Attachment 5- Q and A.pdf

Questions received:

Q1: The SOW says (Task 4.1, final sentence of the first paragraph), that the contractor should be available for at least 30 days per year. However, the labor estimate provided in attachment 2 appears to include hours for more field work (each field line includes an estimate of 960 hours at 12 hours per day, which would be far more than 30 days of field effort even including setup and breakdown field days on either side of the field effort). Do we match the hours in the labor estimate table, or submit one that reflects 30 our costs for 30 days each year?

A1: Given the 30 days is a minimum, the labor table would drive the ceiling value which is the maximum so proposals should match the labor hour table.

Q2: For the labor matrix table requested, is this one table that covers the full five years, or is there one table for each of the years to account for labor escalation rates (e.g. cost of living increases)?

A2: This is for each year, and we anticipate even distribution over the 5 years for planning purposes.

Q3: The solicitation seems to imply that we are required to submit the estimated labor mix required by the solicitation, is that accurate?

A3: The solicitation does not require the estimated labor mix be proposed. Offerors have discretion to deviate and provide a rationale. The Government cannot respond in advance of closing to potential solutions because the evaluation of such solutions will take place after solicitation closing when the Government evaluates the proposal inclusive of the labor mix rationale.

Q4: Given this is an LPTA source selection deviation from the estimated labor mix to provide greater qualifications, experience, and capability could be detrimental to an offeror, correct?

A4: Yes. The Government selected an LPTA source selection schema because it is not looking to prioritize greater performance quality over cost/price. The Government has determined the estimated labor mix will meet the minimum quality requirements of the solicitation SOW.

Q5: If an offeror can substantiate a process or tool it intends to use that can accomplish the requirements more efficiently (i.e. with fewer hours) can the offeror propose fewer than the Government’s estimated hours.

A5: No. Notwithstanding the ability to deviate in the proposed categories and hours described in the answer to question 4, offerors that do not propose the full level of effort identified in Section L of the RFP will be determined ineligible for award.