ERS COMS-S Qand A Matrix v2 01 Dec 20.pdf

M67854-20-R-7828 Attachment 7 – Solicitation Question and Answer Matrix Version I Dated 01 Dec 20

RFP Document

(i.e., Attachment J1, Attachment J2…, RFP, etc.)

Page/Section/

Paragraph/etc.

Relevant Text Question Government Answers

1 Attachment 4 Header “Insert Name of Offeror”

This area of the document is not fillable –

Will the Government update the Adobe Form to allow offerors to update the header on each page of the form?

Document has been revised and is now fillable to allow offerors to update the header on each page of the form.

2 Attachment 8 Header “Insert Name of Offeror”

This area of the document is not fillable –

Will the Government update the Adobe Form to allow offerors to update the header on each page of the form

Document has been revised and is now fillable to allow offerors to update the header on each page of the form.

3 Attachment 8 Page 7; Past Performance

Questionnaires Past Performance Questionnaires

The area of the document is not fillable to provide the contact information of individuals that the PPQs were sent. Will the

Government update this form to allow this information to be provided?

Document has been revised and is now fillable to allow offerors to provide the contact information of individuals receiving the PPQs.

4 Attachment 1

Page 38; 3.1.19

OPERATIONAL

AVAILABILITY

the Contractor shall refer to paragraph 3.1.20 RAM Report for Ao computation.

Will the Government provide access to the RAM Report for computing Ao?

This will not be provided with the MATOC. TOs will include the computing information/details for reporting in the applicable PWS/CDRLs

5 RFP Page 71; B.3

“Offerors are limited to 10 pages for A.2.A.9

(Organizational Experience) and 20 pages for

A.2.A.10 (Past Performance).”

Why are page number limits provide for Organizational Experience and Past

Performance, when the response for this information is provide to the Government via Attachment 4 and Attachment 8 respectively?

Please ensure the RFP is understood with regard to submission of Technical and Past Performance requirements.

6 RFP Page 71; B.5 “The Offeror shall use a standard page numbering system.”

Is it the Government’s intent to have the proposal pages sequentially numbered for our response for A.2.A.1 through A.2.A.8?

“The Offeror shall use a standard page numbering system. All lines of text per page shall be consecutively numbered.” Please note where this requirement is located.

7 RFP Page 71; B.5 “The Offeror shall use a standard page numbering system.”

Since our proposal response to A.2.A.9 and

A.2.A.10 will be provided to the Government via Attachment 4 and Attachment 8 is it correct that this numbering requirement does not apply to this portion of our proposal?

Please ensure Proposal Submission Instructions are understood and followed.

8 RFP

Page 69; 9 Organizational

Experience

“Offerors are required to describe a single contract (i.e., no more than one contract) for each of the below experience requirements.”

While a small business can show its experience providing Training System

Operators and Maintenance of Training System that are very similar to the requirements identified in ERS COMS at multiple locations. By adding the OCONUS requirement significantly limits the number of programs that would qualify. Request the

Government allow small businesses show their OCONUS experience using an additional program reference.

Update to no more than two contracts and page limit remains at 10 pages.

9 RFP Page 71; B.5 “All lines of text per page shall be consecutively.”

Is the Government wanting the lines of the each page to be numbered 1, 2, 3, …n or does the Government want the line numbering to begin at 1 on the first page and continuing from page to page not restarting at

1?

The Offeror shall use a standard page numbering system. All lines of text per page shall be consecutively numbered. Please note which section this requirements is found in.

10 RFP Page 71; B.5 “All lines of text per page shall be consecutively.”

Since there are a number of forms and enclosures to be provided by responding to

A.2.A.1 through A.2.A.8, this would make this numbering process very difficult and recommend deleting this requirement.

Each submission will have lines of text per page consecutively for reference. Regardless of the numbering, submissions cannot exceed page limits for organization experience and past performance.

11 RFP Page 30 DFARS 252.244-7001

Will FAR Clause 52.244-2 be added in order for Contractor to purchase items while getting an approved Contractor Purchasing

System? If no, can Contractor purchase items without consent while getting approval for its

Purchasing System?

The prescriptions to support FAR 52.244-2 and DFARS 252.244-7001 are not met to include in this MATOC effort.

Attachment 8 & RFP

A.2.A.10

Att 8 Pages 1 – 6, and RFP

Page 69 - 71

RFP A.2.A.10 requires up to 3 Past Performance references but does not specifically state the offeror utilize Attachment

8 to provide this information (the RFP only indicates using this Attachment in A.2.A.10(d) for listing the POCs related to each PPQ).

Also, Attachment 8 (pages 1-6) only provides space for two references “Past Performance

Reference #1: Training System Operator

Experience” (pages 1-3) and “Past Performance Reference #2: Training System

Maintenance Experience” (pages 4-6). This doesn’t allow a space for the 3rd Past Performance the offeror is afforded and it also seems to that pages 1-6 are structured along the lines of Organizational Experience in A.2.A.9 where it is broken out by Operator

Experience and Maintenance Experience, which A.2.A.10 does not specify you need to break out your past performance references along that criteria.

