M68909-20-R-7600 NETC RFP_QA - FINAL_0002.pdf

Question # Section Page Question Government Response

1 RFP L.2.A.8 58

Required evidence of a Top Secret Clearance (TS FCL). Will the Government consider slightly rewording this requirement to require a Secret Level at the time of RFP response, but require Top Secret at the Task Order response level? This will allow the 8a's such as ours who are in the process of getting a TS FCL and having a DD254 processed to participate in the solicitation and still meet the TS FCL requirements at the Task Order level This will also allow the Government a viable pool of 8a candidates who have experience and qualifications in the Task Areas and incumbent experience with USMC with relevant award winning experience to continue to support USMC.

The requirement remains to provide evidence of a Top Secret Clearance (TS FCL) in response to this Request for Proposal (RFP). Please be advised that the Top Secret facility requirement is incorporated into the NETC solicitation to satisfy the known requirements that are within the scope of the NETC solicitation that require a Top Secret facility clearance. Moreover, the solicitation requires offerors to possess a Top Secret facility clearance at the time of award, because of concerns regarding potential performance delays attendant to offerors obtaining the Top Secret facility clearance, which would compromise the Government’s ability to timely meet critical Top Secret requirements. Furthermore, the agency has a reasonable expectation of receiving two or more proposals from entities that have a Top Secret facility clearance. Therefore, consistent with the applicable case law, the fact that the Top Secret facility requirement may be burdensome or even impossible for a particular firm to meet does not make it objectionable if the requirement where, as here, reasonably reflects the agency’s needs.

2 RFP L.2.A 58

Can the Government considering adding a requirement for the 8a Offeror to have a valid and active ISO 27001 certification which would provide the confidence of the Offeror's experience and application of security standards framework for managing information security with industry best practices demonstrating commitment to Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification

(CMMC)?

The Government will not be adding the requirement for the Offeror to have an ISO 27001 certification.

3 RFP L.2.A.2(g) 58

Requires "A list of Show Cause Notices, Cure Notices and Terminations for Default received on any and all contracts, task orders, or delivery orders within the past 5 years for all CAGE codes associated with the organization."

Can the Government stipulate this is for all contracts, subcontracts from Government or prime contractors? To reduce companies with performance issues, we recommend the Government consider 8a companies who have had Show Cause Notices, Cure Notices and Terminations for Default from prime contractors.

For the purposes of this RFP and determining responsibility, the requirement remains as written.

4 RFP L.2.A 58

Will the Government consider adding a requirement for the Offeror to hold a ISO 9001:2015 to limit the number of Offerors to companies with demonstrated commitment to quality standards and delivery excellence?

The Government will not be adding the requirement for the Offeror to hold a ISO 9001:2015 certification.

5 RFP L.2. B.1(b) 59

If the Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) is not returned by the PPQ point of contact no later than the RFP closing date, which is currently "0900 local, Camp Pendleton, CA on 15 June 2020," will the Offeror be rejected during the Go/No‐Go evaluation criteria first step process?

No, if a PPQ is not returned the Offeror will not be rejected. However, offerors should note that an Offeror's unsubstantiated description of its performance will not typically be used as a basis for evaluation. Keep in mind that offerors with a record of recent and relevant performance that so sparse or unavailable as to preclude the assignment of a meaningful past performance rating will be deemed to have a "Neutral" rating.

6 RFP L.2. C.1(a) 59

Indicates the past performance reference is limited to one page in the first sentence. In the last sentence of the same paragraph the requirement is to provide the information using the worksheet provided in Section J – Past Performance Worksheet. The worksheet provided is a table which is currently formatted with 1 inch margins, Times New Roman font size 10 and to take up almost a full page. Is the Government's intent for the description for the contract work to be brief and roughly 1‐2 paragraphs maximum based on this worksheet template provided as Attachment 4?

Yes, the Government's intent is for the description of the contract work to be clear, concise and provided in Box 11 of the worksheet template provided as Attachment 4.

7 RFP L.2.C.1(a) 59

States "Offerors shall provide no more than a total of five recent and relevant past performance references, limited to one page (single sided) each, for only the prime." We agree that the 8(a) prime offeror should have experience and capabilities of their own and not be dependent on a large business subcontractor/partner to meet the RFP requirements. Can the Government provide an updated Attachment 5: PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE TEMPLATE with updated instructions removing the references of the 'Major Subcontractor'?

Attachment 5: Instructions have been revised to remove "Major Subcontractor" from the Instructions.

8 RFP L.2. C.1(a) 59

Can the Government consider a minimum of three (3) and no more than a total of five recent and relevant past performance references from the prime offeror? We strongly suggest at least 3 past performance references to limit RFP responses only to those qualified 8(a) Offerors with actual demonstrated recent and relevant experience and thus increasing the confidence in qualified 8(a) companies that can meet the Governments needs and actually deliver on the task orders after award. This will reduce the risk the Government may experience with under‐qualified 8(a) Offerors .

The requirement remains "to provide no more than a total of five recent and relevant past performance references".

