N66001-18-R-0001 - RFP QAs.pdf

N66001-18-R-0001 – RFP Questions & Answers

# Reference Question Answer 1 Reference paragraph M-

TXT-06 (pg. 114 of 117)

– “Section 825 provides an Exception to the Requirement to Include Cost or Price to the Government as a Factor in the Evaluation of Proposals for Certain Multiple- Award Task or Delivery Order Contracts”, and (b) “The Government will not evaluate price or cost as a factor for this

MAC.”

It is understood that part of the reason the Government is requesting cost and price information for this MAC is to establish the overall contract ceiling consistent with the stated Level of Effort. Given that the Government will not be evaluating price or cost as a factor for this MAC, requiring the submission of cost information for both prime contractors and proposed subcontractors appears unnecessarily burdensome to industry (particularly small business – bidding both as prime and as subcontractors).

a) Will the Government consider amending the solicitation to remove the requirement to submit price or cost information since it is decidedly not a factor for this MAC?

b) Would the Government consider simply setting the contract ceiling for each awardee consistent with the Government developed independent cost estimate?

a) The solicitation will not be amended to remove the requirement to submit price or cost information for Volume II.

The Volume II submission is required to evaluate professional compensation as required by FAR 52.222-46, and small business participation.

b) No.

2 If the Government still desires the submission of price and cost information, is it acceptable for the prime offeror to propose all Level of Effort required in VOLUME II - PRICE/COST INFORMATION (pg.

105 of 117) on behalf of their entire team, thereby reducing dozens (and potentially hundreds from all offerors) of subcontractor proposals submitted to the Government?

Per RFP L-TXT-12, 2.1(d)(2), If subcontractors are proposed, submit the same detailed level of cost information as for the prime contractor. Per RFP L-TXT-12, 2.3(a)(3), Subcontractor labor hours at all tiers should be shown in the same manner as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) above.

3 Section M, Paragraph 2.1, Small Business Participation (pg. 115 of 117), “Only the portion of small business participation that is both listed in the matrix and substantiated by the cost proposal will be considered in the evaluation.”

a) If acceptable for the prime to propose all hours on behalf of their team, will the Government consider amending the solicitation to remove the above requirement and instead consider utilizing the offeror’s required Subcontracting Plan and proposed goals (pg. 59 of 117) for the evaluation in Section M, Paragraph 2.1, Small Business Participation (pg.

115 of 117)?

b) Would the Government consider revising Attachment 7 “Small Business Participation Information Sheet” to reflect each offeror’s proposed teammates and document the Teaming Agreement date of execution [or signed TA document] to serve as evidence that the prime contractor and subcontractor have entered into a business agreement?

a) Per RFP L-TXT-12, 2.3(a)(3), Subcontractor labor hours at all tiers should be shown in the same manner as described in paragraphs (1) and (2) above.

b) Attachment 7 will not be revised.

4 H-TXT-32 Section H-TXT-32 indicates that a Small Business Subcontracting Plan will become a part of the award yet Section L does not identify it as a part of the proposal submission. Is the Small Business Subcontracting Plan due as a part of the proposal submission and if so what volume is it expected to be a part of?

L-TXT-12 2.7(g) and 3.3 have been updated via Amendment 0002.

5 L-TXT-12 Are contractors and subcontractors required to submit the general financial condition requirements found in Section 2.7(e) as well as the requirements found in Section 2.7(f), which include a summary of the organization, property control system, quality assurance programs, and equipment and facilities relative to this effort as they do not appear relevant?

Subcontractors do not need to submit the information required by L-TXT-12 2.7(e) and (f).

6 Will the government consider Cooperative Prime Teaming for this procurement?

RFP provision L-TXT-12, 2.7(g)(2) states: 'If the proposal contains a “contractor team arrangement' as defined in FAR 9.601, provide information that describes the contractor team arrangement to include any information that will help the Government understand the contractor team arrangement purpose and benefit.”

