Attachment_(19)_Question_and_Answers_vr3.docx

PAST PERFORMANCE QUESTIONNAIRE

GLOBAL PEACEKEEPING OPERATION INITIATIVE (GPOI)

RFP N61340-13-R-0062

Attachment (19)

AMENDMENT - 0001 - 26 June 2013

Q1:

Regarding the past performance to be submitted in accordance with (IAW) Section L.2 (b)(1)(i), can offerors provide past performance where they performed as a subcontractor or is only performance as a prime contractor allowable?

A1:

Offerors may submit past performance questionnaires for efforts where they were the subcontractor. The Past Performance Questionnaire, Section J, Attachment (18) of the RFP, is structured to designate whether or not it is for “prime” contractor efforts.

Q2:

Will an offeror who has no past performance, IAW section L.2 (b)(1)(i) of the solicitation, receive an unacceptable past performance rating?

A2:

In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305(a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have an unknown past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, the “unknown” shall be considered “acceptable.”

AMENDMENT - 0002 - 10 July 2013

Q3:

Are the shipment addresses specific to each sample order known? And if so, can they be provided for pricing purposes.

A3:

Per Section D.1(b), the Marking information will be provided at the delivery order level. However, it is being provided below for pricing purposes.

Tunisia: U.S. Embassy Tunis Les Berges du Lac - 1053 TUNIS, Tunisia

Ukraine: Education and Research Center for International Peacekeeping, National Defense University of Ukraine 28 Povitroflotskyi Avenue Kyiv, Ukraine 03049

Djibouti: The delivery information has yet to be provided by the host country. However, it will be provided in a subsequent RFP amendment.

Nepal: Col Devendra Medhasi (Comandant) Maj Rohit Gurung birendrapeacekeeping@yahoo.com

TRIBHUVAN INT'L AIRPORT

PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS DIRECTORATE

ROYAL NEPALESE ARMY

TUNDIKHEL, KATHMANDU

249-535 (LOCAL)

Q4:

What are the required delivery dates from award of the individual delivery orders (DO)?

A4:

Section L.1.2 of the RFP has been revised to read as follows; Offerors are to submit proposals that satisfy a delivery date of 90 days from DO award.

Q5:

Is there a preferred method of shipping the required items?

A5:

It is the offeror's responsibility to choose a delivery method that satisfies the required delivery dates per Section L1.2 of the RFP and Answer #4 listed above.

Q6:

Is there an estimate of the duration associated with the Nepal travel requirement?

A6:

Per the Nepal SOW (120021) paragraph 3.1.1 – Travel, the contractor shall make one (1) roundtrip to Nepal for “equipment installation, configuration, testing, and training on the use of installed equipment.” Also per paragraph 3.2.3.6 (Equipment Installation) of the same SOW, the Instructor/Operator and Maintenance training course “shall not exceed two days for a maximum of 5 students.”

It is therefore the offeror's responsibility to estimate the duration associated with the Nepal travel requirement, taking into consideration the not-to-exceed duration of the training course.

Q7:

Is the contractor required to install all of the items procured to meet the Nepal travel requirement?

A7:

To clarify the Nepal installation requirement, paragraph 3.2.3.6 (Equipment Installation) of the Nepal SOW will be revised in a subsequent RFP amendment to state that “the contractor shall install and configure the driver simulator trainer listed in Appendix A, at the final destination.”

Offerors are advised of the upcoming change to the Nepal SOW and should plan to reflect such change in their proposals accordingly.

Q8:

What is considered a “Lot” in Section B of the solicitation? For example, in CLIN 1000, would the Tunisia requirement be considered 1 Lot of the Max Quantity 10?

A8:

The unit of measure “Lot” used in the subject solicitation is used to indicate that the items in subsequent orders will be inspected and accepted as a group or “lot.”

Also, per Section B Notes, The “MAX QUANTITY” referenced within each CLIN are estimates only, and are not intended to represent the maximum quantity of unit to be issued under the respective CLIN. The individual quantity of units for each CLIN will depend on materialized requirements during the life of the contract.

