Amendment 3_Sec J Att 27_NCTAMS RFP_Site Visit QA_09June2023_No.2.xlsx

RFP & Post-Site Visit Questions N0060423R0002 - NCTAMS PAC Communications Systems O&M Questions & Answers RFP issued: 09Jun2023 & Site Visit 27-28 June 2023

DD Form 254 section 13.6 states "All access to classified information will be in Government operated facilities."

Would the Government please clarify if only major subcontractors are required to submit pricing data, or if all subcontractors are to provide complete pricing data?

NOTE: The statement "Offerors and their subcontractors that fail to follow the above instructions and/or provide all of the required submissions may not be considered for award." is not included in section Section L.1.B.2.m.3.d.

ANSWER: The statement is found in L.1.A.3.d Under section titled "IMPORTANT NOTES" and it is in reference to all the instructions contained within Section L.1. Offerors (Prime and any Subcontractors) shall submit prices for all CLINs and for all performance periods. Subcontractors need not separately submit cost or pricing data that is reflected in the Prime’s prices.

5 Section L.1.B.2.m.(i)(1) on page 138 Section L.1.B.2.m.(i)(1) on page 138 requests offerors to provide "(1) Complete and Sign Offer Standard Form (SF) 33."

Would the Government please clarify if offerors are to provide only the signed SF33 and Section B? Or does the Government request the offeror provide additional solicitation sections? NOTE: RFP Section L.1.B.2.m.(i)(3) revised to remove " and accompanying attachments in Section J" as there are no Section J attachments applicable to Volume II - Price Proposal.

ANSWER: Government confirms offerors are to provide only the signed SF33 and completed Section B and no other Section J solicitation sections as it applies to RFP Section L.1.B.2.m.(i)(1).

6 Section L.1.A.2.i on page 126 Section L.1.A.2.i on page 126 states "Only spreadsheet pages may be formatted to be printed on ledger paper size (11 x 17) in lieu of the standard page size (8.5 x 11)."

Page 137 States: "Offeror and any subcontractor(s) shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with the Collective Bargaining Agreement and/or Service Contract Act (SCA) for all applicable labor categories." Question: The current CBA expires 3/31/2025. The period of performance for the new contract would extend well into 2028. Question: Understanding that a new CBA will be re-noegotiated and ratified during the execution of this contract, how should biddrs apply labor rates that extend beyond the expiration of the current CBA? Provide clear guidance so bidders utilize the same approach in bidding for the years beyond the current CBA. Typically, in this situation, bid rates are held constant through the bid period, and an equitable adjustment is made at the time a new CBA is negotiated and ratified. Interested parties shall submit a price proposal in accordance with the offeror's accounting practices.

When the CBA based Wage Determination changes via contract modification following the renegotiation or ratification of a CBA, the contractor will be able submit a request for wage adjustment effective as of the beginningof the next option period in accordance with FAR 52.222-43 Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Labor Standards-Price Adjustment (Multiple Year and Option Contracts).

8 Section J, Att 11, PACRIM PWS Draft Page 66, Para 3.2.4 Para 3.2.4 states "The VLF watch shall monitor the activities at Building 1 (HFGCS Transmitter site) and respond to any alarm situations". Does remote alarm monitoring capability exist to monitor the HFGCS Alarms in Building 1 from the Building where the VLF withstander is located? Adjust RFP/PWS to include details on how the alarms are monitored and if not done remotely, provide the required periodicity for the monitoring (e.g how often the VLF watch travels to Building 1) The VLF watchstander shall have capabilities to receive remote notifications for security and facility systems. Periodic inspections of the interior and exterior of the HFGCS Transmitter building (BLDG 1) and its systems are required, at a minimum of every 8 hours no matter the status of the remote monitoring capabilities. Please refer to revised PWS section 3.2.4.8.

PWS Section 3.2.4.8 revised to state, “The Contractor shall monitor all controlled and restricted areas via remote monitoring tools (where applicable) and perform periodic security and safety inspections of all areas, at a minimum of every 8 hours. These inspections shall be logged in the Master Station Log.

9 Volume I: Factor 4, Subfactor 1 page 148 States: "The small business concerns (SBC) as defined in FAR Part 19 that are to be used in your proposed approach to satisfying the requirements of this solicitation for the entire performance period, including company name, business category(ies), description of products or services and NAICS code to be provided by each SBC and the nature of the commitment with the SBC (e.g., letter of commitment, joint ventures, mentor protégé agreements, others). Binding commitments shall become enforceable, contractual requirements".

