Solicitation Questions and Answers Amendment 01.pdf

N6134020R0011, Courseware IDIQ Solicitation Question and Answer Form

Question

Number

Subject (title) Question Question Reference (SOW, L&M, Page #s, etc)

Answers

1 Past Performance We understand a “Performance Confidence Assessment Rating (PCAR) reflects the Government’s confidence in a company’s ability to performed based all contracts cited in the Past Performance

Volume. We also understand that contracts performed for the Navy will be more highly rated than those performed for Other Agencies. Our express concern is the consequent devaluing of extremely relevant ITL and IMI experience merely on the basis of the who the customer is, and thus negatively impacts a company's overall "Performance Confidence Assessment Rating (PCAR)". For example: It is our interpretation that Company ABC submitting three (3) Navy contracts could receive a higher overall PCAR than Company XYZ submitting three (3) Navy and two (2) Other Agency contracts as we assume the non-Navy contract ratings would negatively impact the overall PCAR for Company XYZ.

The rationale being that all three (3) of Company ABC’s Navy contracts have the potential of receiving a Relevant rating whereas Company XZY’s two Non-Navy contracts will receive no higher than

Somewhat Relevant regardless of how closely aligned the task requirements are this Navy contract.

Question: Is it therefore better for Company XYZ to NOT submit their two other agency citations?" If so, would the government please, reconsider this approach and be more specific in how PCAR is determined/scored? It is our contention in this example that Company XYZ's PP is potentially as strong and relevant as Company ABC's yet would be scored lower as we understand the current description in Section M.

M-1 Section 2.0., Pg. 106, Part B

Section 2.0, Pg. 109, Section 4.0 Pg.

The past performance confidence assessment ratining is complex in nature and is not merely determined on the basis of who the customer is. As is detailed in section

M, there are three aspects of the past performance evaluation: recency, relevancy, and demonstrated past performance. All three play a part in determining the confidence assessment rating. In determining the relevancy of a past performance reference, the customer is not the only factor. There are several factors that are encompassed in the scope, magnitude, and complexity as stated in the past performance relevancy rating's definition, and all are evaluated. The scenario in the question fails to consider the other scope, magnitude, and complexity factors; does not account for demonstrated past performance; recency; or any of the items in section M identified as items of consideration in assigning a performance confidence assessment rating or in the source selection tradeoff decision. All of these items considered, an offeror would not be "dinged" for submitting non-navy work in the manner the question speculates The Government cannot influence what contracts a potential offeror submits as part of its proposal. The assumption that company XYZ would be "scored" lower is not accurate on the face value of the question. However, as stated above the customer alone does not determine the relevancy of a past performance submission, or the determination of a confidence assessment rating.

2 Past Performance We request that the government extend the past performance period to include contract/task orders performed within five years of the solicitation release date. Extending the past performance period to five years offers the government a true picture of the offerors overall performance and allows offerors to demonstrate their capabilities in the performance areas required by NAWCTSD.

RFP pg 103 The Government is confident that three years of past performance will provide an adequate analysis of an offerors past performance.

3 CPAQ Submission Date If submitting a CPAQ for a past performance citation, please clarify whether the CPAQ is due to Mr.

Mark Johnson by the Past Performance Due date (December 17, 2019) or by the Proposal Submission

Due date (January 8, 2020)?

L, Pg. 103, 2.0 Volume 2: Past

Performance

Full proposals are due on the proposal due date stated in block 9 of the SF33. It is requested that past performance information be submitted on 17 December, however it is not required and any offeror who submits a timely proposal in accordance with block 9 of the SF33 will have their proposal fairly considered.

4 Past Performance Evaluation

Criteria

Section M, Part-B, 2.0 Past Performance, para. 2, last sentence: The government will only consider past performance by entities with the same CAGE Code and DUNS as the Prime Contractor and principal subcontractor(s) or JV team members.

It is our understanding that DUNS and CAGE codes are specific identifiation codes for a given entity thus no two or more entities will have identical DUNS and CAGE codes. Please clarify the above italized requirement. Is the Government asking that PPIFs submitted by a given team member--beit the prime, principal subcontracot, or JV team member--be awarded under the same DUNS and CAGE code?

