RFI_16_Nov_2015.pdf

16 November 2015

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) N68335-15-R-0178

Q1: 2.1.3.6 Small Business Utilization includes a requirement to submit three SF294s or SF 295s

“for the most current three relevant contracts, that best demonstrate the Offeror's ability to achieve the proposed subcontracting goals.“ Given that this is part of the Management Plan which is limited to 10 Pages can we submit these materials as an appendix to the Technical

Volume exempted from page count?

A1: Yes you can submit as an appendix exempt from page count

Q2: Volume 1, Executive Summary, requires an Offeror to “check” whether there is an

Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) as part of the Representations and Certifications.

Volume 5, Exceptions, Deviations, and Waivers, contains an OCI Clause. Is the Offeror to assume that if the clause in Volume 1 is “checked” as “Information concerning a conflict of interest, as identified in NAVAIR 5252.209-9510, is provided” then the information required is to be provided in Volume 5 in accordance with the information stated in the clause in Section L

Volume 5?

A2: Yes the information is to be provided in Volume 5

Q3: Will the government please confirm that Volume 3 and the Offeror's Summary Table are due NLT 11A, 2 Dec 2015?

A3: Volume 3 and the offeror’s summary table are due on 16 Dec 2015, the date of the block in the RFP. The past questionnaires are addressed on page 73, paragraph 2 of 3.0 Volume

3: Past Performance.

Q4: Considering that the Offeror's Summary Table will require finalized pricing inputs, in order to allow time to develop the best offer for the Government, will the Government allow electronic submission of inputs due on 2 Dec 2015?

A4: see answer to question #3

Q5: Typically, during the finalization of pricing and negotiations over positions there are changes to the workshare. Will minor changes to the workshare allocations between the Dec 2 nd and Dec 16 th submissions be acceptable?

A5: see answer to question #3

Q6: In the OCI Clause 5252.209-9510 on page 34, it is stated that a period of prohibition will be put in place for any company that works this program. Please provide further details on the period of prohibition, i.e., contract wide prohibition or will the prohibition be on a task order by task order basis.

A6: The period of prohibition will apply to the entire contract.

Q7: 52.219-9 Section M states that the Offeror will be evaluated on their Small Business

Subcontracting Plan and Subcontract Management Approach. This evaluation seems to be different than what is asked for in Section L Small Business Utilization as part of the Volume 2

Technical. Is it the intention of the government to have the Volume 2 Small Business Utilization section include the Small Business Subcontracting Plan and Management Approach, inclusive of

FAR 52.219-9 (Section I), or will the Offeror be required to submit the Small Business Plan upon award?

A7: Yes, it is the intent of the Government to have Volume 2 include the Small business subcontracting Plan and the Management approach inclusive of FAR 52.219.9.

Q8: The Cross Reference Matrix is to be submitted in the Technical Volume. The instructions indicate it should cross reference the proposal volumes. Is it the governments intent to have a single Cross Reference Matrix that addresses all Volumes or is it acceptable to include individual

CRMs in each Volume as applicable?

A8: It is acceptable to include individual CRMs or single as long as all the information is addressed per section L.

Q9: The table in 4.3(f) lists $102,010 for Ordering Year III Material estimate. We believe the government intended to use $102,000 as the figure. Please confirm or update the Totals for

Ordering Year III.

A9: the figure, should read as “$102,000”

Q10: The table in 4.3(g) uses 8.640 hours for the Senior Engineer position, we believe this should be 8,640.

A10: the figure should reads as “$8,640 hours”

Q11: 3.1 Past Performance

The RFP indicates five of the most relevant contracts for each critical team member and two of the most relevant contracts for each principal subcontractor. Based on your definition of principal (25% or more) and critical (critical function) subcontractors, the amount of past performance citations for these subcontractors are to provide seems skewed.

· Due to the explanation of a critical subcontractor, would it make more sense to have two relevant past performance citations specifying work in their function proposed.

· Due to the explanation of a principal subcontractor, would it make more sense to have five relevant past performance citations because of the amount of work they are proposed to perform.

Please confirm that these are the correct numbers.

A11: The offeror shall provide five of the most relevant contracts for each principal subcontractor and two of the most relevant contract for each critical team member

Q12: Section M, 1.3 Management Plan

The Government states the "The Offeror’s strategy for utilizing Small Business, Small

Disadvantaged Business, Women-Owned Small Business, HUB Zone Small Businesses, Veteran-Owned Small Business, Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business concerns and

Historically Black Colleges/Universities and Minority Institutions (HBCU/MI) as well as its consistency with the proposed Small Business Subcontracting Plan (if applicable) will be evaluated." In In 1.3.1.1 The RFP states that "The Government will evaluate the offeror’s strategy for utilizing small business, women-owned small business, HUB Zone small businesses, veteran-owned small business, service disabled veteran-owned small business concerns."

Is there a reason that SDB and HBCU were not on the second list?

A12: Reference section L 2.1.3.6