QUESTION: Would the USG please confirm that fully executed Teaming Agreements with SBCs are acceptable documentation to satisfy that requirement?

QUESTION: Can the Government provide a sample of an acceptable “letter of commitment”? Question answered on Draft RFP responses released on 6/30/23.

Answer 1: Yes, fully executed Teaming Agreements with SBCs are acceptable documentation.

Answer 2: Yes, see RFP Section J, Attachment 23 for Sample Letter of Commitment template.

10 PWS 2.4.2.1 page 24 This paragraph states: "All GFP is to be provided in an 'as is' condition per FAR 52.245-1(d)(2)(iii). The Contractor will be given the opportunity to inspect such property prior to the property being provided. The Government makes no warranty with respect to the serviceability and/or suitability of the property for contract performance. Any repairs, replacement, and /or refurbishment shall be at the Contractor’ expense."

We understand the critical importance of an organization demonstrating its experience in successfully conducting effective and efficient technical business operations in host/foreign nations to eliminate risk in the successful staffing and execution of the requirements at Detachment Kojarena, Australia; however, limiting international business operations experience to those conducted solely in Australia presents a barrier to competition, particularly in regard to this solicitation’s type of work.

Many companies, such as ours, possess extensive overseas business operations experience, which demonstrates a proven ability to successfully operate within, and adhere to, country- specific requirements (i.e., taxes, business licensing, visas, etc.). However, given there are not currently many US DOD contracting opportunities in Australia, it is highly likely that only the incumbent Prime and subcontractors will be able to satisfy the USG's requirement as currently written, particularly for projects similar in scope to the NCTAMS PAC requirements at Det Kojarena. This may create an unfair advantage that prohibits companies other than the incumbents from being awarded a contract, which could result in the appearance that only the incumbents need to submit a proposal. This could have the adverse effect of severely limiting competitive choices that could produce great value for the USG.

Recommendation: Remove the Australia-specific language from the Past Performance requirement or, alternatively, consider modifying the current wording to expand the requirement to include Internaltional Business Experience in any non-US nation. Example: “The contractor/subcontractor’s experience in successfully recruiting qualified staff and conducting business operations in Australia or similar foreign countries, while adhering to host nation requirements such as labor laws, corporate tax regulations, visa requirements, etc. Include type of work, scope, and duration."

Rationale: Doing business overseas comes with a unique set of requirements regardless of the country in which business is being conducted. As such, industry must be flexible and experienced in their corporate operations and adapt to each country’s specific laws and regulations. Any bidder that can demonstrate, through Corporate Experience and Past Performance, a successful track record of conducting business/corporate operations in similar regions and foreign countries would logically be able to identify and adapt to satisfy all requirements to successfully do business in Australia, and satisfy the overall Det Kojarena scope of work.

If the Government chooses not to remove the Australia specificity in the Past Peformance requirement, recommend the Government revise the evaluation criteria for this requirement and allow any Past Peformance citation that demonstrates International Busness Experience in Australia, while not necessarily having the same technical scope, to achieve a rating higher than Not Relevant as having the International Business Experience in Australia is one of two evaluation criteria described in Section M. Revised RFP Section M as follows: "For purposes of assessing capability, the Government will consider all international business experience to be potentially relevant and may rate business experience in Australia more favorably."

12 Section M, 3. Factor 3 – Past Performance, d, ii, 2 on page 145 Will the Government allow bidders to submit Past Performance Citations and Past Performance Questionnaires via JWICS? Or, alternatively, offer a method for providing relevant, Australia-specific past performance that is on a classified contract? This section states: "2. International Business Experience – The contractor/sub-contractor must demonstrate capability in successfully conducting business operations in Australia, include type of work, scope, and duration. " There are an extremely limited number of US Government contracts whose place of perfomance is Australia and and also have a scope that is technically relelvant to the NCTAMS PACRIM PWS requirements. A good portion, if not most/all, of those efforts are on contracts that are considered classified in nature and prevent industry from using them as Past Performance to be submitted through unclassified channels. By allowing bidders to submit Past Peformance Citations and Past Performance Questionnaires via JWICS the Government would enhance competition by increasing the pool of qualified potential bidders. Not allowing the submission of Past Performance information via classified channels decreased the likelihood of adequate competition. Allow bidders to submit Past Performance Citations and Past Performance Questionnaires via JWICS. Or, alternatively, offer a method for providing relevant, Australia-specific past performance that is on a classified contract. Government will not allow bidders to submit Past Performance Citations and Past Performance Questionnaires via JWICS.