Q9:

Please confirm that section B does not need to be completed and submitted.

A9:

Per Section L.2(c)(ii), the offeror shall complete and include in its price volume Attachment 17 of this solicitation with the offeror’s proposed fixed prices inserted in the appropriate blank spaces.

To clarify, Section B does not need to be completed. Section B, in a basic IDIQ, establishes a structure for the line items of the subsequent delivery orders to tie back to.

Q10:

Will progress or milestone payments be established at contract award?

A10:

No financing will be offered under the resultant contract.

Q11:

Does NAWCTSD currently have funding in-house for these efforts?

A11:

Yes.

Q12:

What are the destination addresses for each sample order?

A12:

The addresses for the sample orders, which are to result in the first four delivery orders upon award, were provided as the answer to Q3 above.

Q13:

Please confirm whether Section L.2(b) requires 3 past performance questionnaires for each contractor or 3 questionnaires for the offeror’s team in total?

A13:

Three (3) questionnaires for the offeror’s team in total.

Q14:

Where in attachment 17 do we price program management?

A14:

The offeror should include all of its cost associated with meeting the Government’s requirement in the proposed firm fixed prices for the items listed in each of the tabs of attachment 17. It is up to the offeror to spread all overhead costs among each item as it deems appropriate. There is no separate line for pricing program management.

Q15:

Clause 52.219-6 was included in Section I by reference. Attachment 17 clearly calls for items manufactured by large businesses. Was this clause included by mistake, or will the Government be issuing a waiver?

A15:

The Government is amending the RFP to include Alternate I of clause 52.219-6. Alternate I of said clause is used when the Government is procuring products “in a class for which the Small Business Administration has determined that there are no small business manufacturers or processors in the Federal market in accordance with 19.502-2(c).”

The Government is exempting offerors from the nonmanufacture rule based on Note 18 “Information Technology Value Added Resellers” of NAICS code 541519, and on this procurement’s PSC code being included in the SBA Class Waiver to the nonmanufacture rule, dated 24 August 2012.

Q16:

Is there a deadline by which offerors must submit their questions in order to be ensured that they will be answered prior to the closing date of the solicitation?

A16:

Language that addresses the submission of questions has been added the subject solicitation as part of Amendment 0002 under Section L.1.3. It is being provided below for your convenience.

Questions regarding this solicitation shall be submitted via email to alberto.amparo@navy.mil. The Government may answer questions prior to the deadline for proposal submission provided that those questions are received no later than 7 days from the RFP due date. Answers to questions will be posted via formal RFP amendments.

The Government reserves the right not to respond to any questions concerning this solicitation received after the time frame specified above. Accordingly, offerors are encouraged to carefully review all solicitation requirements and submit questions to the Government early in the proposal preparation cycle.

Q17:

Where do we submit our completed proposal?

A17:

Language that addresses proposal submission has been added to the subject solicitation as part of Amendment 0002 under Section L.1.4. It is being provided below for your convenience.

Clearly mark all packages with the solicitation number. The submission date for the entire proposal, to include all Volumes, shall be no later than the date and time specified in Block 8 of Standard Form 1449 of the RFP.

Offeror shall submit proposals via United States Postal Service or through a commercial carrier using the address provided below. Offeror shall NOT submit proposals by facsimile or electronically via email.

Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division Code: AIR-2.5.3.6.1 (Alberto Amparo) 12350 Research Parkway Orlando, FL 32826 Solicitation Number: N61340-13-R-0062

Hand carried proposals may be delivered to the address above, attention (PCO) and/or (Specialist).

If a proposal or amendment is hand carried, the Offeror must complete a visit request no later than twenty-four (24) hours prior to delivery of the proposal to the Contract Specialist. Without the visit request, the Offeror may not get beyond the security gate to deliver its proposal. A visit request may be obtained by contacting Mr. Alberto Amparo, Contract Specialist, at (407) 380-8028, alberto.amparo@navy.mil. Upon arrival to NAWCTSD, please contact Mr. Amparo. In the event that Mr. Amparo is not available, please contact the alternate POC, Mr. Robert Orozco, (407) 380-4173. Do not use the wooden mailbox located on the counter to deposit hand carried proposals. Security guards are not authorized to accept proposals.

