ID01150067_Tab_10_FINAL_SOLIC_Q A_05.pdf

ID01150067 – SETS

FINAL DRAFT Solicitation Questions, v5

April 5, 2016 Page 1

The following questions were asked in response to the FINAL DRAFT Solicitation:

Item Reference Question Response

1. Part I, Section A, para. (iv) The Synopsis posted with the Final Draft Solicitation indicates that “This final Draft Solicitation will become the 'solicitation’” and that "the attachments in this Presolicitation Notice will be issued as the Solicitation, and Offers (Proposals) will be due thirty (30) calendar days from the issuance of the Solicitation on Federal Business Opportunities (fbo.gov).” However the Final Draft Part I, Section A, paragraph (iv) states: "CLOSING DATE AND TIME:

Email version: 2:00 p.m. (EST) April 29, 2016 and DVD/CD versions 2:00 p.m. (EST) May 2, 2016.” Please, clarify if the Schedule in Part A is draft or final?

The Solicitation will include the closing date and time when it issues on fbo.gov.

2. Section A: Offeror Requirements/ Proposal Submission, Pg. 3 & Section L: Proposal Contents and Format (Delivery) Pg. 46

Section A (Offeror Requirements) and Section L state that “the proposal shall be submitted via email and electronically (CD/DVD format), but the solicitation provides no proposal instructions for the CD/DVD submission. Questions:

(a) How many copies of the CD/DVD should Offerors submit and should Cost and Non-Cost proposals be separated?

(b) What are the delivery instructions? For example, can the

CD/DVD be hand-delivered? If so, to whom? What are the mail delivery instructions?

(c) How would the government like Offerors to name files?

(d) Should all files be submitted in both MS Word and PDF formats for other than Excel spreadsheets?

(a) One CD/DVD is acceptable and separate files for the Non-Cost and Cost Proposals are appreciated.

(b) Mail to the address for Anthony Pellegrino, as indicated in Section A. You may use USPS, FedEx, UPS, or any other carrier. Hand delivery is not recommended, as Mr. Pellegrino may not be present at the date and time delivered. If absolutely necessary however, please email first to confirm specific hand delivery instructions, on a case-by-case basis.

(c) No set naming convention is required but “ID01150067_OfferorNameHere_Non-Cost Proposal” and “ID01150067_OfferorNameHere_Cost Proposal” are examples of what would be nice.

(d) Yes. Refer to the Solicitation. The point is that all narrative documents included in the offer are in PDF and MS Word formats. This way, we have one version that is search capable (MS Word) and one version that is locked (PDF [yes, we know some PDF are searchable]). The Cost Details need to be in Excel format so the Government can verify, analyze, and adjust the data, including the formulas, as required by Cost Analysis described in the Solicitation and required by law. The PDF version of the Cost Details are locked.

3. Section A: Offeror Requirements/ Proposal Submission, Pg. 3 & Section L: Proposal Contents and Format (Delivery) Pg. 46

(a) Will the Government please provide the size limit of email submissions?

(b) Does the Government have a preference on the file format and version (i.e., MS Word, MS Excel or pdf.)?

(a) 25 Mb including overhead. Feel free to use .zip. Feel free to send multiple emails if needed.

(b) See Solicitation and Response 2, above.

April 5, 2016 Page 2

Item Reference Question Response

4. Section A, Item vii The RFP requires that the data in SAM and ASSIST be a character for character match. GSA ITSS (ASSIST) requires basic company information (Profile) to include company name, company address DUNs number, etc. System for Award Management (SAM) includes a much more extensive and comprehensive set of data points to include the following: Entity Overview, Entity Record (Core Data, Assertions, Reps and Certs, POCs), Reports, and Exclusions. Not only are the systems not identical in the data they contain, there may be valid reasons for some of the differences.

While the basic data may be the same, a company may have different points of contact in the different databases, for example, as they are handled by different personnel. Since the data contained may be different, why does the Government require that they be identical?

Please confirm that the requirement for this proposal is to 1) confirm that the Offeror’s ITSS account is active and up to date and 2) confirm that the company name and address in the Cover page is identical to the company name and address in both ITSS and SAM. If the data match-up must go beyond these data points, please specify which other data points must be identical in ITSS and SAM.

