N00421-16-R-0088_Q&As_24_May_2017.pdf

N00421-16-R-0088 – SOLICITATION QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

The following Questions and Answers were posted to www.fbo.gov on 9 May 2017:

Question 1: The magnitude requirement for past performance is listed as $35M. Will past performance submissions with values less than $35M be considered not relevant, and not evaluated? If a robust competition is desired by the Government, a contract value of $20M for multiple contracts would still provide adequate confidence in a company’s ability to successfully execute this contract and would significantly increase the competitive field within the 541330 NAICS code.

Answer 1: Section M, Part A, Paragraph 2.0 Past Performance states “More relevant past performance will typically be a stronger predictor of future success and have more influence on the Performance

Confidence Assessment Rating than past performance of lesser relevance”. The Relevancy definition in

Section M, Part C, Paragraph 4.0 Other Definitions “is the measure of the extent of similarity between the service/support effort, complexity, dollar value, contract type, and subcontract/teaming or other comparable attributes of past performance examples and the source solicitation requirements; and a measure of the likelihood that the past performance is an indicator of future performance”. Magnitude is only one aspect of relevancy, and an overall relevancy rating will take into consideration all aspects as outlined in the definition.

Question 2: Do key personnel who are contingent employees require two separate letters – a contingent offer letter and a letter of intent?

Answer 2: In accordance with Section L, Part B, Paragraph 1.3.2.2 “If the “Key” employee is a contingent hire, the Offeror shall submit a corresponding letter of intent in Volume 4. The letter of intent is a separate written agreement signed by the potential employee(s) to work for the Offeror effective at task order award”.

Section L, Part B, Paragraph 3.3(c) inadvertently states “For contingent hires, the Offeror shall provide contingent offer letters outlining salary information for contingent hire employees”. In order to address this ambiguity, Paragraph 3.3(c) will be updated in a forthcoming amendment to read: “For contingent hires, the Offeror shall provide letters of intent outlining salary information for contingent hire employees.”

A letter of intent is required for all Key personnel who are contingent employees.

Question 3: Section M, Part B, is missing paragraph 4.0. The paragraphs jump from 3.0 to 5.0. Should

5.0 be renumbered as 4.0?

Answer 3: Paragraph 5.0 should be renumbered as 4.0 and will be updated in a forthcoming amendment.

The following Questions and Answers were posted to www.fbo.gov on 18 May 2017:

Question 4: Attachment P4 contains the verbiage “Role on this Solicitation.” Does that refer to the contract being written about in the past performance, or the company’s role in the current solicitation that the past performance is being used for?

http://www.fbo.gov/

Answer 4: “Role on this Solicitation” pertains to the current solicitation. Select the choice from the drop-down (Prime, Subcontractor, Team Member). The offeror should outline their role in reference to the past performance contract within the “Contract Effort Description” block of Attachment P4. Section

L, Part B, third paragraph under 2.1 will be revised in a forthcoming amendment to read: “The Offeror shall provide a narrative on each Past Performance Information form in the “Contract Effort Description” area that clearly describes how each contract reference (including Task Order, if applicable) has relevant work effort that matches the relevancy definitions specified in Section M of the solicitation. Additionally, the Offeror shall state whether the work under the Past Performance was provided as a Prime, Subcontractor, or Team Member.”

Question 5: Attachment P4 does not print more than 8 lines of text for the Contract Effort Description.

Please change the P4 to allow for additional space when printed.

Answer 5: Offerors shall use Attachment P4 in the format provided. The solicitation, Section L, Part A, paragraph 3.0 will be revised to include an Annex under Volume 2, Past Performance. Due to the form’s printing limitations, the offerors may utilize this Annex to include an exact copy of the full text from the

“Contract Effort Description” block of Attachment P4.

Question 6: Will the Government consider submission on a later date? This would allow our Veteran staff to properly observe Memorial Day. This would also allow vendors to adjust their approach if questions are only going to be addressed after the question submission deadline of May 15 th

Answer 6: The closing date of the RFP will be extended to 16 June 2017 at 10:00 am EST.

Question 7: Would the Government consider changing the Due Date from 5 June to at least 19 June

2017 to allow an adequate time for a response?

Answer 7: See Answer 6

Question 8: Due to the complexity and magnitude of the requirements listed in the subject solicitation, in addition to the time needed for proposal production, will the Government consider granting a two week extension to the current due date of 05 June 2017?

Answer 8: See Answer 6

Question 9: A ten page limit for Past Performance seems very restrictive given the Past Performance P4 layout, the Section L requirements and the need for a robust team in order to cover the whole SOW. Will the government consider a limit of 15 pages?

