The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Industry Questions & Government Answers 27 October 2016
Q&A Compiled for all three Command-Wide Contracts
Q&A Applicable to N65236-16-R-0026 and N65236-16-R-0027
| Industry Question |
| Government Response |
| 1 |
| Background/Reference: Full Text of Market Survey, Paragraph 3, Section 1331 of the Small Business Jobs Act Consideration. Will offers from SBA-approved joint ventures be considered for this acquisition? |
| The procurement strategy for this requirement has not been determined. Once determined proposals will need to be submitted by firms whose business size (including JVs) comply with the acquisition strategy. |
| 2 |
| Background/Reference: Full Text of Market Survey, Paragraph 2 (c) Description. The market survey for solicitation N65236-16-R-0026/0027 states the applicable NAICS code is 541330, Engineering Services, (Exception Military and Aerospace Equipment and Military Weapons). Will the Government consider instead using NAICS code 541712, R&D in the Physical, Engineering and Life Sciences, with a size standard of 1,000 employees? The nature of the draft PWS requirements indicates that this is an appropriate NAICS code, and this will enable a greater number of highly qualified small businesses to establish their capability to meet the requirements, and to compete in a small business set-aside acquisition. |
| The NAICS code selected is the most appropriate for this requirement and has an associated size standard of $38.5M. The identified NAICS code will not be changed. |
| 3 |
| Background/Reference: Draft PWS 1.2, Scope. The Draft PWS states “NOTE: Work will be performed in Afghanistan.” Will all work be in Afghanistan … or will some work be in Afghanistan … or will work be in support of activities in Afghanistan? Please clarify. |
| The acquisition will support efforts worldwide. A potential place of performance includes Afghanistan. |
| 4 |
| Background/Reference: Draft PWS 1.2, Scope. Where is the primary Place of Performance? The PWS the mentions the work will be performed in Afghanistan and another area references Charleston, SC. Is the primary Place of Performance in Charleston with travel to Afghanistan? |
| See response to question #3 above. There is no primary place of performance. |
| 5 |
| Background/Reference: Draft PWS 1.2, Scope. In the PWS included with the market survey, there is a statement that “Work will be performed in Afghanistan.” Approximately what percentage of the total contract is expected to be performed in Afghanistan? |
| See response to question #3 above. Additionally, no specific percentage of work has been assigned to any potential place of performance. |
| 6 |
| Background/Reference: Draft PWS 1.2, Scope. Is there any additional information regarding duration of work in Afghanistan? |
| Not at this time. |
| 7 |
| Background/Reference: Currency. Given the diverse nature of the work and this procurement’s timeline, would the Government consider a five (5) year lookback for referenceable corporate experience when the final RFP is released? |
| Source selection criteria have not yet been developed. When establishing source selection criteria, the Government will consider the market research and the acquisition strategy in order to determine the most appropriate evaluation criteria for these competitive procurements. |
| 8 |
| Background/Reference: Currency. Will the government consider extending the duration of past performance to 5 years? |
| See response to question #7 above. |
| 9 |
| Does the Government anticipate any OCI issues with an offeror performing TOs re: strategic planning, policy development, architecture, etc. and also performing other tasking as described in the Market Survey? |
| It is anticipated the solicitations and resulting contracts will contain OCI clauses. OCI mitigations will be addressed in the solicitation phase. |
| 10 |
| In the Market Survey the introductory paragraph states, "This is an assessment/analysis of a respondent's independent abilities as to what they can or cannot perform - exclusive of any potential subcontractor team member information." However footnote 1, on page 3 and 4, states "Table 1 must be completed for each of the teaming partners." The introduction paragraph leads me to believe our subs should not be part of our RFI Response but the footnote leads me to believe we should fill out a Table 1 for potential teaming partners. |
The reference to teaming partners pertains to offerors who plan on proposing as a joint venture. We are only requesting information from prime offerors at this time.
| 11 |
| Will teaming partners who are not included in the RFI be allowed to be part of the RFP response after it is released? |
| Yes. |
| 12 |
| If we are allowed to use teaming partners in the RFI what bearing will the proposed response in Column B of Table 1 have on RFP responses? IE if we state a sub will have 10% will be held to 10% on the RFP? |
| See response to question #10 above. |
| 13 |
| Background/Reference: Market Survey. Will the government consider extending the page count to 20 pages? |
| No. |
| 14 |
| What will the method of evaluation be? Will SPAWAR be implementing a point system? |
| See response to question #7 above. |
| 15 |
| Background/Reference: Market Survey. “The cumulative summary of work submission should not exceed 11 pages exclusive of Attachment 2 cover pages.” Please clarify the reference to Attachment 2 cover pages. We recommend a 1-page limit per each Relevant Contract Experience. |
| It is expected that a cover page will be submitted for each cited contract reference, up to 10 references. |
Q&A Applicable to N65236-16-R-0036
| Industry Question |
| Government Response |
| 16 |
| Will this be a performance-based acquisition and include a Statement of Objectives? |
| No. |
| 17 |
| PWS Section 8.1.1 Security Classification: "The contractor shall have at the time of contract award and prior to commencement of classified work, a SECRET facility clearance (FCL). The initial DD-254 issued is limited to SECRET; however, as the need arises, some of the task orders under this contract will require a TOP SECRET (TS) or TOP SECRET with Sensitive Compartment Information (SCI) FCL access." QUESTION: Must the prime contractor possess these FCLs or the company facilities where the work will be performed? |
| The DD254 will be provided to the Prime’s CAGE Code; in addition, if the work is classified as SECRET it has to be performed at a facility with a SECRET FCL. |
| 18 |
| Paragraph 5.4 (Earned Value Management) is somewhat confusing as it relates to the value of the contract and whether or not EVM is required in accordance with DFARS 252.234-7001. It appears that the government's intent is to not officially invoke EVM but rather have the contractor comply with the requirements in subparagraphs 5.4.1-5.4.5 which include elements of EVM. Recommend the government provide clarification on this and that EVM is not officially invoked because it is very costly for a small business and would result in significantly higher costs to the government. |
| As stated in the PWS, Earned Value Management (EVM) implementation will be determined at the delivery/task order level since this IDIQ contract is utilized by multiple users and multiple programs and may not be necessary for every order issued under the MAC. |
| 19 |
| Paragraph 13.0 (Small Business Subcontracting Plan) requires the prime contractor to present a SB plan. Since this solicitation has been determined to be small business will this requirement be removed? |
| Yes, this will be removed from the RFP PWS. |
| 20 |
| What NAICS code does the government plan to assign to this procurement? |
| The NAICS code is 334220 with a size standard of 1,250 employees. Additional NAICS codes may be considered. |
