Questions and Responses.pdf

CIVILIAN IN THE BATTLEFIELD TRAINING SERVICES

NAVY EXPEDITIONARY COMBAT COMMAND (NECC)

SOLICITATION NUMBER: N0018921R0038

AMENDMENT 0001

1. Question: Is this a BPA contract, and If so, how many awardees will there be?

Response: Please refer to the ADDENDUM TO FAR PROVISION 52.212-2 ENTITLED

“EVALUATION– COMMERCIAL ITEMS” in the solicitation, which states: “The Government intends to award multiple Firm Fixed Priced (FFP), Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) type contracts to the responsible offerors whose proposals represent the best value after evaluation in accordance with the factors and sub-factors in the solicitation……….Although the Government intends to award up to two (2) contracts, but not more than five (5) contracts, the Contracting Officer reserves the right to award to any number of contracts less than five (5), to include awarding only one (1) contract.

2. Question: Who is the incumbent and is it currently a sole source?

Response: The current requirement was procured as a multiple award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite

Quantity (IDIQ), 8(a) set-aside. Services are currently provided by the vendors listed below:

Tope Technology LLC – N00189-16-D-0050

Chi-Chack LLC - N00189-16-D-0051

3. Question: Can the past performance of our subs make up the majority of the past performance in this proposal?

Response: Please refer to the ADDENDUM TO FAR PROVISION 52.212-1 ENTITLED

“INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS”, paragraph titled “Volume II – Factor

II – Past Performance”. There are no percentages given for prime/contractor past performance submissions.

4. Question: Can you provide the pricing details or proposal from the previous contract?

Response: Pricing details and previous proposals are proprietary to the previous companies and cannot be provided.

5. Question: (Volume II – Factor II – Past Performance pg. 79) The instructions indicate that past performance should be 3 relevant contracts performed within 5 years of the solicitation date and must reflect one year of completed past performance by the closing date of the solicitation. One year of completed performance is defined as twelve (12) consecutive months of performance. The instructions further state that an IDIQ contract itself can’t be submitted, for example, but rather what should be submitted as an example of past performance is a Task Order (TO) issued under that IDIQ. The instructions further say those examples of performance (i.e., the TO) must have been performed within 5 years of the solicitation date issuance and demonstrate at least one year of completed performance.

Does this mean that a Task Order, if it were to be submitted as an example of Past Performance, would need to be 12 months in length? (If so, then past performance on this NECC contract may not qualify as individual task orders are not 12 months in length). Or does it merely mean that the performance of the

Task Order – regardless of length - would need to have been completed in the 12 months prior to the solicitation issuance date?

Response: Offerors may submit a combination of no more than three (3) delivery orders (DOs), task orders (TOs), technical direction letters (TDLs), and/or technical area tasks (TATs) placed under an

ID/IQ or BPA as one of the three examples of past performance. Such a combination must also meet the requirements stated above: each individual example in the combination must have been performed within five (5) years of the solicitation issuance date and demonstrate at least one (1) year of completed performance by the closing date of the solicitation.

6. Question: (8.1.3 The Contractor will be provided no less than 7 days written notice of the scheduling of a training event. In the event the government is unable to provide a 7 day written notification, the Contractor is not obligated to support the training event. Pg. 9)

The above paragraph indicates that the contract will be given 7 days written notice of scheduling. However, many other provisions require that certain actions take place 15 days prior to the event. For example, paragraph 9.3 Personnel List, requires the contractor to “provide to the COR a list of personnel who will require access to the installation for training events, NLT no later than (NLT) fifteen (15) days prior to the first training day.”

Additionally, other provisions indicate that information is to be provided within 7 days such as in paragraph

9.1.3 where “The TEP shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer Representative (COR) and Alternate

Contracting Officer Representative (ACOR), if applicable, no later than (NLT) seven (7) days prior to the first training day, or as required by the Task Order.”

If the contractor only receives 7 days notice of the event, it is not possible to meet notice requirements like these (i.e., a list of personnel can’t be provided 15 days prior if the notice of training is received 7 days prior to training; likewise, a TEP can’t be provided on the same day notice is received of the training).

Further, it is logistically challenging to complete contract required deliverables such as background and security checks within this timeframe.

We request that 7 days notice be changed to 20 to 30 days notice in order to appropriately respond to contract requirements and deliverables.