Please provide only unclassified information (including, if available, a client point of contact who can respond to an unclassified Past Performance Questionnaire) as it relates to past performance information for contracts considered to be relevant.

13 Section L.1.A.2.i on page 126 The RFP states, "Only spreadsheet pages may be formatted to be printed on ledger paper size (11 x 17) in lieu of the standard page size (8.5 x 11)."

L.1.A.1.v Pages 130 & 131 Will the Government provide clear direction on these two items from the RFP that appear to be in conflict with one another?

1) The RFP States: "If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and Point of Contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, e-mail address, and telephone and fax numbers."

2) The RFP also states: "(v) Submissions. Offerors are discouraged from providing points of contact with another contractors’ facility, i.e., in case an offeror (or one of his/her team members) is in a subcontract with another contractor who has submitted a proposal on the same requirement. Offerors shall provide and submit the prime contract number and all Governmental agency POCs in lieu of subcontract numbers or prime contract POCs in situations as described above."

De-conflict these two requirements so that industry has clear direction. RFP Section L.1.A.1.i (1) revised to remove "If the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and Point of Contact (POC) within the prime contractor organization (name, and current address, e-mail address, and telephone and fax numbers)."

15 Factor 3 (vi) & Factor 4, Subfactor 1, (3) Pages 132 & 133 Request the Government provide clarification on the referenced requirements, where it is stated that bidders are to provide notice on whether or not there has been any negative information regarding Small Business utilization reported in the past six years but then requests the same informtion for the past five years.

(vi) Small Business Participation Past Performance. All Offerors shall submit information substantiating the Offerors’ past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns, maximizing opportunities for U.S. small business subcontractors. Offerors shall also provide a statement indicating whether any negative information has been reported in the past six years concerning the Offerors’ past compliance with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business Concerns. If any such negative information has been reported, the Offeror may submit explanations or comments responding to such negative information. Offerors with no prior contracts containing FAR 52.219-8 shall certify the same.

"Page count is excluded from Volume I and shall be limited to only the pages provided via SAM.gov FAR & DFARS Report or Representations and Certifications found within SF 33."

The contractor may be responsible for the removal of general waste and disposition of government property generated by outside organizations as stated in PWS section 2.2.2.2, but the outside organization will be responsible for the removal of all of their hazardous waste (not the contractor).

Sentence added to PWS section 2.2.2.2 to state "The contractor will not be responsible for the disposal of hazardous waste generated by other organizations on site."

20 Security Escorts_Attachment 11 PACRIM PWS; 3.0 Deliverables Matrix; 3.1.27.3 Physical Security The PWS states that "The contractor shall provide escorts for uncleared personnel". This direction conflicts with the NCTAMS PAC Command Security Instruction 5510. Request Government clarification. Question answered on Draft RFP responses released on 6/30/23.

Perform as specified in the PWS. Command instruction under revision.

No. The Government does not intend to add the requirement for Key Personnel resumes at this time.

24 Staffing Plan_Sub-factor 2 - Management Plan With the omission of Key Personnel resume requirements, the Government has no method of assessing the risk of unspecificed personnel planned for critical contract positions. Recommend adding the requirement to include personnel names, clearance level, CSWF certification, and employment status (i.e. current employee, LOI signed, TBD) in the staffing chart currently required in Sub-Factor 2. Personally Identfiable Information (PII) can be protected through appropriate measures (i.e. encryption, password protection, etc.) Question answered on Draft RFP responses released on 6/30/23.

No. The Government does not intend to add the requirement to include personnel names, clearance level, CSWF certification, and employment status at this time.

25 Technical Capability_Factor 2 - Technical Approach The current Factor 2 requirement is constituted of Transition, Management, and QASP sub-factors. These factors don't allow the Government to evaluate offerors' technical capability necessary to perform the maintenance tasks required in the PWS. Recommend adding a Section L requirement for offerors to demonstrate they have the technical understanding, capability, and certifications to successfully perform NCTAMS maintenance tasks. Question answered on Draft RFP responses released on 6/30/23.

No. The Government does not intend to revise Factor 2 - Technical Approach evaluation criteria at this time.