9 PWS 3.1.7.4 13

States "Technical tasks associated with this PWS require access to classified information and a security clearance up to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) COSMIC TOP SECRET (CTS)." Personnel with this requirement will be hard to find. Can the Government advise if interim NATO CTS clearances are granted allowing personnel to work on task orders typically for MCTSSA with this NATO CTS requirement?

No interim clearances will be granted.

We are currently still an active 8(a) but may graduate prior to award. Would we be eligible for an award?

In order to be eligible for an award, the offeror must be a Certified SBA 8(a) Program Participant at time of contract award.

RFP L.2.A.8 58

Can the 8a prime leverage a SB teammate’s Facility Clearance for purposes of the IDIQ MATOC?

No, the 8(a) prime must submit evidence of a Top Secret Facility Clearance

12 RFP L.1.2 56 How many awards does the government expect to make for this MATOC?

The Government does not have a predetermined number of expected awards. In accordance with L.1.2 The Government intends to award contracts to all “qualified offerors”.

RFP L.1.9 56 What is the government's email file size limitation? The Government's email file size limitation is 10MB.

59 Are PDF files allowed for submission?

The following instructions have been added to Paragraph L.2 Proposal Content "Documents including signatures may be submitted in PDF format.

All other documents shall be submitted in Word Document format."

RFP L.2.C 59

Please confirm are we only allowed to provide Past Performance for the Prime Offeror and not any of our teammates.

Yes, Past Performance shall only be provided for the Prime Offeror.

RFP clause 52.244‐6 40 Will vendors be permitted to add/change subcontractors post‐award?

Yes, awardees will be permitted to add/change subcontractors at the task order level.

RFP L.2.A.8 58

The RFP states: "Submit evidence of a valid Top‐Secret Facility Clearance as determined by the U.S. Government..." Does this mean that vendors have to possess a Top Secret Facility Clearance in place in order to bid (pre‐award)?

Or will vendors that currently possess a Secret Facility Clearance be allowed to bid with the condition that they obtain a Top Secret Facility clearance post‐award?

The 8(a) Prime must submit evidence in response to this RFP that it currently possesses a Top Secret Facility Clearance.

RFP L.2.A.8 58

The DD 441 does not state the type of clearance a contractor holds. Is the government looking for the FCL Designation letter?

The solicitation has been updated to reflect a DDS FL 381‐R, Letter of Notification of Facility Security Clearance, must be submitted by the Offeror.

RFP L.2.B.1.b 59

The RFP states: “Offerors shall use Times New Roman 12‐point font with normal spacing. Tables, graphics, and illustrations are not required and, if necessary, shall be kept to a minimum and may be prepared with Times New Roman 10‐point font and single spacing.” Please define the difference between “normal spacing” and “single spacing.”

The RFP has been revised to read "Offerors shall use Times New Roman 12‐ point font with single spacing."

RFP Section B.7 2 This section states, in part, "No indirect costs, fees or profit are allowed for Travel and or Materials." Will this statement preclude contractors from applying G&A to travel and or materials?

Correct, no G&A (indirect cost) will be allowed on Travel and/or Materials.

21 PWS 3.1.1 16

Will the Government please provide an estimate of the number of trips and locations for this effort?

See Attachment 6 ‐ Notional Travel that has been incorporated into the

RFP.

RFP L.2.5 57

Can the Government confirm that if the offeror relies upon completed Representations and Certifications in SAM, the Government will review SAM and that a separate FAR/DFAR report is not required to be supplied by the offeror?

Yes, the Government will review SAM if a separate FAR/DFARS report is not provided by the offeror.

RFP L.C.1 59

Will the Government allow up to two past performances from substantial (>25% of total effort) subcontractors to be included in the five total past performances submitted?

No, all past performance references shall be from the Prime.

RFP L.C.1 59

Will the Government provide a representative set of task orders expected to be released under this MATOC that would better enable the offeror to determine the scope, complexity, and magnitude of the effort?

Because offerors may propose to perform "the entire scope of one or more of the technical requirements in the PWS," the efforts they submit for past performance should‐‐in terms of scope, complexity and magnitude‐‐ encompass the same technical requirements for which they are proposing.

PWS; 1.3 2

Will the Government provide a list of hardware and software to be used in support of the MATOC solicitation’s requirements

For the purposes of proposing on the base RFP, the Government does not intend to provide a list of hardware and software to be used.

PWS; 3.1.5 8

The PWS states that “The Contractor shall utilize appropriate labor categories and labor hours to perform all the work or tasks identified in this contract or subsequent task orders.” Will the Government provide what they believe the appropriate labor categories are on this contract?

The Government's intent is not to dictate labor categories, but rather to allow the contractor the flexibility to propose their own labor categories in accordance with the requirements of the PWS at the task order level. PWS paragraph 3.1.5 has been revised to remove the cited language.

RFP File III C.1.a 59

Block 11 of the PP Worksheet states in‐part “Use a continuation sheet, if necessary.” Is the Government allowing two pages per past performance, which would include the Worksheet plus the one‐page extension sheet for the project description?

