Questions_and_Answers-032817.docx

Questions and Answers

RFP: N00421-16-R-0021

Question 1.

IAW with the Government’s response to Question #21 posted in FBO on 16 March 2017, the NAVAIR tripwire amount will be $300,000.00 for each individual proposed. The instructions for Attachment P2, Column D require offerors to incorporate information for Functional Area Labor Rate Category yet no Functional Area Labor Categories were specified in the solicitation. Column D on the actual spreadsheet require offerors to provide the Proposed Fully Burdened Rates for Year 1. Please clarify.

Answer:

Attachment P2 and its instructions were updated as part of Amendment 2 of the RFP.

Question 2.

Will the Government disclose the IAT Level I, II, and III requirements by labor category?

Answer:

No. Offerors should propose a labor mix, to include IAT Level I, II, and III by labor category as required in Section C paragraph 4.4 of the RFP, based on its approach to the tasking. This flexibility will allow offerors to identify the number of people, with specific IT System position sensitivity level, needed to fill a variety of labor categories based on the tasking.

Question 3.

Page 41, 7.5.8a require offerors to submit a proposed Software Development Plan (SDP) with their proposals, and, during contract performance, deliver a completed SDP (based on the proposed SDP) as a CDRL deliverable, subject to the Government review and approval. On page 53 the SDP is listed as CDRL A041, a deliverable for the contract. Section L, 3.0 Proposal Content and Volume, page 102, does not list or limit the page count of the DRAFT or proposed SDP required on Page 41, 7.5.8a. Is there a page limit for the DRAFT or proposed SDP that must be submitted with the proposal or will the SDP not be evaluated as part of the award process?

Answer:

Please see forthcoming Amendment 3 of the RFP.

Question 4.

The Instructions for Attachment P1 Cost Summary Worksheet state that subcontractors should delete rows 22-48. This would delete the rows for Indirect Costs. Are the subcontractors supposed to submit their package without showing indirect rate/cost detail – or did the government mean for subcontractors to delete rows 43 -54 (Subcontractor Labor Costs – assuming team member who is already a subcontractor will not have any subs beneath them)?

Answer:

Please see the updated Attachment P1 and its instructions included as an attachment to Amendment 2 of the RFP.

Question 5.

Several industry questions were not included in yesterday’s FBO posting nor were there mention of an upcoming FBO posting or the issuance of an amendment to address industry remaining questions.

Does the Government intend to address the remaining industry questions?

Answer:

Yes, please see the most recent updates to the Questions and Answers and Amendment 2 of the RFP.

Question 6.

Page 107 – Volume 2 – Past Performance – Please confirm what form or is it contractor format acceptable for the narratives for the Past Performance Information provided when a current CPAR exists. Or are we to use the Attachment P3, Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire forms for all the Past Performance narratives?

Answer:

Please see Amendment 2 of the RFP.

Question 7 Please confirm that Attachment P3 – Contractor Performance Assessment Questionnaire, is the form that the contractor needs to submit ALL past performance narratives on? Because this form does not contain the same contract information as required in the Past Performance Information form that was an attachment in the original solicitation release. Also, the Attachment P3 requires assessing official input since it is a questionnaire and some of the past performance submitted may have a recent CPAR, so would a questionnaire still be required? If the Government wants offerors to use the Past Performance Information form provided in the original solicitation, can the contractor modify the form fields to allow for printing in the hard copy submittal?

Answer:

Please see the answer to Question 6.

Question 8.

Section L, paragraph 2.0 Volume 2: Past Performance states the offeror “shall” complete a CPAQ. However, in another sentence in this paragraph it states an offeror is only required to submit a CPAQ if the offeror does not have a CPAR past performance reference. Recommend the Government clarify its desire for completed CPAQ, by requiring such a completed form only when the offeror’s contract being cited has no CPAR.

Answer:

Please see the answer to Question 6.

Question 9.

Section L, paragraph 2.0 Volume: Past Performance states offerors shall provide a narrative using the Past Performance Information Form for each contract referenced; however, no form was attached to the solicitation. Recommend the Government provide the Past Performance Information Form or provide offerors instructions as to what information is to be provided for each contract referenced as past performance.

Answer:

Please see the answer to Question 6.

Question 10.

IAW Section M, page 119, NAVAIR’s established annual tripwire is $300,000 for each labor category. When proposing a labor mix/labor hours which best meets the offeror’s approach to performing the contract requirements, the personnel proposed by the offeror may increase for certain labor categories which may result in the total salaries for the labor category exceeding NAVAIR’ tripwire annual amount of $300,000. Will the Government consider citing an annual tripwire dollar amount for each proposed individual versus an annual tripwire dollar amount of $300,000 for each labor category?

Answer:

Please see Amendment 2 of the RFP.

Question 11:

Section C, paragraph 8.1 state some non-key labor categories do not require a security clearance; however, the specific labor categories were not identified. Please identify the specific labor categories that do not require a secret clearance.

Answer:

There are no restrictions on the labor categories that can be proposed for the tasking. The proposed labor categories should be filled by persons that meet the minimum qualifications as directed in the RFP and meet the clearance, certifications, and training requirements as directed by all applicable references, policies, and instructions. The qualifications of the persons filling the labor categories should be such that the offeror can successfully meet the terms of the QASP.

Question 12.

Please clarify Page 42 which states Engineering Scientist Senior (Key) 2 yet on page 112 it implies there are Engineer Scientist Senior (Key) 4 {8000 hours}. Is it estimated to be 2 or 4 keys.

Answer:

Please see the forthcoming Amendment 3 of the RFP.

Question 13.

Section M, Part B Section 2.0 Past Performance on page 117 specifies that the magnitude of all past performance references is for “Contract total value of $25M -$50M, annual contract value of $5-$10, contract term of 60 Months.” We believe this requirement is too narrow for the Government’s purposes and unrealistic for small business to have. We believe that relevant technical competence can be demonstrated on contracts of different magnitude. Recommend amend this requirement to read “The prime contractor must provide at least one past performance instance where the contract total is $25 - $50M, annual contract value of $5-$10 contract term of 60 months.”

Answer:

Please see the forthcoming Amendment 3 of the RFP.

Question 14.

Please clarify that for the Engineer/Scientist, Senior (Key), we are to provide two key resumes as specified in Section 8.2 Key Labor Categories (page 42) and that we are to propose 8,000 hours per year (40,000 total) as specified in Section 3.8.2 Labor Hours (page 112)?

Answer:

Please see the forthcoming Amendment 3 of the RFP.

Question 15.

Per section A, Page 2 of 121, this is not a SCA contract so the Non-Displacement of Qualified Workers Under Service Contracts clause does not apply. However, offerors must adhere to SCA minimum wage rates for those categories which qualify. Will the Government provide the categories in the solicitation that qualify for the minimum SCA wage rate, and provide the relevant Wage Determination for purposes of responding to this Solicitation?

Answer:

Please see the forthcoming Amendment 3 of the RFP.