Response: Please refer to Amendment 0001, which changes PWS section 8.1.3 from 7 days written notice to 20 days written notice.

7. Question: Paragraph 2.6 references watercraft duties (“Operate a variety of watercraft duties while portraying Host Nation Security, Insurgent, OpFor Indigenous Role Player during military training missions. Riverine Operations SME (Technical Instructor: SWCC/Level II Coxswain Qualified”). These are highly specialized skills and we suggest they are at an SME II level. Would it be more appropriate to place these skills in Paragraph 2.7?

Response: Please refer to Amendment 0001, which revises sections 2.6 and 2.7 of PWS Attachment I.

8. Question: (Wage Determination No. 2015-5645 Revision No. 15 Dated 12/21/2020)

The wage determination listed above in the RFP is for Orange County, CA. Could the government clarify if the San Clemente place of performance is San Clemente Island and not the town of San Clemente? If the location is San Clemente Island, we request that the appropriate WD for LA County is incorporated.

Response: Please refer to Amendment 0001, which revises the Places of Performance under section 3.0 in the PWS.

9. Question: Would the government consider incorporating the WDs for Port Hueneme (Ventura County, CA) and adding as a place of performance?

Response: The Government will not be conducting exercises on Port Hueneme; therefore, we will not be adding it as a place of performance.

10. Question: Would the government consider adding Camp Pendleton, CA to its list of locations?

Revised Response: The Government will not be conducting exercises on Port Camp Pendleton, CA;

therefore, we will not be adding it as a place of performance.

11. Question: Does the government anticipate providing CUI as part of this contract? If so, is the government prepared to identify that CUI at the time of contract award as required per 5.1 (e) in the DOD instructions contained in 5200.48? Or does the government anticipate that the awardee will be creating CUI as part of the execution of the contract? And, if so, what CUI categories will that fall under? If not, would the government consider removing 252.204-7012, 252.204-7019, and 252.204-7020 as these clauses are directions to handle CUI?

Response: These are standard DFARS clauses and provisions required for all solicitations and contracts. These clauses are required on the solicitation and 252.204-7019 would not be included on the award. These clauses are inserted as added measures for protecting, safeguarding and controlling unclassified government information.

12. Question: In the past performance information form, it is requested that we provide a detailed description of the work performed, along with this statement: “If Helpdesk work was performed, indicate population of users supported, number of trouble tickets processed, and average turnaround time.” Would the government please eliminate this provision if it is not applicable or relevant to this solicitation?

Response: This is a standard template used for all solicitations. Disregard if it does not apply to your past performance submission.

13. Question: The RFP asks for pricing for each position per hour by “California Only” and “Locations Other than California.” However, the RFP includes work across sites covered by multiple different WDs in

California and multiple different WDs outside of California.

In order to ensure that offerors are competing on a common basis, and the government receives fair, reasonable and realistic pricing, and would the government either (1) break down the “California” and

“Outside California” pricing categories of the price form into worksite/wage determination specific categories, or (2) provide historical data or estimates of hours per position per worksite that offerors can use as the basis to propose hybrid rates in the “California” and “Outside California” pricing categories?

Response: Please propose rates based on the provided “Civilians in the Battlefield Contract Pricing” spreadsheet.

14. Question: The reference on Page 20 of the RFP — “The below Wage Determinations or its most recent versions are incorporated into this contract.” Is “most recent version” intended to mean a version of the

WD that exists as of the date the solicitation was issued or the date proposals are due or some other date?

If something else, please clarify?

Response: Please refer to Amendment 0001, which revises the verbiage in the “Wage Determinations” section.

15. Question: Will contract awardees be entitled to SCA price adjustments at the contract anniversary dates per FAR 52.222-43(d) to account for WD wage increases in the contract option periods? If not, offerors will need to include contingency in their option year pricing to cover predicted increases in wages and benefits required by WDs applicable in the option years.

Response: Wage Determination wage increases will be allowed to the extent of FAR 52.222-43(d)(1).

16. Question: Are the rates proposed in response to the RFP deemed to be the contractual maximum rates that a contractor can propose for any task order under the contract? Or, will adjustments be allowed to accommodate changes in Wage Determinations?

Response: Rates included in contract awards are deemed the contractual maximum rate a contractor can propose for any task order under that contract. Adjustments will be allowed to accommodate changes in Wage Determinations per FAR 52.222-43(d)(1).