No, the past performance references are limited to one page (single sided) each. The intent of the continuation sheet is to provide an explanation of any performance problems or other conflicts with the customer and/or to describe any litigation pending, on‐going, or completed as stated in Box 11 of the Past Performance Worksheet .

RFP File III C.1.c 59 RFP requires Contractors to submit all CPARS. Please clarify if this is all CPARS the Contractor has received in the past 3 years or CPARS for just the five submitted Past Performance projects?

See the change in the pertinent language in Amendment 0002.

RFP L.2.C.1 59

Will the Government evaluate past performance where the prime has affiliation with a sister subsidiary under a common parent company, as‐long‐ as the sister subsidiary has committed resources, management, and experience to reduce risk for performance, and provided that the prime offeror describes the nature of the relationship as‐well‐as the planned relationship under the proposal for the subject solicitation? If so, will the Government provide the following instruction to offerors that, ‘for affiliate past performance, the offeror must clearly demonstrate the factual basis for how the affiliate will be involved in performance and how the affiliate will share resources with the offeror.’

No, the Government will not accept or evaluate past performance information for affiliates in addition to, or instead of, the past performance of the prime contractor.

RFP L‐2, A, 8 58

DoDM 5220.22 Volume 2, Section 6.2 Para C ‐ Pre‐Award Access to Classified Information defines the process for the Government Contracting Agency (GCA) and that all prospective contractors have an FCL and safeguarding level that is at least as high as the classification of the pre‐award information. Does the contractor require access to classified information during the pre‐award phase?

No, the contractor does not require access to classified information during the pre‐award phase.

RFP L‐2, A, 8 58

DoDM 5220.22 Volume 2, Section 6.2 Para C ‐ Pre‐Award Access to Classified Information defines the process for the Government Contracting Agency (GCA) and that all prospective contractors have an FCL and safeguarding level that is at least as high as the classification of the pre‐award information. Would the Government consider processing Pre‐Award Access to Classified Information to allow prospective contractors to access classified information in the pre‐award phase, and be prepared for task order execution if successfully awarded a MATOC?

No, the Government will not be processing Pre‐Award Access to Classified Information.

RFP L‐2, A, 8 58

DoDM 5220.22 Volume 2, Section 6.2 Para b (3) states, “The lack of an existing FCL is not sufficient justification to exclude a contractor from competing or being awarded a classified contract provided the contractor is willing and eligible to be processed for an FCL and take all required actions associated with such processing on a timely basis.” Would the Government consider amending accepting a DD441 for a SECRET Facility Security Clearance for initial award of the base MATOC contract, and subsequently sponsor the 8(a) firm for a Top Secret FCL post award?

The Government will not sponsor a contractor for a Top Secret FCL post award.

RFP clause 25.219‐7010 41 Section I references Clause 252.219‐7010, Notification of Competition Limited to Eligible 8(a). Can the Government please clarify if this procurement is limited to 8(a) qualified companies only?

Yes, this procurement is 100% set‐aside for 8(a) qualified companies.

RFP M.4.e 58

The draft documentation for this procurement did not make mention of the requirement of the bidder to possess a Top Secret Facility clearance.

Contractors spend months (or years) developing partnerships to pursue important procurements like this one. This last‐minute change in requirements and a one‐month proposal response requirement does not provide companies the time to establish new teaming arrangements to meet the June 15, 2020 submission date. Would the Government reconsider the requirement for the bidder to possess the Top Secret Facility clearance and downgrade it to Secret or extend the due date of the proposal by 45 to 60 days to allow time for the Government response to the questions and development of new teaming arrangements?

See response to Question #1. The Government has extended the proposal due date from 15 June 2020 to 22 June 2020.

RFP L.2.A.2.a. 58

Due to staffing issues at the Small Business Administration (SBA) District Offices, the process that the SBA uses for approving an 8(a) Joint Venture (JV) is that they will not process a JV Agreement for approval until the procuring office notifies the SBA District Office that an award is imminent and the agency is ready to award the contract. Thus, for newly formed 8(a) Joint Ventures that are bidding on this contract, when will the agency be reaching out to the SBA to confirm eligibility and approval of the JV Agreement?

Vendor status will be verified at receipt of proposal to include JV status and size status of any offeror.

RFP L.1.A 59

Ref “description of their company’s ability to meet the entire scope of one or more of the technical requirements in the PWS.” Are contractors required to write to each technical requirement or can we choose to only write to some requirements.

Contractors are not required to propose for every technical requirement listed in the PWS. Offerors may choose to address only one or more technical requirements in their technical approach. Contractors should clearly identify which PWS requirements they are proposing to perform, and should be thorough in addressing the entirety of each requirement for which they are proposing.

RFP L.1.A 59 If not required to write to each area, how will that affect the evaluation? It does not affect the evaluation as described in M.5(a).

RFP M.A.1 63‐64

If the contract technical approach is not acceptable in one are for example

1.3.1 Lab Management, will that result in a unacceptable rating for the entire technical approach?

Yes. The technical approach will be evaluated as a whole in accordance with RFP Section M.5(a).