7 L-TXT-12, 3.2, page 110 Past Performance; states The Government will evaluate performance data since 1 January 2013 provided by offerors, and obtained from other sources, in the following areas", followed by addressing Quality, Schedule, etc. Will the Government provide direction on how this requested information from the offer should be provided?"

Per RFP L-TXT-12, 3.2(b), Offerors shall submit the most recent performance assessment from the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for each reference.

For contract actions where past performance information does not reside in CPARS, offerors shall contact their past performance references and request that each reference complete Attachment 6 “Past Performance Questionnaire” and e-mail the completed survey form, before the due date of this solicitation.

8 Att. 3, pg. A3-5 Are the two categories Tech Writer/Editor and Eng/Draft Tech Illustrator meant to have the same description?

No, via Amendment 0002, Attachment 3 has been updated to separate the two categories.

9 Att. 3 Can you confirm that this is applicable for all LCATS or only for those that have it listed?

The labor categories listed in Attachment 3 correspond to those listed in RFP L-TXT-12, 2.3(a)(3).

10 7.0 of the SOW Can the government provide insight to potential locations for OCONUS travel at the Task Order Level?

No. Travel requirements will be determined at the task order level.

11 Can the government estimate the percentage of work that is anticipated to be at the TS Level or above?

The Government is unable to estimate the percentage of work that is anticipated to be at the TS Level or above at this time.

12 Will the government sponsor security clearance requirements above the TS level for specific Task Order requirements?

Not at this time.

13 We interpret the Statement of Work to not contain Systems Engineering and Technical Assistance (SETA) type work. Does the government concur that the Statement of Work does not contain SETA work?

SETA work is not anticipated.

14 Does the Government anticipate any of the future Task Orders that contain development and/or requirements review to be SETA work and supporting the requirements definition?

SETA work is not anticipated.

15 L-TXT-12 L-TXT-12 states, "Do not submit any information that is not specifically requested by this solicitation." With this also requiring a hard copy submission, this offeror respectfully request clarification that front matter material for the binders (i.e., table of content; title pages (to include disclosure statements IAW FAR 52.215-1); glossaries, cross reference

As stated in L-TXT-12, 1.0(e)- If desired, an offeror may include a proposal cover letter, not to exceed two pages in length, in Volume I. It is not intended that the cover letter be an executive summary; rather it may include summary information, such as points of contact.

matrices) are acceptable to include and will not be included in any page count limitations.

16 Please define what constitutes an “acceptable” rating with regard to the organizational experience factor. For example, is providing one past performance capability example for each component of the key SOW areas an acceptable response?

Refer to RFP M-TXT-06, 2.2.

17 Section L 2.4 Other Direct Cost

The government provides a single required plug number per contract year for “Travel, Materials, etc.” Will the government please divide the total plug number per year and provide the specific estimated amounts for Travel and Materials individually? We apply indirect costs differently depending on whether the cost is categorized as Travel or Material.

Combining Travel and Material costs would require to propose an application of indirect rates that differs from our CASB Disclosure Statement.

Amendment 0003 will revise the ODC table to breakout the costs by Travel and Materials.

18 Amendment 01, page 2, L-TXT-38 (a) and (d).

Clause L-TXT-38, Submission of Electronic Proposals, Item (a) states that “No hard copy will be accepted.” Item (d) cites the number of hard copy deliverables required in addition to the electronic proposals.

Please confirm that offerors should comply with the hard copy submittals defined in Item (d).

Offerors shall provide hard copies.

19 Section L, P 103: 2.1 (a) Direct Labor

The proposal states: “The labor specified under this category shall only be for the prime contractor's direct labor and shall not include any subcontracted labor.” The sentence includes a reference to “See Subcontracts Below” but that section contains no reference as to how to price out the Subcontractor Labor. So the question is: If we are directed to only price out the Prime Contractors Direct Labor, how are we to price out the Subcontractors Direct Labor?