The requirement for this proposal is to 1) confirm that the Offeror’s ITSS account is active and up to date and 2) confirm that the company name and address in the Cover Page is identical to the company name and address in both ITSS and SAM, including DUNS and CAGE.

5. Section B1(c ) Allowable Cost, Pg. 4

For billing purposes, this section will include awardee’s established indirect billing rates. Since a contractor’s provisional billing rates will vary from year to year, and sometimes will be updated within a year, is it the Government’s intention to modify the contract as new billing rates for any contract year are determined acceptable by DCAA?

Yes. The Contractor will advise the Government (through the Contracting Officer) of changes to the provisional billing rates and request a modification to the contract as a result of the change(s).

6. F6 – Table 1, Pg. 10 Table includes the Base Year Estimate for the initial 4 Work Assignments, but does not cover the full base year. Where should Offerors include Q3 April – June 2017?

Section F6 – Table 1 is simply the anticipated funding cycle and the anticipated, known requirements for the Base Period. There is no response required (or requested) to Section F6 – Table 1 Funding Cycle.

April 5, 2016 Page 3

7. PART II – CONTRACT

CLAUSES

SECTION I – CONTRACT

CLAUSES

I1. FAR 52.252-2 - Clauses Incorporated by Reference (Feb 1998), Pg. 23.

The referenced list of clauses includes FAR 52.222-46 Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees (Feb 1999).

(a) In which volume should the compensation plan required by the clause be included?

(b) Please confirm that any subcontractor required to submit a sealed package must also submit a compensation plan.

(c) Please confirm that the compensation plan required by the clause will be outside of the page count.

The Cost Summary Details (Attachment J1) provides the proposed salaries and fringe benefits for an Offeror’s employees and the Cost Narrative requires the data used to establish the total compensation structure for the Offeror’s employees. The compensation plan is not a separate document.

The Government will compare the incumbent’s Compensation for professional employees to that proposed by the Offerors as a prelude to determining whether further analysis of the Offerors’ compensation plan is required.

The subject clause and applicable regulations do not prevent the Government from obtaining a better price via lower compensation for professional employees, provided there are no detrimental consequences associated with accepting the lower price(s). A competitive acquisition which might produce savings in terms of professional compensation is in accord with one aim of the Competition in Contracting Act of 1984 -- to allow the Government to obtain the best services at the best price.

8. RFP Cost Proposal (Part A) Section L6.1(e), Pg 48.

Can the government explain how ceiling rates will be established when multiple companies, prime and sub, have provided different rates for the same labor category? Will ceilings be based on the highest team member’s rate for that LCAT or separate ceilings for each team member?

Each labor category will have a ceiling rate. The J1 identifies every labor category by company. Offerors may add lines to the J1 as needed to reflect the on and off-site rates of the prime and the subs.

9. L.2.1 Accounting System and L.6.1(b)

The RFP requires evidence of accounting system adequacy for cost type contracting. What is an acceptable verification of an approved accounting system?

A letter or other written instrument from the cognizant Government agency/department that reviewed and approved your accounting system. This is most often a letter from DCAA.

April 5, 2016 Page 4

10. Section L6.1(e) Cost

Proposal (Part A), Draft Solicitation #2 Questions - Response to Questions 23 and 24, pg. 46

Part I. After contract award, please confirm if the following is reimbursable under the contract: (i) Direct Labor Rates or Overhead Rates or G&A Rates or other burden rates (Rates) that may have increased from the contractor’s Attachment J1 proposed Rates and (ii) those increased Rates meet the requirements of FAR 31.201-2 Determining Allowability and FAR 31.201-3 Determining Reasonableness as well other applicable portions of FAR Part 31?

Part II. Please adjust item L.6.1(e) to remove reference to ceiling rate and replace with reference requiring Rates be allowable and reasonable.

Part I (i) Increases to Direct Labor Rates will be allowable only if in accordance with the terms of the Contract, i.e., included in the Schedule of Cost/Price (Attachment J1) (e.g., escalation); (ii) Changes to Indirect Rates are allowable upon request by the Contractor as supported by evidence of the change (e.g., DCAA provisional rates submissions or Forward Price Rate Agreements.

