2.02 IT Support 4th Fleet Questions Answers.pdf

Questions Answers This log is for informational purposes only. It does not amend the RFQ. If a revision to the RFQis required, a formal amendment will be issued.

Question # Question Date RFQ Section/Page/Paragraph Question Government Response

26-Aug-20 Facility Clearance All our employees have clearances but my company doesn't have a facility clearance as of yet. Will the Government sponsor the winning contractor?

No.

26-Aug-20 Past Performance Factor II past performance; which states “ For additional information regarding a particular reference beyond that which will fit on the form, the information may be continued onto an additional sheet. The forms and any such continuation sheet(s) for submitted references will count toward the Volume II page limit described above.” – This implies there is a form / template the government wishes to be utilized, however there was no form provided with the solicitation. Can the government please provide the template should they have a format they wish to have utilized?

The Past Performance Reference Questionnaire is included as Attachment 3 of the Combined Synopsis.

26-Aug-20 Facility Clearance

Can you clarify that the government would sponsor our upgrade to a TS Facility Clearance if the contract was awarded to us. Or is the intent that the Prime needs to possess a TS Facility Clearance before they would be deemed eligible to compete?

Prime needs to possess

27-Aug-20 Past Performance Quote Submission Instructions And Requirements, Factor II – Past Performance has a page limit of 20 pages, however Quoter’s can provide no more than a one (1) page detailed explanation for each of its past performance evaluations demonstrating the relevance of the contracts to the requirements of the solicitation. Does that mean 1 page limit is for each past performance? If yes, which is quiet inconvenient to cover all task requirements in detail.

The quoter is responsible to provide Past Performance Reference Questionnaire (Attachment 3) to their references for completion.

27-Aug-20 Pricing Spreadsheet On the Pricing Spreadsheet, Sheet2, Cell G33 currently excludes cell G4 from the overall contract total. Cell G4 is the total for the base year. Please confirm whether the overall total should include or exclude cell G4 (base year pricing).

The overall total pricing should include the Base and Option Periods.

28-Aug-20 Past Performance The provided Past Performance Questionnaire PDF on beta.sam.gov is the marked-up (comments) version of the PPQ. Would it be possible to get a clean version or word version (so that we can edit the header and response fields) prior to sending to our govt customers for completion?

Provided via Amendment 0001

28-Aug-20 Incumbet Is there currently an incumbent company or previous incumbent, who completed similar contract performing these services?

Yes.

28-Aug-20 Previous Contract Info Can you please provide incumbent contract number, dollar value and period of performance? Contract number: N6883617F0240. Dollar Value: $2,197,948.80. PoP: 06/23/2017 - 09/22/2020.

This log is for informational purposes only. It does not amend the RFQ. If a revision to the RFQis required, a formal amendment will be issued.

Question # Question Date RFQ Section/Page/Paragraph Question Government Response

28-Aug-20 Performance Are you satisfied with incumbent performance? Yes

28-Aug-20 Local Preference Does this opportunity contain local preference? If yes, please provide the details. There is no local preference under this action.

28-Aug-20 Budget What is the budget of this opportunity? Is Budget approved? Funding for this action is approved.

28-Aug-20 Contractors Sick Leave Is this contract covered by the EO 13706? Contract is covered by Service Contract Act

28-Aug-20 Fringe applicability Can you please confirm, whether the fringe($4.22) is applicable to this requirement or not? Contract is covered by Service Contract Act

28-Aug-20 SCA Is this position covered by the SCA? If so, what occupation code is utilized for this requirement applicable wage determination?

52.222-41 is applicable to this action. Refer to the cluase section on the Combined Synopsis. WD No. 2015-4540 Rev. 11.

28-Aug-20 Facility Clearance Why the Facility Clearance is a requirement? Is it possible you can consider dropping the Facility Clearance at company level and keep requirement at employee level? If not, would Navy sponsor such obtainment?

We will not drop the Facility Clearance requirement

29-Aug-20 Labor Categories The labor categories which are specified under the section 4.1 to 4.6, did agency require one person for each category or more?