Per RFP L-TXT-12, 2.1(d)(2) - If subcontractors are proposed, submit the same detailed level of cost information as for the prime contractor.

20 Section L, p 107: 2.6 (4)

(5) (6)

2.6 Cost Proposal Format (page 107) requests (4) Subcontractor Labor Cost; (5) Subcontractor Fee; (6) Total Subcontractor Labor cost and Fee (the sum of (4) and (5)) and (8) Total Subcontractor Labor Cost including Pass Through. Are there any directions as to how to derive the Subcontractor Labor?

There are no directions as to how to derive the Subcontractor Labor. If there are subcontractor labor costs it is expected that the prime would obtain it directly from the subcontractor.

21 Section L-TXT-12, pg 109, 2.7 Corporate Cost Information, (f)

Please confirm what specific information is required for items 1-4. Offeror information applicable to the items listed in L-TXT-12, 2.7(f) 1-4.

22 Section L-TXT-12, 3.2(b) requires submittal of the most recent performance assessment from the Contract Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS) for each reference. Certain proprietary USG programs do not use CPARS, but rather Contractor Performance Evaluation Assessments (CPEA). Would the Government please allow submission of CPEAs in lieu of CPARs?

No, refer to L-TXT-12, 3.2(b) requiring CPARs or PPQs.

23 Section L-TXT-12, 2.1, General Instructions. Will the direct and indirect rates Offerors and teaming subcontractors are providing result in contract ceiling rates?

No.

24 Section L-TXT-12, 2.7(f)(4), Equipment and facilities relative to this effort. Please clarify what summary information is required for “(4), Equipment and facilities relative to this effort.”

It could address facilities related to L-TXT-12, 2.1(c)(2). No list of contractor supplied items will be provided with the basic contract. If applicable, individual task orders will provide the anticipated Government Furnished Property/Equipment.

25 Attachment 5, Reference Information Sheet does not have 1” margins all around as required in L-TXT-12. Should the offeror use the template as provided by the Government without adjusting the margins?

Offerors are not to change the spatial structure of the attachment.

26 Is the page limit for Attachment 4 unlimited? If not, please provide a page limit.

There is no page limit. Offerors shall complete the one-page RFP attachment 4.

27 Is the page limit for Attachment 7 unlimited? If not, please provide a page limit.

There is no page limit. Offerors shall complete the one-page RFP attachment 7.

28 Due to the cost proposal requirements for all subcontractors including small businesses and the need for customer approval to release contract capabilities (required by Volume III), would the Government consider extending the due date of this proposal until Tuesday, 14 August?

The Government will extend the due date at this time. See Amendment 0003.

29 Proprietary USG programs are highly relevant to this contract and would be relevant citations for Volume III. Please provide guidelines for For Official Use Only (FOUO) submission.

Unclassified information should only be submitted for Volume III. Please note that submitted proposal information will only be used for official use.

30 Section L-TXT-12, 2.7(d), Historical indirect data. Section L-TXT-12, 2.7(d), Historical indirect data, states “Historical indirect data, to include provisional rates, actual incurred rates, and annual incurred cost claims (if submitted), shall be provided for the three years prior to the offeror’s current fiscal year.” Offeror submits an annual incurred cost proposal to our Corporate ACO each year which is audited by our resident DCAA office. In order for us to adequately respond and comply with the RFP’s intent, please clarify this request and the purpose for this information.

For example, which schedules of the annual incurred cost claims is the Government requesting in Section L-TXT-12, 2.7(d).

This information is useful to the Government for multiple purposes (e.g. professional compensation, cost analysis at the task order level, etc.)

31 L-TXT-12,2.1, (2) and 2.7

It is requested that the RFP be revised in the cited sections to allow offerors to submit Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation (FPRR) in lieu of FPRA since many offerors will not have an FPRA. This is consistent with Section 2.7(c)(3).

The RFP will not be revised. Per L-TXT-12, 2.7(c)(3), offerors can submit Copies of the most current DCMA FPRA or Forward Pricing Rate Recommendation (FPRR).

