ID07180011_Questions_and_Answers_Final.pdf

ID07180011

Q1. In Section L.10, page 101, “Size” paragraph, the Government states that the Past Experience used must have been “performed within the last two years of the closing date of the solicitation” (Oct.

22). Also in Section L.10, page 101, “Duration” paragraph states that the PE “must demonstrate the ability … over the course of at least two years.” Could you please clarify that as long as the program has some work scope performed within the last two years, and that the duration of the project was at least two years long, even if some of that performance was outside of the past two years, then that project can be used as PE?

A1. Section L.10 language has been revised to reflect “three (3) projects no less than 50% complete”.

Q2. Attachment 7 Past Performance Questionnaire and Attachment 10 Past Performance Reference Information Sheet are provided with the solicitation, but per Solicitation Section L.13, these are only stated to be requirements for Phase 2. Could you please verify that for the Past Experience required in Phase I proposals (L.10, page 100), an offeror-created Past Experience format is to be used and that no PPQs are requested?

A2. Past Experience (Phase One) is a separate non-price factor from Past Performance (Phase Two).

Past Experience may be submitted in an offeror-created format so long as all requested information is provided. No PPQs are requested for Past Experience.

Q3. Please refer to Solicitation, Section H.17, Pages 42 and 43. It is standard for the Contractor’s work product to belong to the Contractor and that the Government could be given Unlimited Rights to the work product. Is it correct that, per the referenced solicitation section, it is the Government’s intention that any and all work product produced by the contractor for this effort will be the property of the US Government, and that the Contractor will have no rights to its own work product, barring a proper FOIA request approved by the Government, with the work attributed as belonging to the Government?

A3. This solicitation language is correct as written, and it accurately reflects the Government’s intention.

Q4. Please refer to Solicitation, Section H.17, Pages 42 and 43. The RFP states, at page 42 bottom to 43 top, “Copyright: Any software and computer data/information developed, as a component of this contract shall have the following statement attached to documentation: This computer program is a work effort for the United States Government and is not protected by copyright (17 U.S. Code 105). Any person who fraudulently places a copyright notice on, or does any other act contrary to the provisions of 17 U.S. Code 506(c) shall be subject to the penalties provided therein. This notice shall not be altered or removed from this software or digital media, and is to be on all reproductions.”

As a related reference, 17 U.S. Code 506(c) states, “Copyright protection under this title is not available for any work of the United States Government…” As another related reference, 17 U.S. Code 101 defines “Work of the United States Government” as, “A work prepared by an officer or employee of the United States Government as part of that person’s official duties.” Our question is that, since the Contractor will not be an officer or employee of the United States Government, is this requirement in the referenced solicitation section in error, and should it be removed from the RFP?

A4. This solicitation language was not in error and was intended as written.

Q5. Please refer to Solicitation Section M.2.3, Financial Review, page 113, which states: “Offerors who are determined financially able to perform a contract valued at $100M will receive a “Go” (acceptable) rating.” Can the Government provide specific thresholds for the financial data to be provided in the GSA

Form 527 that would lead to a “financially able to perform a contract valued at $100M” determination?

Also, would a bank letter guaranteeing a line of credit commensurate with the awarded contract value strengthen the GSA Form 527 data?

A5. Requested information regarding specific thresholds cannot be provided. The Government reserves the right to request information other than that on the GSA Form 527 if needed to make a responsibility determination.

Q6. Reference C.16 / Page 21 - '"Other multi-awardee vendors receiving a contract as a result of this solicitation. To Be Determined (TBD) after contract award." What are the ACAs with other multi-awardee vendors intended to cover - instances where the awardees collaborate on a given task order, are these ACAs more general in nature. Since the awardees will presumably compete for task orders, why would ACAs be required in this case?

A6. Programs may involve individual projects, each with multiple different awardees, and there may be instances where coordination among multi-awardee vendors may necessitate the need for an ACA.

Q7. Reference D.2 / Page 23 - '"Overseas shipping shall be coordinated with the US State Department and following International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) on an order by order basis" Who is responsible for overseas shipping and potential customs coordination and fees associated with shipment to oversees military installations - contractor or the US Gov't?

A7. Responsibility for overseas shipping and potential customs coordination and fees, if applicable, will be determined on a case by case basis at the task order level.

Q8. Reference C.5 / Page 11 - "preferred (fully vetted) vendor/subcontractor list," How should vetting be accomplished - by the contractor or by the gov't? When is this due?

A8. PWS paragraph C.5 has been updated to remove the reference to the vendor/subcontractor list and the financial management system.