Section M, Part-B, 2.0 Past

Performance, para. 2, Pg. 108

The Government will only evaluate past performance references that were performed under the prime offeror or principal subcontractor's same CAGE Code and DUNS number. A company can possess several CAGE codes for different divisions of the company, the italicized statement is clarifying that only the CAGE

Code and DUNS number of the proposing entity will be considered. All PPIFs submitted do not need to be the same CAGE Code and DUNS number, as the prime offeror or a principal sub-contractor would have different CAGE Codes or DUNS numbers, and in accordance with Section L an offeror can provide references from both.

5 Past Performance CPAR In the event a CPAR exists, please confirm the Government will obtain the CPAR and that industry is not required to submit a copy with our proposal.

Pg. 104, Section 2.0 Past

Performance, para. 3; Pg. 109, Section 2.0 Past Performance, para. 4

The Government will obtain the CPARS record if a CPARS record exists.

6 Past Performance Forms Pleas confirm the maximum number of Past PerformanceInformation Forms (PPIF) is as follows:

Prime offeror may submit no more than three (3) PPIFs; each prinicpal subcontractor or JV team membere may submit no more than two (2) PPIFs.

Pg. 104, Section 2.0 Past

Performance, para. 2

Yes, that is correct.

7 Government POC for CPAQs submission

Attachment L-5 indicates the Government POC to receive CPAQs is Reagan Gill. Section L, Part B 2.0, second to last para. Indicates the Government POC to receive CPAQs is Mark Jonhson. Please clarify who is to receive the completed CPAQs and provide a corrected Attachment L-5, if applicable.

Attachment L-5; Section L, Pg. 104

Section 2.0 Past Performance, Para. 3

Attachment L-5 is revised via amendment 01 to include Mark Johnson as well as

Reagan Gill for delivery of the CPAQ. Any offeror who has already submitted a

CPAQ to a POC to be completed or who has sent a completed CPAQ to the

Government, does not need to resubmit their CPAQ using the version provided via amendment 01, the orginal form will suffice. As long as either Reagan Gill or Mark

Johnson receive the CPAQ it is sufficent.

Solicitation Question Form

SOURCE SELECTION INFORMATION

When Filled In 1 of 5

8 Attachment L-5 CPAQ questions

In section III. Instructions to the CPAQ POC: Instructions to complete the assessment: Please provide responses to, 1 through 4, that are listed below the assessment rating system table.

The form consists of 7 questions. Please confirm our contract POC is to answer all 7 question. and provide an updated Attachment L-5.

Attachment L-5 Yes, the POC is to answer all the questions in section III. The CAPQ form is revised via Amendment 01. Any offeror who has already submitted a CPAQ to a POC to be completed or who has sent a completed CPAQ to the Government, does not need to resubmit their CPAQ using the version provided via amendment 01, the orginal form will suffice.

9 Attachment L-4 Section L formatting requirements specify Times New Roman font size 12 for text and 10 for graphics.

Attachment L-4: Past Performance Information Form is provided in Calibri, size 11. Please confirm for industry that the font type and size for any of the Government forms incorporated with the solicitation are to remain as the Government has established and thus not changed to Times New

Roman size 12 or 10.

Section L, Pg. 99 2.0 Proposal Format, Attachment L-4

Offerors should not change the type or font of a form provided by the Government.

10 Error! Reference source not found on SOW

Would the government provide an updated SOW for 170021 without the "Error! Reference not found. SOW 170021, Sect. 3.2.2. Page 8 The Government reviewed SOW 170021 uploaded into beta.SAM and does not see the reference error in question.

11 Labor Categories Are all the positions required to work on government site? If not, which positions are able to work remotely?

As stated in section 1.8 of the base SOW, the Government will not furnish facilities.

The Contractor shall provide all necessary facilities.

12 Exhibit Exhibit A is referenced on page 55; however, only Exhibits B - F have been provided. Please provide

Exhibit A.

Page 55 Clause 5252.247-9505 is revised to reference Exhibits B and F via Amendment 01.

13 Place of Performance Place of Performance indicates address in Orlando; however, are any positions allowed to on

Contractor Site to complete tasks; if so, which ones?

The new beta.SAM site requires text to be entered into a place of performance data field when posting a solicitation. As stated in the base SOW the contractor shall provide all necessary facilities. Since the contractor is not known at this time, the

Government entered the NAWCTSD facility location in the required data field of beta.SAM.