26 LOI_Sub-factor 2 - Management Plan To ensure offerors proposed key personnel represent a realistic solution for project execution, recommend the Government require signed Letters of Intent (LOIs) for all Key Personnel that demonstrate employees will be 100% dedicated to the NCTAMS PAC contract for a minimum of 1 year of program execution. These LOI's should be included as an attachment to the Technical Volume and not count against page limitations. Question answered on Draft RFP responses released on 6/30/23.

No. The Government does not intend to add the requirement for Letters of Intent (LOI) at this time.

27 Past Performance Inconsistency_Factor 3 - Past Performance Section L and M requirements for recency and relevancy criteria for Factor 3 are inconsistent. Please clarify. Question answered on Draft RFP responses released on 6/30/23.

Request vendor provide more information (e.g. provide RFP pages where inconsistencies were found) to provide adequate answer to question or correction to RFP.

Factor 4 - Small Business Participation Plan and Utilization Page 132:

a. The minimum Quantitative Requirements (MQR) Targets are as follows: SB 13.5%, SDB 5%, WOSB 5%, HUBZone 1%, VOSB 3%, and SDVOSB 3%.

Page 133:

(2) The SBCs (prime offerors and small business subcontractors) proposed quantitative participation in terms of the value of the total contract value.”

The RFP states that the goals should be in terms of Total Contract Value. Since the DoD Statutory HUBZone goal of 3%, based on Total Subcontract Value, continues to presents challenges for government and industry, is a 1% goal based on Total Contract Value an error? Please clarify if the socioeconomic goals should be in terms of Total Subcontract Value in accordance with the DoD Statutory goals (SDB 5%, WOSB 5%, HUBZone 3%, and SDVOSB 3%). The minimum Quantitative Requirements (MQR) Targets are as follows, based upon Total Contract Value: SB 13.5%, SDB 5%, WOSB 5%, HUBZone 1%, VOSB 3%, and SDVOSB 3%.

Example: Total Contract Value (TCV), $1,000,000; HUBZone 1% MQR equals $10,000. MQRs are based upon Total Contract Value; the statutory goals are based upon Total Subcontract Value.

Example:

Total Contract Value: $1,000,000 Total SubK Value: $270,000 SB MQR, 13.5%: $135,000 SB SubKtr Goal, 23%: $135,000 (50%) SDB MQR, 5%: $50,000 SDB SubKtr Goal, 5%: $50,000 (18.5%) WOSB MQR, 5%: $50,000 WOSB SubKtr Goal, 5%: $50,000 (18.5%) HUBZone MQR, 1%: $10,000 HUBZone SubKtr Goal, 3%: $10,000 (3.7%) VOSB MRQ, 3%: $30,000 VOSB SubKtr Goal, N/A: $30,000 (11.1%) SDVOSB MQR, 3%: $30,000 SDVOSB SubKtr Goal, 3%: $30,000 (11.1%) Other Than Small: $135,000 (50%)

Section B Cost Reimbursement CLINs X023 MUOS Australia, X026 C2G2 Teleport Australia and X028 C2G2 Teleport GYC (AUS Terminal) note that the Governments estimated plug amounts as defined in Section L Volume II – Price Proposal para. (v), are for Repair Parts and Travel Cost.

Please confirm that travel reimbursable costs for AU assigned positions, including instances such as travel for potential replacement staff that could occur during the five year life of the contract and any travel associated with periodic visits to an employees’ home country, are not included in CLINs X023 and X026. Therefore such potential contractor incurred costs that an offeror deems necessary and recoverable would need to be included within the associated FFP CLIN prices.

The contractor shall be allowed to utilize CLINs X023 and X026 for travel costs incurred by required by Government action (i.e. CAC re-issuance, mandatory training). Vendors should factor travel costs incurred for Non-Government action into their FFP CLIN cost submissions.

*NOTE - The Government will NOT authorize the utilization of CLINs X023 and X026 for initial staffing if the vendor chooses to not utilize staff currently residing in Australia.

35 Plug Numbers_Volume II Price Proposal Reference Section L m. Volume II – Price Proposal paragraph (v) states: FOR COST REIMBURSEMENT CLINs IDENTIFIED IN THE TABLE ABOVE ONLY and in support of the proposed Indirect Expense Rates, Offeror and its subcontractor(s) shall provide documentation of the most recent Indirect Expense Rates, If the Prime proposes all of the Governments plug numbers provided in the table estimates, as Subcontractors are not expected to incur such expenses, is documentation of the most recent Indirect Expense Rates only required of the Prime and not its Subcontractors?

