Government Responses to NTIP DRAFT RFP N00030-20-R-0015 dtd 12 Mar 2020.pdf

GOVERNMENT RESPONSES TO INDUSTRY QUESTIONS/CLARIFICATIONS FOR DRAFT NTIP

SOLICITATION N00030-20-R-0015

1. Reference: Draft PWS 3.1 Personnel; CLIN 0001 – 8.1.

Noting that the LOE has increased since the previous RFP, what is the rationale behind the increase in personnel, and what areas of the PWS or elements of the NTIP organization may be expanding?

Answer: The PWS content and estimated level of effort represents the Government’s FY21-25 NTIP support requirements.

2. Reference: Draft Section L-4, Mandatory Requirement 1(b) (6) and (7)

Please clarify how years and months of experience will be measured: Will years of experience be inclusive of the interim between proposal submission and contract award or experience up to the time of proposal response submission only?

Answer: There was an inadvertent discrepancy between the cutoff date for experience between the DRAFT PWS and DRAFT Section L. Section L will be updated to reflect experience obtained by the solicitation “closing date.”

3. Reference: Draft PWS 3.1.2 Personnel Requirements and Position Descriptions; Draft Section L-3, Volume I – Subjective Tradeoff Factors, Factor B: Staffing Plan

Factor B – Staffing Plan calls for “recruiting personnel with the requisite niche experience and qualifications for the NTIP personnel identified in PWS paragraph 3.1.2 Personnel Requirements and Position Descriptions.” Other than educational degree and years of experience, how will the Government evaluate the qualifications of proposed candidates for the three (3) Key CWC Subject Matter Experts required?

Response: Offeror’s proposed Key Personnel shall be evaluated based on the mandatory educational and experience requirements identified in the solicitation. Offeror’s proposed Factor B – Staffing Plan shall be evaluated based on the Factor B – Staffing Plan requirements identified in the solicitation.

4. Reference: Draft PWS 3.1.2 Personnel Requirements and Position Descriptions, Key Personnel, 6.

Is participation in DON-specific CWC exercises a requirement for CWC SMEs? Is participation in CWC exercises for other branches of the military, e.g., Army, Air Force, acceptable to qualify CWC SMEs?

Response: DON-specific CWC exercise experience is not a requirement. Experience with the CWC is the requirement and is not based upon which military branch was supported while obtaining the requisite CWC experience.

5. Reference: Draft PWS 4.4 Treaty on Open Skies Support

Will the scope of requirements of this RFP change if there is an executive decision of the United States to no longer participate in the Open Skies Treaty? If so, what changes in scope may be anticipated?

Response: The scope of the PWS is current and accurate as written.

6. Reference: Draft Section M-4.3.3.3 Past Performance – Quality

The Quality measure for evaluation of Past Performance “will consider the offeror’s historical compliance with the requirements of FAR 52-219-8 and FAR 52-219-9.” These regulations address Utilization of Small Business Concerns and Small Business Subcontracting Plans, respectively. Please explain the rationale for the use of these regulations as evaluative measures of quality of past performance and how these regulations will be applied in the evaluation process.

Response: In accordance with DFARS 215.305(a)(2), the evaluation will consider the offeror’s historical compliance with the requirements of FAR 52.219-8 and FAR 52.219-9 .

7. Reference: Draft Section M-4.3.4 Mandatory Requirement 3 – Small Business Participation

If the Prime Contractor is a Small Business, does the Prime Contractor automatically meet the Small Business requirement?

Response: As detailed in Section L -4, MANDATORY REQUIREMENT 2: SMALL BUSINESS* PARTICIPATION, Small business primes are to include their own planned effort in the Attachment 2 response. NOTE: There is no “automatic” compliance with any proposal content or submission requirements. Offerors will be evaluated based on the content of their proposal submission and their compliance with the proposal content requirements as identified in the solicitation.

8. Reference: Draft Section M-4.3.3.2 Past Performance – Relevancy

“The relevancy evaluation will consider the similarity of the scope of work required under the proposed effort to the scope of work required under this RFP.” Will the Government expand on the definition and evaluative parameters of “relevancy” as pertains to past performance?

Is specific arms control support experience required or would similar activity such as weapons of mass destruction policy be accepted?

Response: The relevancy evaluation will consider the similarity of the scope of the work required under the proposed effort to the scope of work required under this RFP.

9. Reference: N/A, General Question

The NAICS Code 541990 with a size standard of $16.5M appears to have been assigned to this effort in beta.SAM but is not confirmed by inclusion in the draft documentation. As there are multiple Small Businesses that are capable of doing this work, will the $16.5M Small Business size standard remain in the final solicitation? Please confirm the NAICS Code and Size Standard that will be assigned to this effort in the final RFP release.

Response: The NAICS code for this requirement is 541990 as identified in the Classification section of the beta.Sam.Gov posting of the DRAFT RFP docs on 19 Feb 2020.

10. Reference: Section L-9 Estimated Labor Hours; Draft Attachment 1, Pricing Model, All CLINS Tab and CLINS 0001, 1001, 2001 3001, and 4001 Tabs, Lines 11, 12, 15, and 16 Section L-9 states that labor hours for key and non-key personnel are shown in Attachment 1 (Pricing Model). Would the Government consider providing the missing labor hours so that industry can begin developing Staffing Plans prior to the release of the final RFP?