14 Labor Categories/CLIN Pricing What is the man-year that the government is using to calculate a full-time person? 1880 or 1920? This effort is considered a supply contract, and therefore the Government calculation of a man year is not relevant.

15 Wage Determination/Labor

Categories

Is there an applicable Wage Determination for any of the the positions listed on the Labor Categories?

If so, can the government provide the applicable Wage Determination and identify the roles?

This effort is not a service contract act covered contract as it is coded and considered a supply contract, therefore there are not applicable Wage

Determinations.

16 Proposal

Submission/Packaging

Can the government clarify the statement of grouping like Volumes to mean Volume 1 and Volume 3 originals are to be packaged in the same envelope together and their subsequent copies packaged similarily? Also, since Volume 2 (PP) will be sent earlier, should it be provided again as a completed set for submission?

page 101 The Government considers like volumes to be all original volumes as like volumes and copy volumes as like volumes. If all volumes (both original and copy) fit into one container that can be carried by a single person, offerors can submit all volumes in one single container. If a full past performance volume is submitted early, than a second volume does not need to be submitted again at proposal submission.

17 Administrative If we have Reps & Certs registered with SAM, please confirm we only need to provide the acknowledgement page to comply with Section 3.3?. Also, do we need to include the Reps and Certs on page 89, along with the acknowledgment from page 85?

Page 105 If Reps & Certs are in SAM an offeror does not need to include them in the proposal, however a fully complete Section K with any necessary fill-in portions completed should be provided in the proposal regardless of whether or not the same clause is completed in the SAM Reps & Certs.

18 Incumbent Can the government provide the current incumbent name, and contract number ? There is no contractor or contract number that is considered an incumbent.

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1021 Each TDPC - Functional Area 1 - LOT I FPI Training Data Products, Functional Area 1, LOT I NON-SET-ASIDE PORTION. The contractor shall deliver the Functional Area 1 (Analysis, Design, and Evaluation) Training Data Products requirement as specified in each individual DO/TO in accordance with the Statement of Work # 110023. BASE ORDERING PERIOD (AWARD + 60 MONTHS). FOB: Destination TARGET COST TARGET PROFIT TOTAL TARGET PRICE CEILING PRICE SHARE RATIO ABOVE TARGET SHARE RATIO BELOW TARGET

Solicitation Question Form

When Filled In 2 of 5

19 CLIN PRICING Can the government provide their formulary for the Quantity column of the CLIN pricing tab spreadsheet to ensure we are meeting NAWCTSD specifications for CLINS 1101-1103 and 1201 - 1203 since from experience each course development, revision and update differs depending on the complexity of the course?

Attachment L-6 CLIN PRICING The quantity listed for CLINs X101-X103 and X201-X203 are based on the number of hours of delivered courseware the Government expects to order in each ordering period. For instance CLIN 1101 lists a quantity of 80 hours. That is 80 hours of delivered Level 1 ILT New Curriculum Development. The type of employees and number of hours necessary to complete and deliver to the Government 1 hour of

Level 1 ILT New Curriculum Development is part of an offerors proposed solution and is for each offeror to determine. As the requirements to produce 1 hour of each specific type of courseware are broken out by each CLIN, and the Government has successfully competed and executed other contracts with the same construct, the Government is confident there is adequate information provided for an offeror to propose for each of these CLINS on a FFP basis. A unit of measure column is added to the CLIN pricing tab of Attachment L-6 CLIN Pricing Form to provide additional clarity via Amendment 01.

20 CLIN PRICING On Attachment L-6 CLIN pricing tab; CLINS 1001 and 1002, respectively and their Option period CLINS have a quantity of (1); however, Section B for the same CLINS have a quantity of (5) each. Would the government advise which one is correct?

P. 2 - Solicitation Section B is revised to reflect the same quantity as the CLIN pricing form Attachment

L-6 via Amendment 01.

21 Past Performance CPAR If the most recent CPAR we possess for a given PP contract is more than three years old, and an updated CPAR was not provided, do we include the CPAR with our proposal or do we need to request a CPAQ? Please advise.

Pg. 104, Section 2.0 Past

Performance, para. 3; Pg. 109, Section 2.0 Past Performance, para. 4

Since the CPARS is outside the recency period a CPAQ should be provided. Anything outside the three year recency period will not be evaluated.

22 Clearance Can the government clarify if all positions including the Administrative Assistant require a Secret clearance to perform their work?