Q18:

Section L.1.1 states that proposals must be double spaced. Does the double space requirement only apply to the Technical Volume or does it apply to all volumes? Further, does the double space requirement apply to tables as well?

A18:

Section L.1.1 has been revised to include the following language; The double space requirement applies to all volumes, not to include information provided within a table.

Q19:

Section L.1.1 states that each proposal volume shall have a table of contents and cross reference matrix. Does this cross reference requirement apply to Volume I only, or does it apply to all volumes?

A19:

Per Section L.1.1, each volume shall adhere to the table of contents and cross reference matrix. Therefore, the requirement applies to all volumes.

Q20:

Is there a font size requirement or limit for the proposal volumes?

A20:

Section L.1.1 has been revised to include the following language; Proposals must be legible, double spaced, use size 12 font, and printed on one side only.

Q21:

Can an offeror submit references from their proposed subcontractor for this FMS contract as part of their response to the past performance requirements in the RFP?

A21:

To reference answer 13 above, three (3) past performance questionnaires shall be submitted for the offeror’s team in total, which may include a proposed subcontractor.

Q22:

Referencing Section L.2, Proposal Content (Pg. 34 of N61340-13-R-0062.pdf), Volume I, Sections 1 through 4 Bullet (iv) states the following: “Describe Offeror’s understanding of the customs clearances and provide evidence of custom declarations and invoices of previous shipments to international recipients.”

All four (4) sections contain this verbiage and refer to the SOW for each country (Tunisia, Ukraine, Djibouti, and Nepal). An offeror may not be able to provide “evidence of custom declarations and invoices of previous shipments” to these exact countries. Such requirements will put us and many other companies at a disadvantage to compete, despite the fact that a company employs staff that have direct, proven working experience and knowledge of the GPOI program. Can we provide a technically acceptable proposal without having to provide “invoices and custom declarations?”

A22:

An offeror does not have to provide evidence of customs and invoices of previous shipments to the exact countries identified (e.g. Tunisia, Ukraine, Djibouti, and Nepal). The RFP requests substantiating documentation to “international recipients” to demonstrate an offeror’s understanding and appreciation for issues that arise from shipping items overseas and customs. This substantiating documentation can be in support of any international recipient, whether or not related to the GPOI/EIPC program.

Further, the language in question has been augmented to read as follows: “Describe Offeror’s understanding of the customs clearances. Also, provide evidence of custom declarations and invoices of previous shipments to international recipients, or describe the experience of the offeror's employee(s) in shipping products to multiple (3 or more) countries over the past 3 years."

Q23:

Section L.2, Proposal Content (Pg. 35 of N61340-13-R-0062.pdf), Volume II, Sections 1 states the following: “(i) A list of three (3) of the offeror’s previous or on-going federal, state, or local Government contracts and private/commercial contracts performed by it during the past three (3) years which are similar in nature and relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Specifically, identify efforts where interactions with foreign in-country customs which shipping items overseas was necessary.”

We feel this requirement extremely limits the number of companies that can compete and provide such documentation. We feel that there will be little to zero companies who will have past performances within the last 3 years dealing with foreign in-country customs.

A23:

The Government disagrees with the potential offeror’s assertion that: (1) the Past Performance language limits the number of companies that can compete and provide such documentation; and (2) there will be little to zero companies who will have past performances within the last 3 years dealing with foreign in-country customs. The Past Performance information requested, as stated in the RFP, indicates it can be provided from “federal, state, or local Government contracts and private/commercial contracts.” This is a very widely cast net from which to obtain past performance information. Furthermore, the RFP has been amended to clarify that offeror’s with no past performance information submitted will receive a “neutral or unknown” past performance rating, which in the context of acceptability/unacceptability, shall be considered “acceptable.”