Response: Tab 1 of the Draft Attachment 1 Pricing Model identifies the total labor hours by labor category, by CLIN (17,580), and in total for all CLINS (87,900). The Pricing Model Instructions of the Draft Attachment 1 Pricing Model stated as follows: “The Pricing Model Direct and Subcontractor labor dispersion of hours is an EXAMPLE structure for illustration purposes. Offerors shall modify the pricing model accordingly for inclusion or exclusion of subcontractors.” There were no missing labor hours in the Attachment 1 Pricing Model. The empty cells/hours under for 4 of the labor categories listed in the Prime section of the Pricing Model were for illustrative purposes to identify how offerors would account for hours proposed between the Prime and the fictional subcontractors ABC and XYZ. In the example, 14,680 hours were proposed by the Prime and 2,900 hours by the aggregate subs, totaling 17,580 and including all Tab 1 labor hours/categories.

To avoid confusion, the final RFP Attachment 1 Pricing Model will not include any example distribution of labor hours.

11. Reference: Draft PWS, 3. Technical Requirements; 4. Performance Work Statement Does the Government wish for industry to address its ability – or the ability of proposed personnel – to accomplish the tasks described in the Draft Performance Work Statement?

Response: Offerors are to solely respond to the content requirements of the identified evaluation criteria and within the specified page limitations.

12. Reference: Section L-3 Volume I – Subjective Tradeoff Factors, Factor B: Staffing Plan The Staffing Plan calls for a demonstration of proposed personnel’s ability to maintain the core competencies to execute the NTIP mission requirements, but NTIP mission requirements are not defined. Does the Government intend to define NTIP’s mission requirements in the final solicitation?

Response: The PWS in it is entirety represents the NTIP Mission requirements. The final solicitation will update the Factor B verbiage to include the word “mission” (e.g. NTIP Mission Support requirements” to remove any ambiguity.

13. Draft PWS, page 1, 3.1 Personnel states, “All personnel must have an appropriate security clearance as stated on the DD Form 254, Section J, Attachment 1 at the time of contract award.” For planning purposes, would the Government please confirm that any personnel requiring a clearance will need to be cleared at the Secret level?

Response: The security clearance level for all personnel is SECRET. The DD254 will be included in the final RFP.

14. Draft PWS, pages 1-2, Personnel Requirements and Position Descriptions. Would the Government consider allowing advanced degrees to offset years of experience for positions requiring a minimum of a Bachelor’s Degree (e.g., a Bachelor’s and 10 years or a Masters and 8 years)?

Response: No. The requirements are accurate as written.

15. Draft PWS, page 2, Key Personnel. 4. Open Skies Lead. Both criterion (a) and (b) identify different years of required arms control experience. Would the Government please clarify the total years of experience in arms control within 10 years of the solicitation closing date required for this position?

Response: Key Personnel 4 Open Skies Lead will be updated in the final solicitation as follows:

(b) 3 total years of experience with the Treaty on Open Skies within 10 years of the solicitation closing date.

16. Draft PWS, pages 2-3, Non-Key Personnel. The Mid-Level Analyst requires “8 total years of experience in arms control, international relations, or national security within 8 years of the solicitation closing date.” This severely limits the pool of candidates from which offerors can select to meet the solicitation requirements. Given that the solicitation only requires 3-5 years of focused experience within the last 10 years for the Key Personnel, who are designated as leads and/or experts, we respectfully request that the Government revise the Mid-Level Analyst experience requirement to either 3 or 5 years within the last 10 years.

Response: The Non-Key Personnel, Mid-Level Analyst experience requirement will be updated in the final solicitation as follows:

(a) 5 total years of experience in arms control, international relations, or national security within 10 years of the solicitation closing date.

17. Draft Section L, page 11, L-5 Factor C: Cost/Price. The solicitation states that the offeror’s cost/price proposal should include “Team Summary Chart (Proposed Team Members (i.e.

subcontractors), Business Size, General Description of Planned Tasking) including a discussion of the roles and responsibilities of the offeror and its proposed team members.” This information is more appropriate for a staffing section, and we respectfully request that this requirement be moved to Volume I.

Response: Offerors are free to choose the content to include or exclude in their Factor B Staffing Plan. The Factor C: Cost/Price content requirements will not be revised.

18. Draft Section L-5, page 11, Factor C: Cost/Price, (3) states the following should be included in the Cost/Price Proposal: “Proposed fixed fee rate (including application base) and profit rate required in Section B.” Would the Government please provide an explanation of the difference between the fixed fee rate and the profit rate that will be required in Section B?

Response: This was a typo. Section L-5 will be updated in the final solicitation to remove the term “profit.”

19. Draft Section L-6 (d), page 12, Professional Employee Compensation Plan. The section requires offerors to complete the Benefits Summary and Salary charts in the Pricing Model.

These two charts were not found in the submitted pricing model. Would the Government please provide the template for the Benefits Summary and Salary Charts?

Response: This was an error. The paragraph after L-6(d) regarding the pricing model will be deleted in the final solicitation.

20. Draft Section L-8, page 13, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Would the Government please provide the Attachment 6 Subcontracting Plan Matrix with the final solicitation?

Response: The Attachment 6 Subcontracting Plan Matrix will be included in the final solicitation.

21. Would the Government please provide a draft DD254 with the final solicitation?

Response: The DD254 will be included in the final solicitation.

22. Would the Government please provide requirements and instructions for subcontractor sealed packages in the final solicitation?

Response: The final solicitation will include instructions for subcontractors submittal of documentation directly to the Government.