and 4 laboratories handle high-risk or life-threatening agents, can the Government please confirm that “highly regulated laboratory” means BSL 3 and 4?

The Government confirms "highly regulated laboratory" does refer to BSL-3 and BSL-4. Solicitation has been revised to add clarification.

RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(b) Volume I: Past Performance

Will the Government please confirm that CPARs will be accepted in lieu of PPQs?

Per the solicitation, "past performance information may be obtained from any other sources available to the Government, to include, but not limited to the Contractor Performance Assessment System (CPARS), Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS), Electronic Subcontract Reporting System (eSRS), or other databases; interviews with Program Managers, Contracting Officers, and the Defense Contract Management Agency." In the case of an Offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available, the Offeror will not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance - the Offeror will receive a neutral rating.

Pg. 47 -- RFP Section M: 3. Cost/Price Evaluation

Given that the evaluation criteria includes FAR 15.404-1 and 52.222-46, the current incumbent contract is FFP, and that under FFP contracts the Government often does not have insight into actual direct labor costs (as opposed to the billed direct labor costs), can the Government please:

1. Advise as to which benchmarks the Government will use to compare offeror’s labor rates against to ensure cost realism? Such as ERI 50th Percentile

2. Detail how the Government will ensure that IAW 52.222-46, proposed compensation levels reflect a clear understanding of the work to be performed? And the ability to obtain and keep suitably qualified personnel?

3. Confirm if proposed direct labor rates will be compared to current actual direct labor rates, vs proposed or billed direct labor rates? And if the latter, how will the Government ensure that proposed compensation levels are not lower than those of the current (predecessor) contract?

Total compensations plans will be evaluated in accordance with FAR 52.222-46.

RFP Section M: 3. Cost/Price Evaluation

The referenced section states that the Government will use “one or more of the cost analysis techniques in FAR 15.404-1. Through these techniques the Government will determine whether the Offeror’s cost is fair, reasonable, and realistic.”

Will the Government please confirm that if, IAW 15.404-1 (d)(2), the Government will establish a probable cost for all offerors?

Establishing a probable cost will help to ensure that offerors do not propose unrealistically low salaries, creating risk to the USAMRIID mission. If a probable cost is established, will the Government please confirm that an offeror’s probable cost will be utilized in determining their evaluated cost?

Section M.3 -- Cost/Price Evaluation updated to reflect the Government's intent to determine a probable cost of performance for each offeror when performing cost realism analysis.

Pg. 10 -- PWS 2.2.2 In situations where flex time is not possible (i.e. can’t cross over from pay period to pay period, and/or there are limited days/hours left in the pay period to allow for flex time), will this be accounted for under CLIN 0003/SURGE?

No, the intent of CLIN x0003 -- Surge is to support a potential increase in scope as a result of changes to the Government's mission.

Pg. 11 & 12 -- PWS Sections 2.2.5.2 and 2.6.4.2

Ref Language from PWS 2.2.5.2 – “Telework Reports shall be submitted at the end of each telework day to the COR and TPOC or as otherwise coordinated and agreed between the COR and Contractor Program Manager.”

And

PWS 2.6.4.2 – “If the Contractor has approved telework, the Contractor shall submit a weekly telework report to the COR NLT COB each Friday.”

Can the Government please update these two PWS sections to confirm when Telework Reports should be submitted?

PWS Sections 2.2.4 and 2.2.5.2 have been updated accordingly.

Pg. 10 -- PWS 2.2.5 Can the Government confirm that Overtime will be available and reimbursable under emergency situations or when flex time is not available?

Historically, flex time has not been an issue and there has not been a need for overtime.

Pg. 19 -- PWS 2.10.2 Can the Government confirm that initial occupational health examinations will be reimbursed under the ODC CLIN?

Occupational health examinations are at no additional cost to the government and will not be reimbursed under the contract.

General Given the significant amount of time between the RFI and RFP stage, can the Government please confirm that no extensions will be granted?

See amended solicitation extending the proposal submission due date.

Pg. 45 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(b) Volume I: Past Performance)

To reduce any issues/confusion regarding potential proposal deadline extensions, will the Government modify the Past Performance Instructions to read: “Contracts cited must be current or have ended not more than three years prior to the original closing date of the solicitation. If the contract performance ended more than three years prior to the original closing date of the solicitation it will be determined to not be recent and not evaluated further.”