Q9. Reference C.11 / Page 13 - '"Travel shall be approved in advance, via the Consent to Purchase (CTP) form (Section J, Attachment 5). " If travel is bid as discrete trips as part of a task order bid, are these trips also subject to CTP process, or are they "approved" with approval of the task order?

A9. Travel is to be performed on a cost reimbursable basis and is therefore subject to the CTP process.

Q10. Reference C.15 / Page 20 - "The Contractor shall provide, at no additional cost to the Government, a minimum one-year warranty (or the warranty provided by the OEM, whichever is longer) for all hardware and software purchased under each order to this contract, including all equipment supplied, installed, and integrated by the Contractor." How should warranty costs for items not subject to at least a one-year OEM warranty be covered and bid under this effort? Should these warranty costs/fees be bid as additional (ODC) items under a specified task order?

A10. Warranties will be handled on a case by case basis at the task order level.

Q11. Reference H.1 / Page 35 - '"The size standard associated with NAICS 541512 is $27.5 million, which means that a company, including its affiliates, would be considered a “small business” if their average annual earnings does not exceed $27.5M for each of the pay periods for the preceding completed 12 calendar months." To confirm - this procurement is open to non-small businesses under NAICS 541512 as well as small businesses?

A11. Yes.

Q12. Reference H.14 / Page 42 - '"The Contractor shall participate in a post-award conference for the purposes of making introductions, coordinating security requirements, discussing schedules, prioritizing PWS requirements, and providing details regarding the transition of work requirements (as applicable) from the incumbent contractor. The Contractor shall commence work on the first day of the period of performance. The Post Award Orientation Conference shall occur within 10 working days after award."

How should the labor and any associated travel in support of the Post-Award conference be allocated and handled? Is this considered part of the default $40,000 task order award under this contract?

A12. The Post Award Orientation Conference should be at no cost to the Government. Section H.14 has been revised.

Q13. Reference H.14 / Page 42 - '"The Contractor shall participate in a post-award conference for the purposes of making introductions, coordinating security requirements, discussing schedules, prioritizing PWS requirements, and providing details regarding the transition of work requirements (as applicable) from the incumbent contractor. The Contractor shall commence work on the first day of the period of performance. The Post Award Orientation Conference shall occur within 10 working days after award."

Additionally, how should other on-going programmatic requirements - such as development and submittal of monthly CDRLs, - and their associated labor and non-labor costs during time-periods where a specific task order is not active be handled and invoiced?

A13. Deliverables as shown in Section C.17, Table 2 are not chargeable. The monthly status report/activity report has been removed from Section C.17, Table 2.

Q14. Reference K.2 / Page 63 - '"The OCI Mitigation Plan shall be submitted as part of the Technical Approach (TA), if an OCI has been identified and requires mitigation." If an OCI mitigation plan is required within the TA, is the TA plus OCI plan still subject to a 15 page limit?

A14. There is no page limit for the OCI Mitigation plan. The OCI Mitigation Plan is not included in the TA page limit.

Q15. Reference L.10 / Page 101 - '"The offeror must demonstrate experience managing three (3) projects performed concurrently with a summed dollar value of at least $5,000,000.00 performed within the last two years from the closing date of the solicitation." Please clarify: For the three projects cited, should their combined value be over $5,000,000 or should each effort cited have a dollar value of over $5,000,000.?

A15. The combined value of the three projects should be at least $5,000,000.00.

Q16. Reference L.10 / Page 101 – “'"The offeror must demonstrate experience managing three (3) projects performed concurrently with a summed dollar value of at least $5,000,000.00 performed within the last two years from the closing date of the solicitation." Please clarify: Should the 3 projects cited in response to this size requirement be the same three projects that are otherwise described in the Past Experience write-ups?

A16. Yes, a total of three past experience submissions should be provided that meet all of the scope, size, and duration requirements of L.10.

Q17. Reference L.11 / Page 102 - "The contractor’s response package must include the following information and must not exceed the following page limitations:

• Cover Letter/Executive Summary (including the contractor’s DUNS, Tax ID, Prompt Payment Discount, and Section 508 compliance (Reference Section H.13)). The Cover Letter/Executive Summary should also include a statement that the offeror’s company understands the requirements specified in the PWS and a statement that the offeror’s company is capable of performing the PWS requirements. 2 Page Limit

• Technical Approach (TA): 15 Page Limit to include all information required in Section L.12)

• Past Performance (PP) Questionnaires (Attachment 7)

• Small Business Utilization/Small Business Participation Plan (SB).