Q24:

Referencing Section L.2, Proposal Content (Pg. 34 of N61340-13-R-0062.pdf), Volume I, Sections 1 through 4 Bullet (iv) states the following: “Describe Offeror’s understanding of the customs clearances and provide evidence of custom declarations and invoices of previous shipments to international recipients.” If an Offeror is unable to provide “evidence of custom declarations and invoices of previous shipments,” will its proposal be automatically determined unacceptable and its proposal ineligible for award?

A24:

The RFP has been revised to allow for employee experience to also be considered in lieu of custom declarations and invoices, as referenced in answer A22 listed above.

Q25:

Does an offeror need to provide a facility in Nepal for receiving and training purposes or will this be provided by the Government?

A25:

The offeror does not need to provide a facility in Nepal. Per section 3.2.3.4 of the Nepal SOW, “the contractor shall be responsible for shipment of the equipment to the destination country and shall ensure that the equipment arrives at the final destination.” Offerors are to treat the delivery address provided in Question #3 above as the final destination for the Nepal requirement.

Q26:

Past Performance questionnaires are provided but no due date is required. Shall the offeror assume that questionnaires must be received by the RFP due date?

A26:

Per section L.2 (b)(1)(ii) of the RFP, “Offerors shall advise the reporting organizations that: (b) the completed questionnaire shall be returned by standard mail, or email to the Contract Specialist no later than the date set for receipt of proposals.”

Q27:

Will the Government provide the commercial freight shipments to OCONUS locations or is the offeror expected to include these costs into their price?

A27:

Per section 3.2.3.3 in the four (4) SOWs that were provided as sample orders (e.g. Tunisia, Djibouti, Nepal, and Ukraine), “the contractor shall be responsible for shipment of the equipment to the destination country and shall ensure that the equipment arrives at the final destination.” “However, the Government reserves the right to supplement some or all of the freight related requirements as an option.

Q28:

Can the Government provide NSN’s or OEM serial numbers within the price list?

A28:

The Government will not be providing this information.

Q29:

Does the Government have a location preference for the offerors CONUS facility to be located for inventory review purposes?

A29:

No.

Per section 3.2.3.3 in the four (4) SOWs that were provided as sample orders (e.g. Tunisia, Djibouti, Nepal, and Ukraine), “Prior to packing and shipment, the Government will perform an inventory review at the contractor’s facility.”

AMENDMENT - 0003 - 16 July 2013

Q30:

On the government provided cost spreadsheet, there is no line item for warehousing. Where would the government like the offeror to break that cost out? Or, can the government re-issue a spreadsheet with warehousing as a line item?

A30:

Similarly to the answer provided to question Q14 above, the offeror should include all of its cost associated with meeting the Government’s requirement in the proposed firm fixed prices for the items listed in each of the tabs of attachment 17. It is up to the offeror to spread all warehousing costs among each item as it deems appropriate. There is no separate line for pricing warehousing.

Q31:

What is the period of performance for this IDIQ? One year total or a Base period with Option periods? If there are Option periods, how many options are there?

A31:

The resultant IDIQ will have an ordering period of 60 months, and no option periods. Per Section I, DFARS clause 252.216-7006(a), “Any supplies and services to be furnished under this contract shall be ordered by issuance of delivery orders or task orders by the individuals or activities designated in the contract schedule. Such orders may be issued from contract award through 60 months after contract award.”

Q32:

Will the final inspection and inventory in the destination country be done by US Government representative or by Foreign Government representatives?

A32:

Per Section E.1(b) of the RFP, “Final inspection and acceptance shall be made by a Government representative within eight working days of the contractor confirming on-site delivery.”

Q33:

RFP Section L.2 Proposal Content, paragraph (a)(4)(viii) states “Provide a proposed Training Plan for operator and maintenance training of the Driving Simulator in accordance with the SOW.

Is this a training outline or agenda of topics, or does it require the full text content of the training plan? If the full text content is required, will it need to be approved after award since would exceed the 50 page limit or will the government extend the page count to accommodate?

A33:

Offerors are to provide a training outline or agenda of topics.