1 person for each section 4.1 through 4.6

29-Aug-20 Labor Categories Can you please provide associated GS category for each position? See amendment 0001

29-Aug-20 Incumbet Can you share who is the current incumbent? Advanced Alliant Solutions Team.

31-Aug-20 Deliverables Is the QCP to be provided after contract award or with the response?

This log is for informational purposes only. It does not amend the RFQ. If a revision to the RFQis required, a formal amendment will be issued.

Question # Question Date RFQ Section/Page/Paragraph Question Government Response

31-Aug-20 Deliverables Offerors with ISO or CMMI certification have a standard QCP that meets the certification’s guidelines.

Therefore, will the government accept the approved QCP under ISO or CMMI. Also, the QCP is a large document and would exceed the 20 page limit.

No certification of this type is included as a requirement on the Combined Synopsis nor the Performance Work Statement (PWS).

31-Aug-20 Deliverables Which Volume encompasses the QCP, Price or Past Performance Volume?

1-Sep-20 Past Performance Reference Questionnaire

Will the Government please provide a revised version of Attachment 3? The current version has a 'tracked changes' comment in it and as a result has pushed all of the formatting to the left.

See Amendment 0001

1-Sep-20 Past Performance The 6th Paragraph on Page 6 of the RFP states: "For additional information regarding a particular reference beyond that which will fit on the form". These instructions make reference to a "form", but a past performance form was not provided in the RFP. Will the Government please provide guidance on how past performance information should be provided? Specifically, should offerors use their own format or will the Government provide a format?

The Past Performance Reference Questionnaire was included as Attachment 3 of the Combined Synopsis.

1-Sep-20 Past Performance Regarding past performance questionnaires, the first paragraph on page 6 of the RFP states "The quoter should provide completed PPQ’s in the quote submission" as well as "If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Riquelme TorresAviles at riquelme.torres@navy.mil";

however, the PPQ form (Attachment 3, Section IV) only allows for clients to provide the completed PPQ directly to the Government. Will the Government please clarify if it is acceptable for clients to return the completed PPQs to offerors for offerors to include in their proposal responses? If this is allowable, will the Government please consider updating/revising Attachment 3?

Refer to synopsis, "The quoter should provide completed PPQ’s in the quote submission." however, "If the client requests, questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact, Riquelme Torres-Aviles at riquelme.torres@navy.mil."

1-Sep-20 Statement of Equivalent Rates Reference 5 U.S. Code § 5332. Will the Government please confirm that the information provided in FAR 52.222- 42 is accurate? In our experience, Network Engineers, Network/System Admins, Program Managers, and SharePont/Web Developers are exempt/professional positions. As such, for exempt/professional positions, we typically see FAR 52.222-42 populated with a GS equivalent and a percentage value for Fringe Benefits. For example, GS-12-01 and 35% Fringe Benefits.

See amendment 0001

This log is for informational purposes only. It does not amend the RFQ. If a revision to the RFQis required, a formal amendment will be issued.

Question # Question Date RFQ Section/Page/Paragraph Question Government Response

1-Sep-20 Statement of Equivalent Rates Reference FAR 52.222-42. Is the Government indicating that the positions listed in FAR 52.222-42 are SCA-covered/non-exempt positions?

52.222-41 is applicable to this action. Refer to the cluase section on the Combined Synopsis.

1-Sep-20 Price Ref. Factor I – Price, it states that we are to provide one (1) electronic copy in PDF format. However, should we submit Price (Attachment 2) in excel and the below remaining requirements submitted in one document in PDF format?

o Acknowledgement of all amendments o SAM registration. Quoter shall ensure current registration on the SAM Website, www.sam.gov, including Annual Representations and Certifications are complete and updated for this procurement. If a Representation or Certification required by this RQP is not provided in SAM, include the representation or certification in your price volume (Attachment 6).

o Responsibility Determination Documentation

Submit in accordance with the combined synopsis/soliciation requirements.

1-Sep-20 Past Performance Ref. Factor II – Past Performance, is there a format (besides 12pt and 20 pages) or a template for the Past Performance citations (outline of information)?

See Attachment 3.