• Mandatory pricing spreadsheet (Attachment 1) must be completed and returned with pricing information.

• Subcontracting Plan.

Any assumptions and/or exceptions should be included if applicable as part of the proposal package."

Are the Small Business utilization Plan and Subcontracting Plan to be submitted with the Phase 2 proposal subject to page limits? Is there a prescribed format for these plans, or can they be provided in a contractor format?

A17. Small Business Utilization, Small Business Participation Plan and Subcontracting Plan are not subject to page limits. While a template for the Subcontracting Plan is provided as Attachment 9, it is not mandatory. There is no prescribed format for the Small Business Utilization and Small Business Participation Plan.

Q18. Reference 'L.11 / Page 102 - '"Subcontracting Plan." Section L.12 below requires a Subcontractor Management Plan excerpt. Is this the same as the Subcontracting Plan requested here? If not, how do these plans differ? If they are the same plan, why is an excerpt required in the TA if the full plan is required to be submitted with the proposal?

A18. The Subcontracting Plan and Subcontractor Management Plan excerpt are not the same requirement. Refer to Sections L.16 and M.2.7.1 for the Subcontracting Plan and L.12 for the Subcontractor Management Plan excerpt.

Q19. Reference L.12 / Page 103 - '"Subcontractor Management Plan Excerpt: The offeror shall provide a subcontractor management plan excerpt as part of the technical approach that explains how the offeror will address subcontractor adherence to schedule, quality, and security." What topics should be addressed by the Subcontractor Management plan excerpt? Is a Table of Contents extract sufficient, or should specific topic areas be excerpted within the TA narrative?

A19. It is the offeror’s responsibility to determine how to address subcontractor adherence to schedule, quality, and security.

Q20. Reference L.12 / Page 103 - '"Corporate Security Plan Excerpt: The offeror shall provide a corporate security plan excerpt that identifies how security requirements associated with the solicitation will be met." What topics should be addressed by the Corporate Security Plan excerpt? Is a Table of Contents extract sufficient, or should specific topic areas be excerpted within the TA narrative?

A20. It is the offeror’s responsibility to determine how to identify how security requirements associated with the solicitation will be met.

Q21. Reference L.12 / Page 104 - '"Quality Control Plan (QCP) Excerpt: The offeror shall provide a draft quality control plan excerpt that reflects key areas identified in the offeror’s technical approach submittal. The QCP excerpt shall also include a Quality Control Matrix that (at a minimum) addresses the elements identified in PWS Table 2 of Section C.17 proposed by the offeror in accordance with the PWS." What topics, besides the stated Quality Control Matrix should be addressed by the Quality Control Plan excerpt? Is a Table of Contents extract sufficient, or should specific topic areas be excerpted within the TA narrative?

A21. It is the offeror’s responsibility to determine how to address the requirement to provide a draft quality control plan excerpt that reflects key areas identified in the offeror’s technical approach submittal.

Q22. Reference L.12 / Page 104 - "Offeror’s Technical Approach must not exceed 15 pages in total." The preceding paragraphs detailing the requirements for the TA write-up specify: 1) response to all PWS requirements in a Methodology section; 2) direct answers to 5 questions associated with the methodology description; additional descriptions of skills and technologies to be employed; 3) descriptions of Management and Staffing Plans; 5) excerpts from 3 Plans (Subcontractor Management Plan, Corporate Security Plan and QCP); and 5) a 2-section OCI mitigation Plan (if applicable). Even without the OCI Plan, it will be difficult to adequately address all listed requirements within the 15-page limit for the TA narratives. We'd like to know if it is possible to revisit the page limit in light of these detailed requirements, or alternately reduce the required scope for the TA write-up.

A22. The Technical Approach (TA) page limitation has been increased from 15 to 20 pages.

Q23. Reference Labor (CLIN) - Can additional labor categories or positions be added to this list?

A23. Labor categories are limited to those provided in Attachment 1 and Attachment 3. If future requirements dictate that additional labor categories be added, such action would be handled during contract administration.

Q24. Reference M.2.3 Financial Review (Phase One) - Offerors who are determined financially able to perform a contract valued at $100M will receive a “Go” (acceptable) rating. Is the $100M contract value for the IDIQ contract or for a Task under the IDIQ?

A24. The $100M is the estimated IDIQ contract ceiling.