17. Question: Will the government be providing a special WD or WD conformance to add a SCA wage for the Role-Player labor category, as it did on the prior contract?

Response: The Government has submitted a Standard Form 98 and will provide when received from the

Department of Labor.

18. Question: How does Government intend for the contractor to move weapons to California, particularly

AK 47s?

Revised Response: NECC has been executing Civilians on the Battlefield contracts for the past 10+ years and has had no issue with the movement of blank firing weapons into California.

19. Question: Due to ammo shortage nationwide, how does the government plan to use and consolidate ammo?

Response: The government does not provide ammunition to the vendor. The vendor is required to provide the amount of blank firing ammunition as requested in the task order. The vendor retains unused ammunition. There is no transfer of ammunition between the government and the vendor.

20. Question: Are there any clearances required for personnel? If so what level and will an amended DD254 be provided? We recommend government adds cleared personnel such as SIGINT/CI/HUMINT with a minimum of 5-10 years of SOCOM experience for more realistic scenarios at minimum Top-Secret level since SIGINT and comms equipment will be utilized.

Response: No. There is no classified data used in any of the task orders. We do not use SIGINT or comms equipment in the exercises.

21. Question: Will live animals such as Goats, chickens, and sheep be required for the contractor to furnish?

If so does the contractor need to have livestock licenses?

Revised Response: No, live animals are not included in the PWS.

22. Question: For vehicle maneuvers, is the government responsible for accidents and insurance coverage if contractor personnel get hurt, and is the contractor required to have a minimum insurance policy if a service member gets hurt in a vehicle accident?

Response: Vehicles are used for transport of role players to and from different areas of exercise. There are no combat maneuvers or dangerous driving in the task orders. The vendor’s personnel will need to have insurance coverage in the case that they injure military/government personnel. Vendor personnel will not be driving government vehicles.

23. Question: Does the government require village elders, tribal sheiks, etc. to speak Pashtu, Dari, French, Maay Maay, Tahitian, or Dari? We recommend making these languages a minimum requirement on personnel who are playing these roles for more realistic scenarios and training.

Response: Please refer to PWS section 2.2 for language requirements.

24. Question: Is sub past performance attributable to the requirements that the government stated?

Response: Yes, please refer to the ADDENDUM TO FAR PROVISION 52.212-1 ENTITLED

“INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS”, paragraph titled “Volume II – Factor

II – Past Performance”.

25. Question: Can the government provide clarification on EMT or ambulance service? Is ALS or BLS required? We recommend at least a minimum of two key personnel requirements of SOCOM EMTI P, 18W, or equivalent SEAL medic or SARC to treat victims and be on standby during exercise support.

Revised Response: Please refer to PWS section 2.3, which details the need for EMT as well as historical use of EMT.

26. Question: In Section 2.5. Technical Instructor (SME I) we ask the government to consider making this person be cleared up to TS level due to the possibility of handling classified information or comms equipment. Can the government confirm?

Revised Response: No, there is no classified data used in any of the task orders. We do not use SIGINT or comms equipment in the exercises.

27. Question: Will the government require the Technical SME II to have a TS SCI clearance? We recommend due to the CI/HUMINT requirements that they possess a minimum of a TS SCI clearance.

Revised Response: No. There is no classified data used in any of the task orders.

28. Question: Will the government please explain how the contractor is supposed to bring in UXO material into California due to the state’s strict laws and regulations?

Response: NECC has been conducting Civilians on the Battlefields with UXO in California for the past

10+ years with no issues with UXO. The vendor needs to provide specific examples of where UXO has been denied.

29. Question: Does the contractor have to provide ethnic ingredients for its indigenous role players and will role players cookout in the field during training for realistic simulations like in Afghanistan or Iraq?

Response: No.

30. Question: Does the government have a plan to mitigate costs for NVGs? At the listed volume (300) the costs will likely be in the tens of thousands of dollars.

Response: The volume per exercise is normally 10-12 or less. The volume listed is the total amount expected to be used over the life of the contract (for example 30 task orders with 10 NVGs/task order).

31. Question: Will the unit armory issue out 240Gs, BFAs, Mags, mortars, AKs, optics, etc, to the contractor or personnel? We recommend this approach to save costs.

Response: No, no USN equipment will be provided.

32. Question: Can the government provide historical data on where incumbents have rented watercraft and acquired right-handed Hilux trucks?