32 In order to properly demonstrate the breadth, depth, and relevance of the offeror’s Organizational Experience in the selected four (4) SOW key areas listed on page 109 of the RFP, request the Government allow for more than 3 references to be used.

No changes to the number of references will be made at this time.

33 Please clarify if subcontractors will be required to submit Hard Copies of their portions of the proposal (Proprietary Pricing information, Cost Volume, Past Performance citations, CPARS, etc…).

Hard copy submissions for subcontractors’ will not be required at this time.

34 If Task Order execution requires labor categories not identified in the base contract, can the offeror propose additional labor categories not identified in the base contract for subsequent task order execution?

Labor categories at the task order level will be determined at that time.

35 In 3.1 (a) of Section L (Pg. 109), government lists four key areas of the SOW. Do these key areas include the sub sections of each SOW section?

For example, government lists SOW 2.5 as one of four key areas. Does government want industry to provide a summary description of work for SOW 2.5 or SOW 2.5, 2.5.1, 2.5.2, and 2.5.2.1?

These key areas include all sub-paragraphs of the key SOW area.

36 B-TXT-08 Will the government provide the ceiling or at a minimum an estimate of the ceiling so that potential offerors can understand the size of the program.

An understanding of the size of the program/contract can be gleaned from the hours provided in Section L.

37 Section 2.1(c) Are offerors to provide their government site and contractor site rates on separate lines in Attachment 2?

As stated in attachment 2, “*In Column B, the offeror shall include separate rows to identify whether the rates are for Government site and contractor site.”

38 Section L-TXT-12- Submission of Proposals, 2nd para, p. 102

Section L-TXT-12-Submission of Proposals (Complex) (Jun 2017), 2nd para, p. 102 states, “The type used shall be no small than Times New Roman, 10-point.” Will the Government allow Offerors to use Times New Roman, no less than 8 point, for tables/graphics/illustrations/figures?

No, per L-TXT-12, The type used shall be no smaller than Times New Roman, 10-point.

39 Section L-TXT-12- Submission of Proposals

Section L-TXT-38-Submission of Electronic Proposals (Jun 2017), 2nd para, p. 112 states, “Electronic copies shall be submitted via the SPAWAR E-Commerce Central (SPAWAR E-CC).” Is there a maximum per file size for SPAWAR E-CC submission?

No, however the larger the file is the longer the upload process will take.

40 M-TXT-06; para 2.1(a)(b)

Please confirm that the Government intends to award to all “Acceptable” offerors that propose a Total SB Percentage Between 10.0% and 14.9%.

As stated in M-TXT-06, 3.0.

41 RFP Section 2.0 Volume II – Price/Cost Information

The evaluation criteria outlined in this RFP states that Cost and Price is not an evaluation factor and a trade-off analysis will not be conducted.

Therefore, would the government consider a more streamlined and efficient approach to the cost/price submission and volume, focusing only on information that can be used to determine the likelihood of an offeror providing other than fair and reasonable pricing under future cost-type task orders?

For example, in order to determine whether an offeror is likely to offer other than fair and reasonable pricing, could this be determined through

The solicitation will not be amended to remove the requirement to submit price or cost information for Volume II. The Volume II submission is required to evaluate professional compensation as required by FAR 52.222-46 and small business participation.

submission of the following, in place of the complete cost summary by cost element as described in RFP sections 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, 2.5 and 2.6?:

• Submission of Attachment 2 – Rate Sheet.

• Submission of items required in paragraph 2.7 Corporate Cost

Information Evidence of indirect rates on file with DCMA / DCAA

(current requirement 2.7) Evidence of adequate accounting system (current requirement 2.7)

• Explanation of how indirect rates are applied, in accordance with the offeror’s accounting system and disclosed practices.