Q25. Reference: B.5 Contract Structure, Minimum Guarantee, Maximum Ceiling and Fair Opportunity Ordering Procedures/pricing and G.3 Invoicing

Issue: The RFQ states in B.5 “This contract is considered severable at the base basic contract level.

Projects issued under this contract on individual orders may be severable or non-severable depending on the specific order scope of work/requirement.”, and in G.3 “Invoicing for Severable orders shall be submitted in accordance with the bid schedule / CLIN structure. FFP Severable orders that are priced by the month shall be billed at the flat rate per month.” The contract does not define Severable/Non-severable.

Question: Would the government please define Severable and Non-severable as specified in Section B.5 of the draft IDIQ contract?

A25. Section B.5 has been revised. Per the DoD Financial Management Regulation, Volume 11A:

“Reimbursable Operations Policy” (DoD 7000.14-R), the definition of severable services is: ”Services that are continuing and recurring in nature where the agency realizes a benefit at the time that services are provided even if the contract has not been performed to completion. Services are considered severable if they can be separated into components that independently provide value to meet an agency’s need”.

This regulation’s definition of non-severable service is: “Services that represent a single undertaking that cannot be feasibly subdivided. If the services produce a single or unified outcome, product, or report, the services are considered non-severable. Requires the contractor to complete and deliver a specified end product”.

Q26. Reference: Initial Solicitation; Section L.10 page 100, 101

Issue: The RFP in L.10 on page 100 requests providing “three (3) projects completed with comparable scope, size, and duration to the requirements of the solicited task”. As written, a project still in execution would not satisfy the requirement to be completed. Under contract size requirements on page 101, the requirement is “performed within the last two years”.

Question: Can the government modify the RFP to state “three (3) projects completed within the past two years or still in execution…” to define recency of references so that references still in execution can be included?

A26. Section L.10 language has been revised to reflect “three (3) projects no less than 50% complete”.

Q27. Reference: Initial Solicitation; Section L.10 page 101

Issue: The RFP states “demonstrate experience managing three (3) projects performed concurrently with a summed dollar value of at least $5,000,000.00”. Other requirements in this section refer to attributes that each project is required to meet.

Question: Can the government confirm that the summed value of $5 million applies to the combined value of the three reference projects provided and not the individual value of each project?

A27. The combined value of the three projects should be at least $5,000,000.00.

Q28. Reference: Initial Solicitation; Section L.10 page 101, L.13 page 105 and Attachment 2 Historical Information

Issue: In L.10 the RFP requires “Past experience must demonstrate the ability to manage multi-phase projects over the course of at least two years”. It also states, “Offers should furnish the following specific information required on each contract/task order provided”. Attachment 2 provides representative examples of the “types of task and projects” accomplished through the 502 TDS. The terms projects, task orders and contracts are all used somewhat interchangeably.

Question: Can the government confirm that the project examples listed in Attachment 2 are representative of projects in determining suitable past experience references; and that a reference project may consist of multiple Modules as defined by the current RTD contract?

A28. Past Experience will be evaluated in accordance with Sections L.10 and M.2.1 of the solicitation.

Q29. Reference: Initial Solicitation; Section L.13 page 105

Issue: The RFP requires providing a copy of the finalized PPIRS record for contracts with CPARS. In some cases, the PPIRs record will involve multiple CPARS reports.

Question: Can the government clarify whether a PPIRs record showing available CPARS reports is required, all the actual CPARS reports, or just the most recent? Recommend simply requiring most recent CPARS reports for contracts.

A29. Section L.13 has been revised.

Q30. Reference: Attachment 6, GSA Form 527

Issue: The validity period within the header of the document provided within the RFQ is denoted as expiring on September 30, 2018. As proposal submissions are due on October 22, 2018, contractor data submitted on Attachment 6 would be on an outdated form, beyond the expiration period.

Question: Is it acceptable to use the expiring form or will the government provide an updated version?

A30. Revised Attachment 6 has been provided in Amendment 01.

Q31. Reference: Section L

Issue: The RFQ doesn’t provide restrictions or guidance on font size, font style or page margins.

Question: Are these open to the bidders’ discretion? Please confirm Times New Roman 10 pt. font for text, legible font for figures, and 1-inch margins is acceptable.

A31. Sections L.9 and L.11 have been revised.

Q32. Reference Section C.5, Requirements/Specific Tasks.

Issue: This task is included: “Reference shall be made to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 9001:2008 as a means of ensuring that the quality assurance oversight is exercised in fulfilling the requirements of this contractor.”

Question: Can the government please confirm that 9001:2008 or later is acceptable?

A32. Section C.5 has been revised.