Attachment 2 and Attachment 3 Anyone working on, handling, or who has access to classified material must possess the required clearance level. If an employee is not working on, handling, or does not have access to classified material they are not required to have a clearance.

23 Resource Allocation Can the government provide the equivalent government hires for the Resource Allocation list to level the playing field with the incumbent and all bidders?

Attachment 2 The Government provided a general description of the education and skill level the

Government will utilize for each labor category when negotiating delivery orders in the Resource Allocation Matrix, Attachment 2. This is not a service contract so the

Government Equivalent Rates Clause is not applicable. There is not a contract or contractor that is considered an incumbent for this effort. All potential offerors are provided the same information via the solicitation.

24 CLIN PRICING In the provided pricing template (10. L-6_CLIN Pricing Form) on the CLIN Pricing tab, cell E100 indicates that cell F100 is the Ordering Period 5 Total however cell F100 is the total of cells F20, F40, F60, and F80 (Ordering Period 1-4 Totals) vice the sum of cells F82-F97. This is causing the Total

Evaluated Price to be miscalculated. Can the government please update the template cell F100 to sum cells F82-F97?

L-6_CLIN Pricing Form.xlsx; CLIN

Pricing tab; Cell E100

Attachment L-6 CLIN Pricing Form is revised to correct the error via Amendment 01.

25 Volume 1 Technical page count Volume 1 Technical Page Limit states " 20*" what is the single asterisk denoting? Does it refer to the

** Page limitation footnote below the table?

RFP/Section L.Part A 3.0 Proposal

Content & Volumes/Pg. 99

The language under the table is revised to reflect the information the single asterisk is referencing via Amendment 01.

26 Format of electronic files Will the government accept all electronic files except the pricing spreadsheet in Adobe Acrobat (pdf) format?

RFP/Section L.Part A.2.0/Pg. 99 Section L, 3.0 requires both paper and electronic copies. As long as the electronic files meet the requirements of section L paragraph 2.0 Proposal Format, the files will be accepted.

27 Electronic file media Will the government accept the electronic files on DVD-ROMs? RFP/Section L.Part A.2.0/Pg. 99 Only CD-ROM is acceptable.

28 PPIF format Will the government accept the Past Performance Information Forms as MS Word documents to facilitate inclusion in Volume 2?

RFP/Section L. Part B 2.0/Pg. 103 Section L, 3.0 requires both paper and electronic copies. As long as the electronic files meet the requirements of section L paragraph 2.0 Proposal Format, the files will be accepted.

29 Curriculum Development tools Quote: If legacy courseware includes Flash files, the Contractor shall replace Flash files with HTML 5 or

Adobe Animate, as required by the DO.

Question: Will the government permit use of other HTML5 / WebGL development+F7 tools such as

Adobe Rise 360?

Attachment 1 Base SOW/Section

1.2.3/Pg. 5

Development tools that comply with the requirements set forth in NETC Instruction

1500.22 (dated 27Sep2018) are permitted.

30 Curriculum Development tools Quote: If legacy courseware includes Flash files, the Contractor shall replace Flash files with HTML 5 or

Adobe Animate, as required by the DO."

Question: Will the government permit the use of other HTML5 / WebGL development tools such as

Adobe Captivate?

Attachment 1 Base SOW/Section

1.2.3/Pg. 5

Development tools that comply with the requirements set forth in NETC Instruction

1500.22 (dated 27Sep2018) are permitted.

ITEM NO SUPPLIES/SERVICES QUANTITY UNIT UNIT PRICE AMOUNT 1021 Each TDPC - Functional Area 1 - LOT I FPI Training Data Products, Functional Area 1, LOT I NON-SET-ASIDE PORTION. The contractor shall deliver the Functional Area 1 (Analysis, Design, and Evaluation) Training Data Products requirement as specified in each individual DO/TO in accordance with the Statement of Work # 110023. BASE ORDERING PERIOD (AWARD + 60 MONTHS). FOB: Destination TARGET COST TARGET PROFIT TOTAL TARGET PRICE CEILING PRICE SHARE RATIO ABOVE TARGET SHARE RATIO BELOW TARGET

Solicitation Question Form

When Filled In 3 of 5

31 Curriculum Development tools Quote: If legacy courseware includes Flash files, the Contractor shall replace Flash files with HTML 5 or

Adobe Animate, as required by the DO."