Part II – No. The J1 rates create the Ceiling Rate for each labor category. A cost in excess of the Ceiling Rate is not per se allowable by the terms of the Contract and applicable law. The Contractor bears the burden of substantiating any cost that exceeds the Ceiling Rate.

11. L6.1, Q&A #23 Please confirm that, for Direct Labor, the Price (Total Cost + Fee) per labor hour for each labor category will be subject to the ceiling rate referenced in the Government’s response to Question #23 on the Draft Solicitation #2. This appears to be consistent with the language in Final Draft RFP Section L6.1, paragraph (e), which states that “The prices proposed by the Offeror on Attachment J1 will be used to create a ceiling rate for each labor category.” Also, please confirm that ceilings will not be applied on the individual cost elements (Direct Labor Rate, Overhead Rate or Cost, G&A Rate or Cost, etc.) that are used to calculate the Price per hour for each labor category.

The Ceiling Rate is comprised of the direct rate, indirect rates (burden), and fee for each labor category. The Contractor shall seek reimbursement for costs incurred for performing the contract. Only those costs on Attachment J1 have been determined to be fair and reasonable and therefore allowable. Likewise, only the fee proposed has been determined to be fair and reasonable. Any cost, regardless of its nature, in excess of the costs proposed and awarded on Attachment J1 is not per se allowable because only those costs proposed, evaluated, and awarded have been found to be fair and reasonable.

Therefore, the Contractor bears the burden of proving the allowability of any cost that exceeds (is greater than) the costs (direct and indirect) on Attachment J1.

The fixed fee is determined (calculated) as a percentage of the cost of each labor hour but is paid regardless of the cost experience with providing the associated labor hour to avoid the illegal contract type of cost plus a percentage of cost. Therefore, if the actual cost experience with providing a labor category is less than awarded on Attachment J1, the fee shall not change. Likewise, if the cost of providing a labor hour increases because of a change in indirect rates, there is no change in the fee for providing the labor hour.

April 5, 2016 Page 5

12. L.6.1 (e) and

Q&A Item 30 States, “Subcontractor Cost Narratives are limited to five (5) pages each and do not count against the Cost Narrative page count.”

The Q&A file indicated that the “Subcontractor Sealed Packages are also limited to ten (10) pages each and do not count against the Cost Narrative page count.” Will the Government please clarify?

L6.1(e) is correct at 5 pages for the Subcontractor Cost Narrative. The Solicitation document controls.

13. Q&A (28 March) and Final v1 Solicitation

Will the next version of the RFP incorporate all answers to Q&A published on 28 March 2016, either by changes to the RFP or incorporated by reference? If not, how should the Offeror consider the responses to the questions in its proposal? (For example, Q&A #30 states subcontractor Cost Volumes are limited to 10 pages but the referenced RFP section states they are limited to 5 pages.)

The Solicitation document controls.

14. Section L6.1.(e) In the second sentence, the government states, “The prices proposed by the Offeror on Attachment J1 will be used to create a ceiling rate for each labor category”. Does “prices” refer to the prices listed in Attachment J1 under column-G (entitled “Direct Labor Rate ($)”), or column-L (entitled “Total Cost ($)”), or column-O (entitled “Price (Total Cost + Fee)”)?

The Ceiling Rate is the fully burdened labor cost plus fee, i.e., the total price.

15. L6.2.1 (c) There seems to be a word missing and it appears the words used are ambiguous. Please clarify what is meant by “how corporate capability relates the services proposed” under (c) Detail how its Corporate Capability relates the services proposed for performing the Contract resulting from this Solicitation.”

The word “to” is missing. Section L6.2.1 should state:

“The Offeror shall . . . (c) Detail how its Corporate Capability relates to the services proposed for performing the Contract resulting from this Solicitation.”

Section L6.2.1 has been corrected.

16. L6.2.2 and L7 Key Personnel Qualifications (Part B2) is limited to eight (8) sequentially numbered pages to include written narratives from each of the four (4) Key Personnel. Each written narrative is to be signed by the respective Key Person. To allow a full description of the knowledge, skill, ability, and current or prior experience, will the Government please allow the signature pages to be in addition to the eight pages of written narrative?