Answer 9: The page limitation of outlined in the table under Section L, Part A, paragraph 3.0 for Past

Performance remains unchanged. However, the page limit is not inclusive of Attachment P4 or

Attachment P5. The table under Section L, Part A, paragraph 3.0 for Past Performance will be revised to reflect this clarification in a forthcoming amendment.

Question 10: NAVAIR Clause 5252.215-9503 states that the anticipated award date for this requirement is 29 January 2018, and NAVAIR Clause 5252.211-9507 states that the period of performance is 01 May

2018 through 30 April 2023. Section L 1.1.5.1 states that the Government anticipates a sixty (60) day transition period. Please confirm the anticipated award date is sixty (60) days versus ninety (90) days.

Answer 10: The anticipated transition period in Section L, Part B, paragraph 1.1.4 will be revised in a forthcoming amendment to indicate an anticipated transition period of approximately 90 days. Offerors are reminded that the transition period is subject to change based on the actual award date.

Question 11: Are all named subcontractors/teammates required to submit proposal documentation, to include a Cost/Price proposal, or are only Principal Subcontractors, as defined in Section L, required to submit Volume 3 responses for Government evaluation?

Answer 11: All subcontractors and consultants are required to submit Volume 3 responses. In accordance with Section L, Part B, paragraph 3.0, “If subcontractors and/or consultants are proposed, they shall provide the same information required for the prime contractor, unless otherwise noted.”

OTHER INFORMATION OF SPECIAL NOTE:

With reference to workforce, offerors are reminded of requirement for compliance with the terms of

NAVAIR Clause 5252.237-9501 Addition or Substitution of Key Personnel.

The following Questions and Answers were posted to www.fbo.gov on 24 May 2017:

Question 12: Section L, Sample Tasks, 1.2.2.1.6: The requirement for “a breakdown of the time proposed to complete the tasking by labor category” makes little sense with respect to the requested responses in the sample tasks. For example, Sample Task 3 asks for the Offeror to “demonstrate your methodology and understanding of the work regarding the above functions.” This does lend itself to a

LOE estimate. Will the Government consider dropping the requirement 1.2.2.1.6?

Answer 12: Section L, Part B, paragraph 1.2.2.1.6 will be removed in a forthcoming amendment.

Question 13: The labor category description for the Key Position, Operations Research Analyst, Senior requires at least 10 years of recent, relevant experience in an engineering position. Request that be changed to include “10 years in an engineering or operations analysis position.”

Answer 13: Section C, paragraph 11.9 will be revised in a forthcoming amendment to read: “At least ten

(10) years of recent and relevant experience in an engineering or operations analysis position…”

Question 14: Please clarify the page limit for the Annex response for P4 “Contract Effort Description” block.

Answer 14: There is no specified page limit for the Annex. However, the Annex is added to include only duplicate information provided within the “Contract Effort Description” block of Attachment P4.

Question 15: When will the Government release an amended RFP that includes all of the changes that the

Government states are forth coming in the Q&A? And will adequate time be allowed after the amendment is released to develop a proposal based on an amended RFP?

Question 15: The Government anticipates release of the RFP amendment not later than 24 May 2017.

The RFP closing date has been extended to 16 June 2017 allowing adequate time to develop a proposal.

Question 16: To provide a streamlined past performance document for evaluators to review, is it acceptable to extract all fields from Attachment P4, Past Performance Information Form, and assimilate into one Microsoft Word document? It is understood that upon submittal, all documents will be in

Portable Document Format (.pdf) using Adobe Acrobat reader.

Answer 16: See Answer 5.

Question 17: Please clarify what is requested for the 10 pages of past performance? The Section L requirements only request P4 and P5.

Answer 17: Per Section L, Part B, paragraph 2.1, there is additional information required with reference to consent from principle subcontractors and JV team members. This information should be included within the past performance submittal.

OTHER INFORMATION OF SPECIAL NOTE:

Additional Security Information:

In accordance with Section C, paragraph 5.1, the contractor shall have the capability to perform up to a

Top Secret level. As such, the offeror must be able to obtain a Top Secret facility clearance during the transition period (prior to the performance start date of the contract). At this time, personnel under the effort are only required to have a Secret clearance to perform tasking. However, Section C, paragraph

11.0 states “During the performance of the contract, higher level security clearances (Top Secret) may be required and will be identified at the task order level.” In accordance with Section L, Part B, paragraph

1.1.5, the Transition Plan narrative should take into consideration the Security Requirements.