Response: Watercraft have only been used in San Diego harbor (one task order). There is not enough historical data to provide the information required. Right handed drive vehicles are not required. Most task orders only require vans to move vendor personnel to and from exercise areas.

33. Question: Can the USG provide the following historical data on the current/previous contract?

• Number of exercises/training events by location/training area.

• Number of hours for each labor category.

• Amount of ammunition ordered/used.

Response: Please utilize the quantity estimates in the “Civilian in the Battlefield Contract Pricing” spreadsheet based on each ordering year.

34. Question: Is there an incumbent for this Contract and is it possible to know the most recent contract amount?

Response: The current requirement was procured as a multiple award Indefinite Delivery Indefinite

Quantity (IDIQ), 8(a) set-aside. The vendors listed below currently provide services:

Tope Technology LLC – N00189-16-D-0050

Chi-Chack LLC - N00189-16-D-0051

35. Question: Can the final due date for submitting our proposal be extended past July 15? Will you permit us to submit our on July 23, 2021?

Response: Please refer to Amendment 0001, which revises solicitation closing date to Tuesday, 20 July

2021.

36. Question: PWS section 2.3 Emergency Medical Technician (EMT):

1. Is the Contractor required to provide an EMT for all support evolutions at all locations for up to 12 hours per day?

2. Would there be an occasion that would require the Contractor to provide more than one (1) EMT?

3. Will an EMT be called out on all Task Orders?

Response:

1. Yes, up to 12 hours per shift if we are doing 24-hour operations.

2. Historically, we have not needed more than one EMT

3. All task orders that include pyrotechnics or blank firing weapons will require an EMT. Task orders that are role players only with no weapons or pyrotechnics do not require EMTs.

37. Question: PWS section 2.5 Technical Instructor (SME I):

1. Is the SME I just a specialized/experienced role player?

2. Will the SME I be required to provide any Courses of Instruction or Periods of Instruction to

Government personnel?

1. A SME I should understand basic military operations and be able to act as Blue/allied military.

2. No.

38. Question: PWS section 2.7 Technical Instructor (SME II):

1. Is the SME II just a specialized/experienced role player?

2. Will the SME II be required to provide any Courses of Instruction or Periods of Instruction to

Government personnel?

1. The SME II personnel must have prior SPECOPs experience so they can act as a Special

Warfare Team able to conduct room/building clearance and small team tactics. The primary user of SME II’s is EOD who, when deployed, support Special Operations teams. The role players take the role of the Special Operations team that the EOD personnel are supporting.

2. No

39. Question: PWS section 2.9 UXO Tech I/Lane Controller:

1. Is the UXO Tech I required to have experience with live ordnance and military ranges – on land and at sea?

2. Will the UXO Tech I be required to provide any Courses of Instruction or Periods of Instruction to

Government personnel?

3. Will the UXO Tech I be required to direct Government personnel?

4. Is the UXO Tech I supposed to be a Special Effects Pyrotechnician delivering BFX - simulated IEDs, RPGs, VBIEDs, IDF, and SVests?

1. No, they must have the experiences indicated in PWS Attachment 1 section 2.9

2. No

3. No

4. Yes, although any role player can wear the fake vests.

40. Question: PWS section 2.10 UXO Tech III:

1. Is the UXO Tech III required to have experience with live ordnance and military ranges – on land and at sea?

2. Is the UXO Tech III supposed to be a Special Effects Pyrotechnician delivering BFX - simulated IEDs, RPGs, VBIEDs, IDF, and SVests?

1. No. The UXO III tech is supposed to be the lead for all pyrotechnic events.

2. Yes, although any role player can wear the fake vests.

41. Question: PWS section 4.9 Battlefield Effects Simulations (BFX): There is a requirement to provide BFX, but it is unclear what personnel the Contractor is to provide to deliver the BFX. Special Effects

Pyrotechnicians deliver BFX, but Special Effects Pyrotechnicians do not have experience with live ordnance – surface or air fired or chemical. Special Effects Pyrotechnicians do not have experience with firing systems – they are not UXO Techs. Special Effects Pyrotechnicians generally deal with Black

Powder products, electronic matches, and A & B Composition to create concussion/explosive effects. Said effects can all be delivered in close proximity and safely to the Training Audience. Should there be a

Personnel category for Special Effects Pyrotechnician?

Response: No, we have not had to use a different labor category over the past 10+ years of holding these exercises.