No.

17. Section L7, Pg. 50 For Section B3 Management Capability the government has allocated 5 pages for B3.1 Staffing Plan, 6 pages for B3.2 Transition Plan, and 3 pages for B3.3 Subcontract Management Plan. In order for Offerors to have some degree of flexibility in presenting their management capabilities, would the government consider removing individual subsection page requirements and instead impose an overall page count of 14 pages for Section B3?

No.

April 5, 2016 Page 6

18. Section L: Proposal Format and Page Count Limitation and Explanation, pg.51

Section L states, “A page is defined as, and shall be …a Microsoft Word Letter (8 ½ x11”) format” and “tables and figures and graphics and diagrams may be Arial narrow in not less than 9 point font and may be Landscape orientation.” To fully and clearly convey information through graphics and diagrams, would the government allow Offerors to use larger fold-out pages and have that page count as a single page?

No.

19. Q&A 56 (28 March);

Attachment J1

In explaining why are there 2 separate groups of labor categories by WAR levels, the Government stated that because the Key Personnel apply to all Work Assignments but the other personnel may apply to one or more Work Assignments, the purpose was to differentiate between Key Personnel and non-Key Personnel.

However, the labor categories from Rows 8 through 54 and those from Rows 55 through 69 on Attachment J1 are also separated appearing to indicate differentiation between those 2 groupings.

Can the Government please explain the meaning of the differentiation between the two groups of non-Key Personnel in Attachment J1 - Cost Summary Details?

There is a page break between Rows 54 and 55. The repeated headings after the page break are simply for formatting purposes. There is no differentiation between the labor categories in Rows 8-54, and those in rows 55- 69.

20. Attachment J1, Cost Summary Details (Pricing Spreadsheet)

The Pricing spreadsheet (Attachment J1) requires Offerors to price a Key Subject Matter Expert and a Key Systems Architect in the top portion of the spreadsheet (entitled “Key Personnel”).

Since these individuals are Key Personnel (and the rates will reflect their actual salaries), can the direct labor rates proposed for these two Key individuals be different than the rates proposed for those same labor categories in the lower portion of the spreadsheet? Specifically can the rate specified for the Key Subject Matter Expert be different (higher) than the rate proposed for the Subject Matter Expert in the lower portion of the spreadsheet? And, can the rate specified for the Key Systems Architect be different (higher) than the rate proposed for the System Architect in the lower portion of the spreadsheet?

Yes, to both questions.

21. Attachment J3, Labor Category Definitions

Given that the DL rates proposed by the Offeror represent Ceiling Rates, would the government consider changing the “year’s experience” requirements for both the Scientist labor categories and the Technician labor categories to match those of the Financial Analyst, Scheduler, Program Analyst, Acquisition Specialist and Operations Research Analyst labor categories?

Specifically, change the experience requirements to 0-6 years for Level-1, 6-10 years for Level-2, and 10+ years for Level-3.

April 5, 2016 Page 7

22. Attachment J3, Labor

Category Definitions Attachment J3 defines responsibilities, education requirements, and years of experience requirements for each labor category.

The defined responsibilities are very clearly stated, but we believe that the responsibilities as stated are not consistent with the years of experience and degrees. For instance, no degree requirements are listed for the Systems Architect (“Designs architectures that include software, hardware, and communications solutions”), and the experience is only 6 years. Likewise Engineers 3, 2, and 1 have no degree requirement. This presents risk to NOAA if the contractor prices positions based on the stated requirements. We recommend that NOAA modify the experience and education requirements to more closely match the responsibilities defined.

We recommend separating each level within a category by 4 years of experience.

FAR 39.104 generally prohibits specifying education and experience requirements for information technology services. The Government believes the needs of the Government are met through the definitions for the labor categories.

23. Attachment J3, Labor Category Definitions

The education/experience requirements for the technical positions (Engineer/Scientist/Technician) do not seem to align with those for the non-technical positions (Financial Analyst/Scheduler/Program Analyst/Acquisition Specialist/OR Analyst). As an example, the Non-technical positions require significantly more education/experience that their comparable technical positions:

e.g., Engineer/Scientist/Technician 2 requires 1+ years' experience and no degree versus Financial/Scheduler/Analyst 2 requires 6-10 years' experience and bachelor's degree; or, Engineer/Scientist/Technician 3 - 3+ years' experience and no degree versus Financial/Scheduler/Analyst 3 - 10+ years' experience and bachelor's degree. Will the Government please confirm the requirements?