Question: Will the government perrmit the use of other HTML5 / WebGL development tools such as

Unity3D?

Attachment 1 Base SOW/Section

1.2.3/Pg. 5

Development tools that comply with the requirements set forth in NETC Instruction

1500.22 (dated 27Sep2018) are permitted.

32 Curriculum Development tools Quote: The Contractor shall develop all courseware using NETC DADMS approved software".

Question: Will the government provide a list of all approved software?

Attachment 1 Base SOW/Section

3.1/Pg. 11

Government Contractors can access DITPR/DADMS by using the PIV_Auth certificate at https://www.dadms.navy.mil/ to verify software requirements. If an offeror does not have access to a CAC card to review approved software, an offeror may contact

Mark Johnson at mark.johnson13@navy.mil with questions on specific software and the Government can answer questions on software directly.

33 Reserved

34 CLIN Pricing Form Quote: The quantities, travel costs, and ODC costs are for evaluation purposes only.

Quote: ...the government will take the Offeror submitted information from Attachment L-6 CLIN

Pricing Form and populate section B of the Base ID/IQ.

Question: The CLIN Pricing Form for x001 and x002 has quantities of 1 for all years and Schedule B has quantities of either 5 or 10. Will the government please clarify the CLIN x001 and x002 quantities since all the other CLIN quantities match between the CLIN Pricing Form and Schedule B?

L_6_CLIN Pricing Form/Instructions tab

RFP/Section L, Part B 3.0 (a)/Pg. 105

Section B is revised to reflect the same quantity as the CLIN pricing found in

Attachment L-6 via Amendment 01.

35 SOW Number Sections L and M state requirements for DOs 0001 on SOW 170021, however the SOW provided as

Section C is numbered 170020. Is the SOW 170020 the desired reference for DO:0001?

N6134020R0011, Section L, Part B, paragraphs 1.1.1 and 1.2.1 on page

103 of 114 and Section M, Part B paragraphs 1.1.1 and 1.2.1 on page

No, the desired SOW for Delivery Order 0001 is not SOW #170020. SOW #170020 is the overarching SOW for all requirements that may take place under this ID/IQ.

SOW #170020 provides the basic requirements for all the work to be performed under each Delivery Order, and will be attached to the base award. SOW #170021 is the SOW for Deliver Order 0001 which defines the specific requirements of Delivery

Order 0001 and will be attached to the Delivery Order 0001 Award. SOW #170021 is referenced in Section C of the Delivery Order 0001 Terms and Conditions document, Attachment L-6. After award each subsequent Delivery Order will also have its own individual SOW that will provide the specific requirements of that Delivery Order.

36 SOW Number Section C of RFP refers to the SOW as #17002, however Section J, Attachment 1 is number 170020. N6134020R0011, Section C, paragraph C.1 on page 45 of 114

The SOW reference in Section C is revised to SOW # 170020 via Amendment 01.

37 Technical Volume Instructions For Section L and M, Part B, 1.1.1, Should this read as follows " Given existing course design documentation provided under Delivery Order 0001 as GFI, the Offeror shall describe their overarching approach for selecting and implementing instructional strategies into blended learning, incorporating Computer Assisted Instruction ((CAI), as defined in DO 0001, SOW 170020 Paragraph

3.2.2) with Instructor-Led Training (ILT). The Offeror shall describe how it will develop media to support the design'.

Section L page 103 and M, page 108, paragraph 1.1.1 states that the offeror shall describe their overarching approach approach for selecting and implementing instructional strategies into blended learning, incorporating Computer

Assisted Instruction ((CAI), as defined in DO 0001, SOW 170021 Paragraph

3.2.1.

No, the SOW for Delivery Order 0001 is SOW # 170021. Please refer to question 35.

38 Technical Volume Instructions For Section L and M, Part B, 1.2.1, Should this read as follows " 1.2.1 The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s overarching approach for the production and delivery of a Training Situation Document for the Advanced Welding Course as outlined in DO 001 SOW 170020 and 3.2.1. The Government will evaluate the Offeror’s proposal for how the Offeror will apply their approach to developing CDRL

F001, Training Situation Document".

Section L page 103 and M, page 108, paragraph 1.2.1 states that the offeror shall describe their overarching approach approach for selecting and implementing instructional strategies into blended learning, incorporating Computer

Assisted Instruction ((CAI), as defined in DO 001 SOW 170021 paragraph

1.1 (b), and 3.2.2.