Section L.2.b of the solicitation has been updated to reflect "original closing date of the solicitation."

Pg. 46 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(b) Volume I: Past Performance)(iii) Section 3 – Subcontracts (if applicable)

This requirement states that only letters of commitment shall be excluded from page count. Can the Government please confirm that Section 3 in its entirety should be excluded from the page limit?

No, Section 3 - Subcontracts is not entirely exempt from the Past Performance page limit which has been increased to 15 pages. Only letters from subcontractors (letters of commitment and written consent), cure notices and show cause letters would be exempt from the Past Performance page limit.

Pg. 46 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(b)(iv) Section 4 – PPQs

Given PPQs are historically submitted directly from the POC to the Government, can the Government please clarify what should be included as part of Section 4 and submitted as part of the proposal, and that it is excluded from the page limit?

Section 4 - PPQs is excluded from the Volume II: Past Performance page limit.

Pg. 41 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 1. Proposal Submission Requirements

Given the response requirements for Volume II, to allow offerors to respond comprehensively, can the Government please increase the page limit for Past Performance from 10 pages to 15 pages?

The page limit for Volume II: Past Performance has been increased to 15 pages.

Pg. 49 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(c) Volume III: Cost/Price

Would the Government please consider allowing the application of G&A to travel costs, provided that it is part the offerors DCAA Approved accounting practices? It is common and accepted for an accounting system to treat travel costs as part of the G&A base, and the application of G&A to travel is consistent with FAR Part 31 in this case.

Page 48 language has been revised to allow G&A on top of the actual cost of travel. Offerors are advised that all ODC's submitted, inclusive of G&A, shall not exceed the pre-determined ceiling of $80,000.00 per year. It is the Offeror's responsibilty to monitor and track costs to ensure the $80,000.00 per year ceiling is not exceeded.

Pg. 49 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(c) Volume III: Cost/Price

Can the Government please advise if contractors are required to use 1880 hours per FTE as a basis for their price proposal?

Section L.2.c of the solicitation has been revised. For purposes of FTE hours, full time is established as 1,912 hours.

Pg. 49 -- RFP, Section L Instructions to Offerors – Section 2(c) Volume III: Cost/Price

For subcontracts, is a detailed breakdown of the proposed subcontractor labor rates required?

Yes, a breakdown of the subcontractor's labor rates is required. The subcontractors data can be submitted directly to the Government POCs listed in the solicitation, to protect company procurement sensitive information. It is the responsibility of the Prime contractor to ensure all subcontractor information is submitted to the Contracting Officer by the proposal due date specified in the solicitation.

RFP, Attachment 5 Can the Government please advise if the Estimated Level of Effort (LOE) is the same LOE as the current contract or if any of the positions/number of personnel are considered new?

The historical level of effort is reflective of the current Government requirement. Offerors are advised to carefully review the requirement in deriving the level of effort it believes necessary in providing their best value proposal.

Offerors are not bound to propose labor categories or quantities in the solicitation, rather Offerors are expected to provide the best solution citing the labor mix and quantity required to accomplish the tasks.

Solicitation - B08- HT942525R0005_Science Support Services” Section L, 3. Volume Instructions, iii Section 3 – Experience B08.01 - Attachment 01 - Performance Work Statement, pages 29- 134 (key personnel mentioned throughout).

B08.05 - Attachment 05 - Historical LOE Key Personnel and BPRP_CS- PRP Requirement

B08.04 - Attachment 04 - Labor Categories and Descriptions

The Key Personnel position listings are the same in (1) the Solicitation pages 44-45, (2) Attachment 01 - PWS, pages 29-134, and (3) Attachment 05 - Historical LOE, Key Personnel and BPRP/CS-PRP Requirement but do not align in Attachment 04 - Labor Categories and Descriptions as additional key personnel positions are listed in Attachment 04.

Can the Government please provide an updated version of Attachment 04 which reconciles the key personnel listing across all documents to ensure alignment of key personnel requirements. We note a delta of 7 positions that are listed in Attachment 4 but not in the other 3 Solicitation documents.