1-Sep-20 Past Performance Reference Questionnaire

Could you released an editable PPQ so we can add our information in the document. See Amendment 0001-attachments

1-Sep-20 PWS Ref. PWS experience required, all requirements per DoD 8570.01-M, Information Assurance Work Force as a privileged user at a minimum IAT Level II Certification, GSEC, Network + CE, Security +CE, SSCP certifications and all subsequent Level II certifications. Usually, individuals are only required to have one of the certifications from IAT II not all of them. Is one certification from the required IAT level acceptable?

Only one certification is required as long as it aligns with IAT Level II certification.

1-Sep-20 SCA/Wage Determinations Ref. FAR 52.222-42, RFQ, wage determination and PWS per the Department of Labor Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) these positions are considered exempt and are not Service Contract Act (SCA) positions. Could you re-evaluate and make the appropriate changes to the requirements/clauses in the RFQ.

See amenedment 0001

1-Sep-20 Due Date The due date for the proposal is listed as Friday, 10 September. The 10th is a Thursday. Please Clarify. Announcement will close at 3:00p.m. EST on Friday, 11 September 2020.

1-Sep-20 PWS Requirements Are all of the positions on this contract on the current contract? No.

This log is for informational purposes only. It does not amend the RFQ. If a revision to the RFQis required, a formal amendment will be issued.

Question # Question Date RFQ Section/Page/Paragraph Question Government Response

1-Sep-20 Evaluation Factors What is the relationship between the Price factor and the Past Performance factor in the evaluation process? Price is approximatley equal to past performance.

1-Sep-20 Past Performance Reference Questionnaire

There are conflicting instructions about how the Past Performance questionnaire should be returned. The proposal instructions say they should be included with the proposal. The questionnaire instructs the reviewer to return them to directly to the government. Please clarify how that form is to be delivered to the government.

The quoter is responsible for providing the Past Performance Questionnaire to their references. Questionnaires may be submitted directly to the Government’s point of contact or with their quote.

1-Sep-20 Past Performance Reference Questionnaire

Can the government provide an updated Past Performance questionnaire in a format that would allow the reviewer to fill out the form electronically? Also, the form appears to have been exported to a PDF without resolving all comments and has a missing date.

See amendment 0001

1-Sep-20 Past Performance The Combined Synopsis states: “Quoters may submit a combination of no more than three (3) delivery orders (DOs), task orders (TOs), technical direction letters (TDLs), and/or technical area tasks (TATs) placed under an ID/IQ or BPA as one of the three examples of past performance.” In our case the tasks were independently managed and funded. There is no one person who can speak to our performance on all three of the tasks. Each task was separately funded and had its own COR’, and they have individual CPARS. Should/Can we submit a questionnaire for each of the tasks even though it’s only one of our past performance submissions?

You should submit past performance in accordance with the RFQ. If you cannot submit one due to the splitting of tasks you reference, then appropriateley label each CPAR and explain they are all part of one submission.

1-Sep-20 Responsibility Determination Information

In regards to “A description of the Quoter’s organization, accounting, and operational controls to meet the requirement.” Could the government provide more information about what they are expecting to satisfy this requirement?

Submission shall include a description as stated in the RFQ that helps us to determine whether or not the quoter has the appropriate accounting and operational controls in place to handle our contract.

2-Sep-20 RFQ, Page 5, Responsibility Determination

The RFQ requires Quoters submit a letter from their financial institution indicating the Quoter has adequate resources to perform the contract. However, the RFQ does not provide any weighing mechanism through which “adequate resources” can be evaluated. In light of this, we recommend requiring companies submit proof of a $2.5M line of credit in order to appropriately evaluate “adequate resources.” Should the Government not accept this recommendation, please provide a value or threshold that establishes adequate financial resources.

No threshold will be provided, please submit letter as required by RFQ.

This log is for informational purposes only. It does not amend the RFQ. If a revision to the RFQis required, a formal amendment will be issued.