No, the SOW for Delivery Order 0001 is SOW # 170021. Please refer to question 35.

Solicitation Question Form

When Filled In 4 of 5

39 Technical Volume Instructions

SOW PWS e-copies

As many training contract SOW/PWS are typically general in nature, does the Government desire any additional specific information, in the form of individual TASK instructions, TASK ORDERS, DELIVERY

ORDERS, or other specific guidance repeatedly referenced as "in accodance with.." on DO/TOs?

Section L page 104 paragraph 2.0

Volume 2: PAST PERFORMANCE states "Additionally, the Offeror shall provide one electronic copy of the

Statement of Work/Performance

Work Statement for each contract reference as Annex 1 to this Past

Performance Volume".

Only documents that are part of the contract an offeror is providing as a past performance reference may be submitted with the reference. If the Government cannot verify the relevancy criteria from the SOW/PWS or contract documents, than the Government cannot consider the work to have been performed under the past performance reference.

40 Past Performance RFP Page 109, item e. states: “Offerors who demonstrate past performance in both IMI and ILT may receive a higher Confidence Assessment Rating than Offerors who demonstrate past performance in only IMI or ILT.”

Is page 109 item e referring to past performance across references or within a single reference?

RFP Page 109, item e. It can be either in the same reference or across references.

41 Past Performance RFP Page 103, 2.0 – Volume 2: Past Performance (last paragraph) states: "For contract references that contain delivery/task orders, additionally provide the work description(s) for each specific delivery/task order deemed relevant by the Offeror to this solicitation’s requirements.”

We have several questions regarding that statement:

a. For an ID/IQ, can multiple DOs be combined in a single Past Performance reference to achieve relevance?

b. Can we use multiple DOs on a single award IDIQ as a single Past Performance reference?

c. Can we use multiple DOs under a MAC as a single Past Performance reference?

RFP Page 103, 2.0 - Volume 2: Past

Performance (last paragraph)

As stated in section M, CPARS will only be evaluated at the filing level stipulated in the proposed effort. An ID/IQ will not be evaluated at both the basic and the order level. Therefore, if the CPARS of an ID/IQ is performed at the basic level the ID/IQ as a whole is considered one reference, if the CPARS is filed at the Delivery Order level, each Delivery Order will be considered a separate reference.

42 CPAQs In the RFP on page 104 it says “All CPAQs should be received by the Government concurrently with the Offeror’s proposal submission.” Does this mean that the CPAQs (attachment L-5) should be received by the Government no later than 11am on 8 Jan 2020? Or are the CPAQs due along with the

Volume 2 (Past Performance) submission on 17 Dec 2019?

RFP Page 104 Full proposals are due on the proposal due date stated in block 9 of the SF33. It is requested that past performance information be submitted on 17 December, however it is not required and any offeror who submits a timely proposal in accordance with block 9 of the SF33 will have their proposal fairly considered.

43 Pricing The last sentence inside the box seems incomplete. Could you please publish the remainder of the sentence, or any remaining instructions?

Attachment L-6, CLIN Pricing Form –

Instructions tab

The box is revised to show the entire sentence via Amendment 01.

44 Pricing CLIN Pricing tab - Cell F100 in Att. L-6 is described as “Order Period 5 Total”; however, the cell's formula adds Order Periods 1 through 4 plus the Delivery Order 01 Price. Should this formula be corrected? This also over-inflates the TEP in Cell F106.

Attachment L-6, CLIN Pricing Form –

CLIN Pricing tab

Attachment L-6 CLIN Pricing Form is revised to correct the error via Amendment 01.

45 Pricing Paragraph 3.2 Price Information states that "Offerors are encouraged to round to the whole dollar, but in any event shall not have any decimals beyond two digits."

Attachment L-6 CLIN Pricing Form does not round the totals in the Extended Price columns nor does it allow the offeror to modify the formulas for rounding. Can you provide a revised L-6 Pricing Form with rounding in the Extended Price columns for all applicable tabs?

RFP Section L, Part B, paragraph3.2 The formula in Attachment L-6 CLIN Pricing Form will not be revised. The formula allows for two decimal points. The statements referenced apply to both unit and extended price columns.

Solicitation Question Form

When Filled In 5 of 5