Attachment 04 provides Labor Categories and Descriptions that are active or have historically been activated as surge under this requirement and, identifies of those, which are anticipated to be Key Personnel should they be activated under Surge. There are additional descriptions listed in Attachment 04 that do not map to Attachment 01 or 05. Updated language in Attachment 04 to provide clarity.

Solicitation - B08- HT942525R0005_Science Support Services” Section L, 3. Volume Instructions, iii Section 3 – Experience B08.01 - Attachment 01 - Performance Work Statement, pages 29- 134 (key personnel mentioned throughout).

B08.05 - Attachment 05 - Historical LOE Key Personnel and BPRP_CS- PRP Requirement

B08.04 - Attachment 04 - Labor Categories and Descriptions

The labor category descriptions for Key Personnel in Attachment 04 do not align with the positions outlined in the Solicitation, Attachment 01 – PWS; and Attachment 05, and the PWS, can the Government provide a mapping of the labor categories from the Solicitation, Attachment 01 – PWS; and Attachment 05, and the PWS that maps to Attachment 04?

Attachment 04 provides Labor Categories and Descriptions that are active or have historically been activated as surge under this requirement and, identifies of those, which are anticipated to be Key Personnel should they be activated under Surge. There are additional descriptions listed in Attachment 04 that do not map to Attachment 01 or 05. Updated language in Attachment 04 to provide clarity.

Pg. 41 -- RFP, 1. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

“All proposals are due no later than 1300 Eastern Time on 05 May 2025. It is the responsibility of the Offeror to confirm receipt with the Government points of contacts.”

Since there is a significant difference in the number and categories of key personnel list in the RFI and what is included in the solicitation, can the Government consider extending the due date to 30 days from the date of Q&A release? This would allow Bidders to identify the additional resources being requested. Leaving the requirement as is without extra time provides an unfair advantage to the incumbent company.

See amended solicitation extending the proposal submission due date.

Pg. 48 -- 2 Volume Instructions. c. Volume III: Cost/Price, Supplemental Cost/Price Worksheet

"The addition of G&A or profit/fee on top of the actual cost of travel is not allowed."

FAR 31.203 allows for an allowable indirect cost to be applied to ODC/Travel. As this is a Cost-Plus Fixed Fee contract and Bidders must abide by the Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) and their Disclosure Statement, can the Government amend the solicitation to allow for General & Administrative (G&A) charges to be added to travel if that is in accordance with the Bidders disclosure statement?

This requirement is exempt from Cost Accounting Standards (CAS).

Page 48 language has been revised to allow G&A on top of the actual cost of travel. Offerors are advised that all ODC's submitted, inclusive of G&A, shall not exceed the pre-determined ceiling of $80,000.00 per year. It is the Offeror's responsibilty to monitor and track costs to ensure the $80,000.00 per year ceiling is not exceeded.

RFP Section M, 3, Cost/Price Evaluation Criteria

“The Government will evaluate offers by establishing a Total Evaluated Cost which will consist of the total cost proposed for all base contract line items, option contract line items, and the amount associated with FAR 52.217-8.

The amount evaluated under FAR 52.217-8 will be calculated using the rates proposed for the last option period, prorated six months.”

The pricing sheet at Attachment 14 does not provide a section for the amounts associated with FAR 52.217-8 although it states how it will be calculated. Please confirm the Government does not want the optional extension included on Attachment 14.

The Government will calculate the value associated with 52.217-8 as specified in the solicitation. Offeror's do not need to include optional extension in Attachment 14.

Pg. 47 -- RFP, Volume III: Cost/Price Please confirm that if a proposed Subcontractor will be working under a time and materials contract that a detailed price volume is not required. If it is required, can the Subcontractor submit their response directly to the Government?

The subcontractors data can be submitted directly to the Government POCs listed in the solicitation, to protect company procurement sensitive information. It is the responsibility of the Prime contractor to ensure all subcontractor information is submitted to the Contracting Officer by the proposal due date specified in the solicitation.