Ceiling fixed fee percentage for Section B clause B-TXT-01

42 Section 2.5 Uncompensated Overtime and Professional Employees

There are extensive requirements outlined in section 2.5 for offerors that happen to be disclosed using a total time accounting approach in the development of their direct labor rates. Typically, this requirement is used in conjunction with specific evaluation criteria to prohibit offerors from obtaining an unfair price evaluation advantage due to uncompensated overtime. Given that the corresponding uncompensated overtime evaluation requirements are not present, would the government consider removing section 2.5 from the cost/price instructions?

If not, would the government please explain how the information requested in section 2.5 will be evaluated?

Section L-TXT-12 2.5 will not be amended at this time.

43 Section 2.5 Uncompensated Overtime and Professional Employees

This section states that hourly rates for exempt employees which are based on more than a 2,080 work-year shall be identified as Uncompensated Overtime as defined in FAR 52.237-10. Section 2.5 provides requirements offerors must address in paragraphs a-h if the offeror intends to submit a proposal using anything other than a 40-hour work week. Specifically, section 2.5 states that the offeror’s proposal shall include a separate, complete cost breakdown to the same level of detail as the breakdown supporting the cost proposal. The separate breakdown requirements must include overhead rates and other costs based on a standard 40-hour workweek or a 2,080-hour standard year.

Compliance with this requirement will necessitate offerors who possess a Government disclosed and approved Total Time Accounting System to essentially create a direct and indirect rate structure based on a standard 40 hour work week. While it is not particularly difficult to generate direct labor rates using an assumption of 2,080 hours, the solicitation provides no guidance as to how an offeror using Total Time Accounting can generate credible indirect rates based on assumptions that are not

Section L-TXT-12 2.5 will not be amended at this time.

supported by its DCMA/DCAA-approved accounting system. For example, an offeror who bases its rates on 2,200 hours a year will have to remove 120 hours per FTE from its computations of both indirect and direct labor rates to meet the requirements of RFP Section 2.5 paragraph (g). There is no auditable support that an offeror can provide that will back up whatever assumptions it ultimately makes regarding the recalculation of indirect rates. Consequently, this offeror requests guidance from the Government as to how it will evaluate the reasonableness and realism of indirect rates that are not supported by the offeror's FPRR/FPRA audit of direct labor and indirect rates and in fact, would never be used in the support of any resulting contract. Specifically, in the Government’s response, please provide the following:

• Guidance on how offerors are to generate the indirect rates that depart from their disclosed Total Time Accounting Systems.

• Definitions and assumptions that are considered acceptable to the Government in the absence of actual supporting data or justification.

If the Government cannot provide the forgoing, it is respectfully requested that the requirements set forth in section 2.5 be removed.

44 Section 2.1 General Instructions, paragraph

(a) and section 2.7 Corporate Cost Information, paragraph (c)

Section 2.1, paragraph (a) states that straight time hourly rates shall use a forty-hour work week for the conversion of salaried employees to the hourly basis.

Section 2.7, paragraph (c)requires offerors to submit documentation substantiating the accuracy of its proposed direct labor rates.

Section 2.1 (a) requires offerors who have adequate accounting systems and Disclosed practices that follow DoD’s preferred method of total time accounting in the development of their direct labor rates to deviate from both their disclosed practices and any supporting information they may have on file with their oversight agencies (DCMA/DCAA) in order to satisfy the requirement for straight time hourly rates. Therefore, those offerors will not be able to also satisfy the substantiation requirement of Section 2.7 (c) if their direct labor rates are based on an FPRA or FPRR.

Please clarify how offerors in this position are to submit a compliant proposal in light of these diametrically opposed requirements.

Offerors in the position you have stated may explain the differences between their FPRA/FPRR rates and their proposed straight time hourly rates.

45 L,3.1(b) (Page 109), L, 3.2(a)(4) (Page 110), and

M-TXT-6, 2.2. M-TXT-

06 2.2 (p.116) defines organizational experience relevancy indicating “Relevance may include, In order to present organizational experience and past performance qualifications that meet both the relevancy and complexity evaluation criteria, will the Government please confirm that a single MAC reflective of multiple task orders exhibiting performance in the RFP specified key performance areas is reflective of one (1) organizational experience reference, understanding that only work performed after 01 Jan 2013 can be submitted for evaluation?