Question # Question Date RFQ Section/Page/Paragraph Question Government Response

2-Sep-20 PWS, Section 6.0 Section 6.0 of the PWS indicates the period of performance for this requirement shall begin on 23 September 2020. Does this include a transition-in period? For example, will the awarded Vendor be provided a 30-day transition-in period in which all FTEs arrive on-site ready to begin performance? Or, is the Government’s expectation that the awarded vendor will have all contract positions filled and ready to begin performance on PoP day one?

2-Sep-20 RFQ, Page 6, Important Note 1 On page 6 of the RFQ under “Important Notes,” the Government outlines “Each quoter shall submit a quote that clearly and concisely describes and defines the contractor’s response to the requirements contained in the RFQ.”

We interpret this to imply a technical approach towards accomplishing the RFQ requirements. However, the evaluation criteria in the RFQ include Price and Past Performance rather than a technical approach. Please confirm Quoters are not required to submit a technical approach towards performing this work and the evaluation will consist solely of Price and Past Performance.

Submission requirements are as stated in the RFQ. Factors for evaluation are Price and Past Performance. It is important to note that a quoter who cannot perform as outlined in the PWS may result in a termination for default.

2-Sep-20 PWS, Section 23: Deliverables PWS Section 23 includes the requirement that “Offerors shall therefore prepare and submit a management/quality control plan (QCP) which will be evaluated as part of the Offeror’s technical capability.” However, the RFQ instructions do not mention including of this Management/Quality Control Plan (QCP). Please advise whether or not this is a requirement of the Quote response? Or, is this a requirement post-award? If Quoters shall include this Management/QCP in their response, in what volume shall this plan be submitted and does it count against the page-limit?

2-Sep-20 RFQ, Page 5, Factor II – Past Performance

Volume II – Factor II: Past Performance requires Quoters to submit three (3) past performances meeting the recency and relevancy definitions provided in the RFQ. The RFQ also allows Quoters to submit Past Performances from their subcontractors or teaming partners. However, we cannot identify a requirement of how many, if any, of the submitted past performances need to be submitted from the Prime Quoter. Absent this requirement, Quoters can Prime this opportunity but submit Past Performances from their teaming partners. Will the Government add a Volume II requirement that two (2) of the three (3) past performance submissions must be for the Prime Quoter? Absent such a requirement, the Government will evaluate the capabilities and experiences of the proposed subcontractors without ever evaluating the capabilities of the Prime Quoter.

Review Factor II Past Perfromance requirements.

This log is for informational purposes only. It does not amend the RFQ. If a revision to the RFQis required, a formal amendment will be issued.

Question # Question Date RFQ Section/Page/Paragraph Question Government Response

2-Sep-20 RFQ, Page 1, Paragraph 1 On page 1 of the RFQ, the Government writes “The successful quoter will be required to complete a DD254 and must be able to obtain a Top Secret Security Clearance.” Given this requirement, we strongly encourage the Government to include proof of a Top Secret Facility Clearance at time of quote submission. In doing so, the Government will preempt downstream inefficiencies which may delay PoP start as the awarded Quoter awaits their TS FCL determination. Should the Government adopt this recommendation, where in the quote response shall Quoters include proof of an active Top Secret Facility Clearance (TS/FCL)?

Requirement prior to award not required. Quoters must have the ability to obtain one.

2-Sep-20 RFQ, Page 5, Factor II – Past Performance

We interpret Volume II – Factor II: Past Performance to consist of the following: an assertion of contract relevancy (no more than one-page per past performance reference) and the completed Attachment 3 – PPQ.

Should the Attachment 3 require additional space than provided in the Attachment, additional information can be included in a follow-on sheet. Collectively, the assertion of relevancy and completed PPQs can be no more than 20-pages total. Can the Government please confirm our understanding of the Volume II contents?

Submit quote in accordance with submission requirements. Volume to shall be no more than 20 pages.

2-Sep-20 RFQ, Page 5, Factor II – Past Performance

Regarding the 20-page limit for Volume II: Past Performance, does this include a table of contents, title page, and cover letter? Or, are those items excluded from the page count?

Table of contents, title pate not part of total page count.

3-Sep-20 Past Performance Factor II - Past Performance: The RFQ states that submission shall not exceed 20 pages. It also states that quoters may provide no more than a one (1) page detailed explanation for each of its past performance evaluations.