Is it the government’s intent for an Offeror to submit an Attachment 8 “package” for each past performance reference as follows:

Attachment 8 Operator

Attachment 8 Maintenance Attachment 8 List of Contacts for each PPQ

Section A2.A.10 has been revised as follows:

“Attachment 8 may be used, in any combination of Training System Operator or Maintenance of

Training Systems, to support three contract efforts of recent and relevant past performance.”

Attachment 8 is provided to support any combination of three recent and relevant past performance of Training System Operator or

Maintenance of Training Systems.

13 RFP B, A.2.A.10, B (3) Page 71

There is no page limitation for the submissions associated with paragraphs A.2.A.1 through A.2.A.8. Offerors are limited to 10 pages for

A.2.A.9 (Organizational Experience) and 20 pages for A.2.A.10 (Past Performance).

Does the 20-page, page count limitation, apply to each “package” (Attachment 8) giving us 20 pages per citation or does the limitation apply to the entire past performance submission if the Offeror chooses to use 3 references?

The 20-page limit is associated with the entire Past Performance requirements referenced in

Section A.2.A.10.

14 RFP A.2.A.2(c) Page 67 Item b: Facility Code

Can the Government please confirm what they mean by Facility Code and where this information would be located, and also how Facility Code differs from CAGE code (item

A.2.A.2(d)?

Facility codes may be applicable in instances where a company has one cage code but also have multiple business segments under that

CAGE code. The individual business segments may be identified as a unique business unit code under the CAGE code.

15 Attachment 5 N/A N/A

Can the Government please indicate what the offeror is required to do with Attachment 5?

It was provided with the solicitation, but there is no reference to it anywhere in the

RFP.

No requirement at this time. Mishap form will be required IAW the PWS and CDRLs if a mishap occurs.

16 RFP A.2.B.1 Page 71 N/A

Will the Government accept one consolidated Volume containing all of the required write-ups for A.2.A as long as it is tabbed properly? If allowable, 3 hard copies of each consolidated volume would be provided in accordance with A.2.B.1.

Yes, one consolidated Volume containing all of the required write-ups for A.2.A are acceptable, as long as it is tabbed properly. Yes, 3 volumes consolidated of all the write-ups of A.2.A are acceptable.

17 RFP A.2 (10)a Page 69

RFP A.2 Proposal Submissions, paragraph 10.

Past Performance Proposal, subparagraph a, requires an Offeror to submit no more than three efforts for consideration.

It is assumed that the government intends these submissions to be provided on

Attachment 8, yet that is not called out in the

RFP. Attachment 8 is only referenced further down in subparagraph d, where the government requires it be used to submit a list detailing the POCs for each PPQ. Can the government clarify if Attachment 8 is to be

Section A2.A.10 has been revised as follows:

“Attachment 8 may be used, in any combination of Training System Operator or Maintenance of

Training Systems, to support three contract efforts of recent and relevant past performance.”

used as the template for past performance narratives and no contract formatted response is desired other than Attachment 8?

ERS+COMS-

S+MATOC+RFP+11.20.20

Page 1 Block 10

[X]WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS

(WOSB) ELIGIBLE UNDER THE WOMEN-

OWNED SMALL BUSINESS PROGRAM

The Pre-RFP release did not include a

Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB) acquisition selected checkbox. Did PM

TRASYS intentionally select this checkbox in the RFP?

Amendment 0001 was issued on November 24, 2020 to correct this error and identify this effort as a 100% SB set-aside.

ERS+COMS-

S+MATOC+RFP+11.20.20

Page 70 Bullet C

Offerors shall instruct past performance points of contact (POC) to send completed PPQs to Mr. Jaime Morrison via email at jaime.morrison@usmc.mil no later than the closing date and time specified in Block 9 on page 1 of the solicitation.

If the offeror previously submitted completed

PPQs during the Pre-RFP phase and those submissions will be the same in the RFP is the offeror required to have PPQ contacts resubmit those PPQs?

If the offeror has previously submitted Past Performance during the Pre-solicitation notice, resubmission of Past Performance is not required.

General Instructions has been revised to include “20. Past Performance Submission

If Early Past Performance was submitted during the Pre-Solicitation Phase, the Government requests that the industry partner not resubmit it again with the FINAL RFP and confirm the early

Past Performance submission is still valid.

Contractor format of confirmation is acceptable and will not count against the total page limitation of the proposal submission.”

20 RFP Block 10 of the 1449 WOSB Set Aside on ERS COMS I’m assuming the WOSB Set Aside on ERS COMS is a mistake (Block 10 of the 1449)?

Amendment 0001 was issued on November 24, 2020 to correct this error and identify this effort as a 100% SB set-aside.