An IDIQ contract may be used as a single reference;

alternatively, individual task orders under an IDIQ contract may be used as multiple references.

but is not limited to, similarity to work contemplated under the RFP with respect to complexity, length of performance, number of task orders (emphasis added), scope, type of work, and value.”

46 Page 17 of 117 – 3.0 Software Engineering Approach

“The contractor shall define a software development approach appropriate for the computer software effort to be performed under this contract. This approach shall be documented in a Software Development Plan (SDP).” Are offeror’s required to submit an SDP as part of the response?

No, offeror’s are not required to submit an SDP as part of the response.

47 Section 2.4 Other Direct Cost. The Government’s best estimate of Other Direct Cost (ODC) items is set forth below. The Government cannot guarantee either the amount for each category or the total estimated amount. If the offeror does not propose the below ODCs, it may be considered unacceptable.

Additionally, these amounts do not include any provision for G&A expense or other loading factors. Offerors shall not propose fee on ODCs or on any indirect costs that are applied to ODCs.

(Page 105).

Please confirm the best estimate of Other Direct Cost (ODC) items set forth under 2.4 Other Direct Cost of the solicitation should be excluded from the total acquisition value included within the SB Participation Information Sheet and Subcontracting Plan.

Other Direct Costs should be included as part of the total acquisition value when determining small business participation.

48 Section L, 3.3 Small business Participation

Offerors shall also identify in the matrix the extent to which each identified business will be participating, as a percentage of the total value of the acquisition. Please define the total value of the acquisition.

The total value of the acquisition is based on the offeror’s total proposed amount (L-TXT-12, 2.6(17)).

49 DFAR 252.219-7003 and FAR 52.219-9, referenced in the solicitation, require a Subcontracting Plan. Can the Government specify if a

Refer to FAR 52.219-9 (DEV) Small Business Subcontracting Plan (Deviation 2018-O0013)(Alternate II Nov 2016) for submission requirements. The Small Business Subcontracting

Subcontracting Plan is required and if so, where the Subcontracting Plan is to be located in the proposal?

Plan will be a part of Volume II of the submission, see revised L-TXT-12, 3.3 (which was revised via Amendment 0002).

50 Regarding M-TXT-06, 2.1(b) includes a table indicating outstanding rating is equal to 20% or greater total small business percentage. Is the total small business percentage proposed based on total acquisition value or total subcontracted dollars?

For the “Small Business Participation” factor, the total small business percentage is based on the proposed total acquisition value.

51 M-TXT-06; para 2.1(a)(b)

Please confirm that the Government is measuring Total SB Percentage as a Percentage of Total Dollars Subcontracted.

For the “Small Business Participation” factor, the total small business percentage is based on the proposed total acquisition value.

52 FAR 52.219-9 and L- TXT-12 at 3.3

Please confirm that offerors only need to identify the extent to which identified small businesses will be participating, as a percentage of the total value of the acquisition, in the matrix provided via Attachment 7 of the RFP, and that offerors are not required to express small business subcontracting goals in terms of a percentage of total contract dollars (reference FAR 52.219-9(d)(1)).

For the “Small Business Participation” factor, the total small business percentage is based on the proposed total acquisition value.

For purposes of the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, please follow the instructions in 52.219-9 (Deviation 2018-O0013).

53 Do you accept proposals for applicants with Security clearance APPLIED status?

Offerors must have the required facility security clearance by time of award.

54 Can you share any links to obtain Security Clearance? No, this is the offeror’s responsibility. SSC Pacific does not issue facility clearances.

55 Can the government please clarify if all subcontractors need to complete the full Reps and Certs (Section K) of this solicitation just like the Prime?

Subcontractors do not need to complete Section K.