Which one is the correct page limit (20 pages or 1 page per contract). Please clarify.

Both are correct, volume II shall not exceed 20 pages which includes the past performance documentation to include the one page detailed explanation if submitted.

3-Sep-20 Positions Experience Some of these positions needs more than 10 years of experience and they are listed as SCA positions. Please confirm that all positions in the solicitation are covered under the Service Contract Act.

Service Contract Act applies.

3-Sep-20 SCA In order to satisfy the DOL vested vacation clause, please advise if the on-going contract is covered under Service

Contract Act.

Contract covered under Service Contract Act.

3-Sep-20 Personnel Current Contract Please provide the number of personnel for each labor category issued on current task orders.

3-Sep-20 Positions Current Contract On the current contract, are all positions filled.

This log is for informational purposes only. It does not amend the RFQ. If a revision to the RFQis required, a formal amendment will be issued.

Question # Question Date RFQ Section/Page/Paragraph Question Government Response

3-Sep-20 Performance Work Statement Has there been any changes in the PWS scope or number of FTEs required for this requirement as compared to the ongoing requirement.

3-Sep-20 Contractors Sick Leave Please advise if FAR 52.222-62 - Paid Sick Leave applies.

3-Sep-20 Security Clearance

Are the employees required to have an active security clearance upon start of contract performance or can the clearance investigation be initiated upon start of performance.

3-Sep-20 Travel Costs Are travel costs part of a separate CLIN or should contractors include expected travel costs into their Firm Fixed

Price?

3-Sep-20 Travel Costs PWS Section 26.0 Travel states that travel costs shall not exceed $10,000 in a fiscal year, however estimated travel costs calculated from the table below it exceeds this amount. Should contractors still assume the $10,000 not-to-exceed amount?

3-Sep-20 PWS 4.0 Requirements & Labor Category Descriptions

The labor category descriptions for this contract are extremely specific and given the geographical location and certification requirement, create a near impossible staffing scenario for onboarding new personnel that fit this criterion. Would the Government consider revising the labor category requirements or allow personnel to receive certifications within 60-90 days after being accepted onto the contract?

3-Sep-20 52.222-41 Service Contract Labor Standards

This contract is applicable to the SCLS although most, if not all, of these positions can be classified as exempt per 29 C.F.R. §541. Would the Government reconsider the SCLS clause as applicable on this contract?

Service Contract Act applies.

3-Sep-20 PWS 4.2; The labor category requirements limit the pool of qualified candidates that the PWS requirements to almost zero This mainly concerns the

Would the Government consider adjusting and/or modifying the labor category requirements of 4.2 lead Information Assurance Network Engineer/Systems Administrator Support?

3-Sep-20 PWS 4.5 The Travel Management Specialist (PWS 4.5) requires very specific experience such as CITIBANK Custom Reporting System (Basic and Advanced). Would the Government consider removing this requirement?

This log is for informational purposes only. It does not amend the RFQ. If a revision to the RFQis required, a formal amendment will be issued.

Question # Question Date RFQ Section/Page/Paragraph Question Government Response

3-Sep-20 PWS 4.0 Requirements & Labor Category Descriptions

The labor categories for 4.1 Lead Information Assurance Systems Administrator/Network Engineer Support, 4.2 Lead Information Assurance Network Engineer/System Administrator Support, 4.4 Knowledge Manager, Records Manager and SharePoint Developer, 4.5 Travel Management Specialist, 4.6 Security and Administrative Specialist, in addition to the required years of experience and certifications; would the Government be willing the provide the educational requirements for each position? (i.e Bachelor’s, Associates, etc.) Would the Government be willing to accept additional years of experience in substitution for a lower degree level? Would the Government be willing accept additional certifications in lieu of years of experience?

3-Sep-20 PWS 4.0 Requirements & Labor Category Descriptions

For the labor category 4.3 Training Program Manager and Command Historian, the educational requirement provided is Master’s Degree. Would the Government be willing to accept additional years of experience in substitution for a lower degree level? Would the Government be willing accept additional certifications in lieu of years of experience?

PPI Log