Information on Indirect Expense Rates is only required by parties (Prime or SubK) submitting price proposals associated with Cost Reimbursable CLINS.

If the Subcontractor is not expected to incur such expenses and will not submit a proposal associated with any of the cost-reimbursable CLINS then they do not have to submit Indirect Expense Rates information to the Government.

Major Facilities Maintenance and Repair (PWS 2.5.3.3) - Historically, the annual cost for materials has been approximately $9200.00 with 30 associated man hours per year.

a. The cover page should indicate the following:

Title of the proposal Volume Number (I or II) Proposal Category (Factor/Sub-factor) Request for Proposal Number Name and Address of Offeror, CAGE Code, SAM Unique Entity ID, and applicable Tax I.D. Number (TIN) Point of Contact name, telephone number, and email address

The CLIN will remain as a NTE, in the event an offeror proposes G&A and/or OH, the CLIN plug-in values will be revised prior to award to account for the winning offeror's proposed Indirect Expense Rates if applicable.

Exhibit in Section J).

Question: Would the government clarify the requirements (Size, Shape, Number) for Contractor provided vehicles and groundskeeping equipment required at NCTAMS PAC, and if required, under which CLIN/ODC to price it under?

Government has provided all requirements and the full GFE list with the RFP release on 6/9/23. It is at the vendor's discretion to determine what Contractor Property, in addition to the GFE that will be provided, is necessary to complete the provided requirements. Government does not intend to disclose any details on Contractor provided property.

*NOTE - The Government does not have restrictions on Size, Shape, Number of contractor provided vehicles located at Government locations identified in the scope of the contract, as long as they do not interfere with operations or access/parking for government or contractor essential personnel.

47 Section L.1.A.2.k on page 126 The Price Proposal row in the Section L.1.A.2.k table states "Proposals submitted which do not adhere to the format or cell requirements may not be further considered for award."

Would the Government please confirm that the format or cell requirements the Government is referring to are those stated in Section L Volume II – Price Proposal paragraph (i)(4): "The proper format consists

Services Plan per the requirements of CDRL AC04." to "75 page limit, excluding Mission-Essential Contractor Services Plan per the requirements of CDRL AC04."

50 PWS paragraph 3.3.2.1 As stated in PWS paragraph 3.3.2.1, the contractor is responsible to provide System Admin support to Harold E Holt (HEH) every 60 days or as required more frequently. Based on our travel team's research, there are no direct flights from Geraldton to HEH and because of limited flights hotel stays will be required in Perth (both ways) and Exmouth where each trips cost could exceed $10,000 and take approximately 5 days.

Getting personnel from Geraldton to an alternate site (via Perth) are limited due to flight schedules and costs can exceed $12,000 per event and take 3-4 days to resolve due to logistics or travel as well as availability for walk-in service for resets.

materials (slides, instructional docs, personnel records, etc.) be provided to the winning contractor during the transition phase? All official system training/reference material, provided by the associated program office, will be provided during the transition period. As stated in PWS section 2.6.9, "the Contractor shall develop and implement a training plan and training for all sites systems" based on the training/reference material to ensure there is no loss in knowledge to properly meet all PWS requirements.

The NCTAMS PAC command training plan is renewed annually. The NCTAMS PAC FY23 command training plan and associated training material shall be provided during the transition period.

*NOTE - Historically the NCTAMS PAC command training plan does require approximately 4 stand down trainings (approximately 1-2 hours) with 3 available sessions during standard business hours over the course of the week for all on-island contractors. Vendors should evaluate for costs associated to requiring contractors to attend off-hour training during the weeks associated to the stand down training.

The command 2023 CSWF annual 20 hour CEU training records and available online course list shall be provided during the transition period.

56 L.1.A.2(i)(6) Page 129 Section L: Transition Plan Section (6) staffing requirement bullets state “.. days after date of award.” Please clarify this should be “days after transition (CLIN 001) start”. Change "after date of award" to "after transition (CLIN001) start" as follows:

25% fully staffed at seven (7) days after transition (CLIN 001) start.

50% fully staffed at fourteen (14) days after transition (CLIN 001) start.

75% fully staffed at twenty-one (21) days after transition (CLIN 001) start.

100% fully staffed at thirty (30) days after transition (CLIN 001) start. RFP L.1.A.2(i)(6) revised as recommended.