FAR 39.104 generally prohibits specifying education and experience requirements for information technology services. The Government believes the needs of the Government are met through the definitions for the labor categories.

24. J3 Labor Category Definitions - Subject Matter Expert

The updated definition specifies minimum education of Bachelor's in engineering. We respectfully recommend that it be revised to "Bachelor's degree in engineering or other appropriate technical discipline". We would suggest that degree's in the fields such as meteorology, physics, mathematics, or computer science would be suitable for a Subject Matter Expert supporting this SOW.

Yes, we agree. Bachelor’s degree in engineering or other technical discipline appropriate for the requirements of the Contract. Attachment J3 has been updated accordingly.

25. J3 Labor Category Definitions - Subject Matter Expert

Given that the DL rates proposed by the Offeror represent Ceiling Rates, would the government consider changing the “year’s experience” requirements for the Subject Matter Expert to be a minimum of 12 years?

No.

26. J3 Labor Category Definitions – Systems Architect

Given that the DL rates proposed by the Offeror represent Ceiling Rates, would the government consider changing the “Systems Architect” labor category to “Systems Architect 1” and adding an additional Level of Systems Architect, specifically a “Systems Architect 2” with a minimum years of experience requirement of 12 years?

April 5, 2016 Page 8

27. J3 Labor Category

Definitions - Technical Writer

Will the Government please clarify if the intent is for the Technical Writer to have the same definition as the Scheduler/IS Operations job category? If not, will the Government please provide the correct Technical Writer definition?

The Technical Writer Labor Description is modified in Attachment J3.

28. Attachment J3, Labor Category Definitions

Question: Will the Service Contract Act apply and if so which WDs and Locations should Contractors use for pricing purposes?

Recommendation: Please provide the appropriate WDs and Location data if SCA applies.

The Government has determined that the job duties detailed in the Labor Categories fall within one or more exemptions of the McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act (SCA). The Government also reasonably anticipates that all personnel meeting the Labor Category definitions will be paid on a salary basis at not less than $455.00 per week.

29. Attachment J4 – SOW, Section 2.4.2.2, p. 13

Topic: System Concept Analysis Modeling Question: The second requirement states the “Contractor shall support the Government in the use models, simulations and prototypes…” Can the Government define what “use models” are? Is this meant to be “use case models”? In addition, is the Contractor to supply simulations and or simulators per Section 2?

Recommendation: Clarify “use model” to be “use case model” or “use of….” Please also clarify whether the Contractor will be required to supply simulations and/or simulators.

The sentence should read “Contractor shall support the Government in the use of models, simulations and prototypes…”

Attachment J4 has been updated to reflect this correction.

30. General RFP Question During performance, can a subcontractor be proposed in a Work Assignment Response in a Labor Category where no rates and/or hours for that subcontractor were provided in the overall proposal?

See Solicitation Section G7.

31. General RFP Question My company is a HUBZone and we are looking to be a part of a team bidding on NOAA NESDIS SETS.

(a) Can you clarify the socioeconomic goals. Are the percentages provided in the Draft documents a percent of Total Contract value?

(b) Will the primes subcontract plan and its alignment to the socioeconomic goals be evaluated and scored?

(c) The draft documents indicate the subcontracting plan and goals will be negotiated after award… can you clarify what that means?

(d) And lastly since NOAA is not meeting its HUBZone goals suggest NOAA consider increasing the goal from 3% to 6% for this procurement.

(a) Please see FAR 52.219-9 Small Business Subcontract Plan (Oct 2015).

(b) See FAR 19.705-4 Reviewing the Subcontracting Plan

(c) The plan is due from the apparent awardee prior to award (not after award) and shall be negotiated within the time specified by the Contracting Officer. The failure to submit and negotiate the subcontracting plan shall make the Offeror ineligible for award of the contract.

(d) NOAA will consider the suggestion.