Pg. 45 -- RFP, 2. VOLUME INSTRUCTIONS, a.iii. Section 3

“For all Key Personnel positions, provide an attachment naming the individuals proposed to fill Key Personnel tasks/positions along with a description of the portion of the solicitation’s PWS that each individual is being proposed to perform”

Please confirm that this list of individuals by name and position/task is excluded from the page count and can be included with key personnel resumes and letters of commitment.

The Key Personnel attachment is not subject to the page limit for Volume I - Technical. The Instructions to Offerors have been updated accordingly.

Pg. 137 -- Attachment 1: PWS

Deliverable 7: Quality Control Plan (QCP), to be submitted with proposal

The instructions do not provide for submission of the QCP Deliverable. Can the Government confirm this is not due at the time of proposal submission? If it is required, please confirm it is excluded from page count and that it can be submitted as an Appendix.

If a QCP is required, in which Volume and Section should the QCP be provided?

The initial Quality Control Plan (QCP) is not required to be submitted with the proposal. Paragraph 2.7.3.1 and the deliverable table in Paragraph 5.5, of Attachment 01 - PWS, have been updated to reflect submission of a QCP 15 days after contract award.

Pg. 42 -- RFP, Section L, 1. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

“The following sections are not subject to page limits:

part of each volume or if just one is required?

1) An Offeror may submit a cover letter as a separate attachment.

2) No specific requirement for the kinds of information that should be included in the letter.

3) Historically, one summary narrative has been provided with an Offeror's proposal. A summary narrative is not required.

Pg. 47 -- RFP, 2 Volume Instructions. c. Volume III: Cost/Price, Supplemental Cost/Price Worksheet

“Forward Pricing Rate Agreement (FPRA): Include a copy of any current rate agreement or FPRA that supports the proposed contract rates. “Copy” in this context is defined as a direct and full copy of the actual applicable pages from your FPRA (to include cover sheet) and not offeror created tables or excerpts. These agreements may be with the Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA), Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), or other Federal Government contracting offices.”

Can bidders submit the rate package provided to DCAA to meet this requirement if the bidder has not received a FPRA to date?

Yes, as supporting documentation of rates; however, the Government is not bound to accept those rates as if they were under a Government Approved FPRA.

Pg. 42 -- Solicitation, Section L, 1 Proposal Submission Requirements

The following sections are not subject to page limits:

• Government Furnished Equipment/Information/Property

• Resumes and letters of intent for Key Personnel

• Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Certification OCI Avoidance or Mitigation Plan (if necessary, in accordance with the OCI Certification)

The Government lists sections that are not subject to the fifty (50) page limit and have their own page limits.

Will the Government confirm that the following documents can be placed as Appendices to account for their individual page limits: 1) Government Furnished Equipment/Information/ Property, 2) Key Personnel List, Resumes and Letters of Intent; 3) OCI Certification, and OCI Avoidance or Mitigation Plan (if necessary).

Yes, Offerors may include 1) Government Furnished Equipment/Information/Property; 2) Key Personnel list and Resumes; and 3) OCI Certification, and OCI Avoidence or Mitigation Plan (if necessary) as appendices. The Instructions to Offerors have been updated accordingly.

Pg. 42 -- Solicitation, Instructions to Offers, Proposal Submission Requirements

All Offerors must comply with FAR 52.204-7, System for Award Management. In complying with this clause, the Offeror must ensure that all representations and certifications contained within the solicitation under Clauses Incorporated in Full Text are completed and uploaded into its SAM record at https://sam.gov by the date specified for receipt of proposals. Any Offeror that does not have an active SAM record or has a record that does not include all representations and certifications required within the solicitation under Clauses Incorporated in Full Text may be considered ineligible for award.

Please confirm if the Offeror should state in our proposal that we are compliant with FAR 52.204-7, System for Award Management or will the Offeror be in compliance with this requirement as long our SAM record is updated and includes all the representations and certifications required within the solicitation under Clauses Incorporated in Full Text?

A separate statement acknowledging compliance with FAR 52.204-7 is not required.

Pg. 43 -- Solicitation, Section L, 2 Volume Instructions. b. Volume I:

Technical, Section ii (Section 2 – Management/Staffing Approach

Pg. 134 -- Attachment 01 – Performance Work Statement

A Transition-In Plan that is: i) achievable, ii) takes custody of…