Q34:

What are the exact payment terms for this contract?

A34:

Offerors are advised to review the following clauses in regards to the payment terms of the resultant contract:

FAR 52.212-4 Contract Terms and Conditions – Commercial Items FAR 52.232-33 Payment by Electronic Funds Transfer – Central Contractor Registration DFARS 252.232-7006 Wide Area Work Flow Payment Instructions DFARS 252.232-7003 Electronic Submission of Payment Requests and Receiving Reports

In addition, and as stated in answer A10 above, “No financing will be offered under the resultant contract.”

Q35:

Can you please describe the specific sample requirements for each location? Do we need to provide samples of all items for all locations as part of the proposal submission?

A35:

Specific sample requirements are described in attachments 3 thru 16 (SOWs and CDRLs). Offerors are to provide a proposal in accordance with Section L of the subject RFP.

Q36:

The Buy American Act is incorporated in this solicitation. Given that many of the items listed in the SOW are brand name from the UK or elsewhere, there is a contradiction. Please advise on the issue.

A36:

The RFP was amended to remove clause FAR 52.225-1 Buy American Act Supplies, which per FAR 25.1101(a)(1)(iii), the Act does not apply to acquisitions for “supplies for use outside the United States.”

Q37:

In order to allow enough time for answering the below questions and to get the best possible pricing, will the government extend the proposal due date by two weeks?

A37:

The subject RFP closing date has been extended by 14 calendar days (7 August 2013).

Q38:

Are Nepal, Ukraine, Djibouti, and Tunisia the only OCONUS locations that this equipment will be sent to or are they just examples of some countries in Africa, Europe, Asia, South America, and Pacific?

A38:

The resultant IDIQ is being established to provide a framework to fulfill the requirements of GPOI/EIPC partner countries located in all of the areas of the world covered by the CLINs listed in Section B of the solicitation. Accordingly, future orders may require delivery to many different countries with different customs requirements.

In addition, paragraph 1 (Scope) of the basic SOW (attachment 1 of the RFP) states that the resultant IDIQ contract will provide the support needed to fulfill peace keeping operations and training in numerous EIPC and GPOI countries. Also, paragraph 1.1 of the basic SOW goes on to say that there will be an emphasis in supporting located in CENTCOM, PACOM, and AFRICOM areas.

As stated in Section L.1.2 of the RFP the sample orders were provided in order for offerors to have a requirement on which to base their proposed price. Also per that Section of the RFP, the sample orders will result in the first four awarded delivery orders under the IDIQ contract.

Q39:

Can you please confirm that this is a brand name or equivalent procurement opportunity?

A39:

All of the items listed in Appendix A of the four (4) SOWs that were provided as sample orders (e.g. Tunisia, Djibouti, Nepal, and Ukraine) contain the phrase “or equivalent” following the description of the required item. If an Offeror decides to propose an equivalent item to one listed in Appendix A, be advised that the instructions provided within provision 52.211-6 (Brand Name or Equal) must be followed. The RFP was amended to add provision FAR 52.211-6 to Section L.

Q40:

Is this contract going to be awarded to only one vendor, or can multiple vendors be awarded based on the different locations?

A40:

Section L.1.2 of the RFP states, “The Government intends to award a single award Indefinitely Delivery Indefinitely Quantity (IDIQ) contract as a result of this solicitation.

Q41:

Why are there 6 CLINs in Section B, but there are only 4 sample locations?

A41:

As stated in answer A9 above, “Section B, in a basic IDIQ, establishes a structure for the line items of the subsequent delivery orders to tie back to.”

Q42:

We would like to request that the verbiage to allow Offerors to describe their employee(s) past experience in shipping products to multiple (3 or more) countries be increased from “over the past 3 years” to “over the past 5 years.” We are making this request due to the unique past performance relevancy requirement (in this case dealing with foreign countries and customs).

A42:

The Government will not be revising the aforementioned verbiage regarding employees past experience from 3 years to 5 years.

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION – SEE FAR PART 2.101 and 3.104