TTS Questions and Answers dates 4.14.2021.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 22 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Tactical Integrated Threat/Target Training Systems (TTS) Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- N6893620R0106
About this file
This document contains details of a federal contract opportunity for a Tactical Integrated Threat/Target Training Systems. The Naval Air Systems Command Naval Air Warfare Center is seeking industry comments on a draft RFP solicitation for TTS by January 2021. Interested offerors must provide meaningful feedback to contribute to the best possible solicitation. The solicitation will result in a multiple award contract. All questions must be submitted in writing to the identified point of contact by email only. Offerors must be certified through Defense Logistics Information Services to access controlled unclassified information on the Beta SAM platform. The document includes a questions and answers file related to the opportunity but no other contract requirement details.
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| TTS Questions and Answers Round 5.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| TTS QASP updated 4.19.2021.docx | DOCX document | |
| TTS Questions and Answers Round 4 dated 4.20.2021.pdf | ||
| TTS Questions and Answers dated 4-7-2021.pdf | ||
| TTS Questions and Answers dated 4-7-2021.pdf | ||
| TTS QASP updated 4-7-2021.docx | DOCX document | |
| TTS Questions and Answers Dates 4-1-2021.pdf | ||
| Attachment L-4 TTS RFP Questions Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| FINAL Attachment L3 - TTS PP Info Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Exhibit A - CDRL DD1423.pdf | ||
| FINAL Attachment L-1 TTS CPAQ.pdf | ||
| Attachment 1 - QASP.docx | DOCX document | |
| FINAL Attachment L2 - TTS ES Teaming Matrix.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Draft RFP (Dec 2020) Questions and Answers.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment L-3 TTS PP Info Form.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment L-2 TTS ES Teaming Matrix.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| Attachment L-1 TTS CPAQ.docx | DOCX document |
Show all 17
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Sheet1
| Solicitation #: N6893620R0106 RFP Questions and Responses | |||||||
| Item No. | Page No. | Section | Para No. | Quote from Solicitation | Question | Response | |
| 1 | 69 | L | 2 | All CPAQs should be received by the Government concurrently with the Offeror’s proposal submission. | Does the government require the Assessing Official to submit the CPAQ to them directly or to the Offeror and for the Offeror to submit the CPAQ with their proposal? | ||
| 2 | Page 61 | ||||||
| Page 66 | L - Part A | ||||||
| L - Part B | Part A - 3.0 | ||||||
| Part B - 1.6 | Added requirement: All Offerors (Large and Small Businesses) shall address their strategies for utilizing SB Concerns in the performance of this contract, whether as a JV, teaming arrangement, or subcontractor. SB Offerors may meet this requirement using work they perform themselves. For purposes of this solicitation, the term SB Concern shall also include the subcategories of Veteran-Owned Small Business (VOSB), Service-Disabled Veteran-Owned Small Business (SDVOSB), HUBZone Small Business (HUBZone), Small Disadvantaged Business (SDB), and Women-Owned Small Business (WOSB). Each subcategory of SB shall be addressed. In describing its SB Utilization Strategy for this solicitation, the Offeror shall, as applicable: |
Describe its approach to identifying SB Concerns.
Describe the extent of participation of SB Concerns on this contract, including a detailed description of the supplies and services for each SB Concern subcategory, and the complexity and variety of the work SB Concerns are to perform. For each SB Concern specifically identified in the proposal, provide the SB Concern's CAGE code, or, if the SB Concern is not registered in the System for Award Management (SAM), at a minimum provide evidence of self-certification in accordance with FAR 19.703(b) as a SB Concern. Where possible, provide documentation regarding enforceable commitments to utilize each SB Concern.
Identify processes to correct inabilities to meet proposed goals with corresponding improvements that will be used on this contract.
Describe its specific efforts and new, contract-specific initiatives to ensure the resulting contract meets proposed goals. These efforts shall include, but are not limited to, sponsoring program specific outreach events and industry conferences, establishing Mentor-Protégé relationships, and market research using websites, such as the NAVAIR Office of Small Business Programs website (http://www.navair.navy.mil/osbp ) to locate SB Concerns.
| Note 1: The SB Subcontracting Plan must be submitted to be eligible for award; however, the acceptability of the SB Subcontracting Plan content will be assessed separately. Therefore, changes to the SB Subcontracting Plan to correct issues may occur after selection of the successful Offeror, during the contract award process, and will not be considered a part of discussions. | The Government added Section L, Part B, 1.6 SB Utilization Strategy. This reference was not added to the page limitation table on pages 60-61, Section L, Part A, Section 3.0. Will the Government update this table to allow offerors five pages to provide a Small Business Utilization Strategy and confirm it is a separate requirement from the SB Plan? | |||||
| 4 | Page 65 | L | 1.2 | The RFP instruction states “The Offeror shall address the following four categories in the proposal which will be evaluated equally.“ | However the subsection numbers (which offerors are required to match) appear incorrect. Should the subsections be numbered 1.2.1, 1.2.2, 1.2.3, and 1.2.4 rather than 1.2.1, 1.2.1.1, 1.2.1.2, 1.2.1.3. | |
| 5 | Page 67 | L | 1.5.1 | The RFP requires offerors to “Use Table ES-1, Offeror Summary, to demonstrate that all future work has been considered.” | Could the government clarify what it is requesting, and whether this instruction belongs in the Executive Summary versus the Management Plan. | |
| 6 | Pages 5 and 6 | Attach 1 QASP | ||||
| • | The Acceptable Performance Definition in the Incentives table (Enclosure 2) states: “All measurement areas rate at least ‘Satisfactory’ or above. Two or more areas are rated as ‘Very Good’ or above.” | |||||
| • | The Incentives in the table state: “Meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for additional task order awards,” while the repercussion for not meeting the AQLs is: “Does not meet the acceptable performance definition as a condition for additional task order awards.” | |||||
| • | The evaluation ratings are then defined as: | |||||
| o | “Satisfactory Performance: Contractor’s performance of most contract requirements meets the acceptable standards…” | |||||
| o | “Very Good Performance: Contractor’s performance of most contract requirements is consistently above acceptable standards…” | |||||
| o | “Exceptional Performance: Contractor’s performance of virtually all contract requirements consistently exceeds the acceptable standards…” | Performance Quality Standards - More than half of the Maximum Allowable Degree of Deviation Requirements (AQLs) in the Table require 100% accuracy. This is a high threshold with no variance. The remaining AQLs are at 95% or 90%. The combination of these factors may pose a risk for meeting performance requirements of Perfection, and it may be very challenging to earn Very Good or Exceptional ratings based on these criteria. Would the government consider changing those at 100% to 90% or 95% in line with the remaining AQLs? | ||||
| 7 | Page 44 | I | DFAR | 252.204-7021 CONTRACTOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE CYBERSECURITY MATURITY MODEL | ||
| CERTIFICATION LEVEL REQUIREMENT (NOV 2020) | The RFP includes DFARS clause 252.204-7021, Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Requirements. Per Interim Final Rule (DFARS Case 2019-D041) – “Assessing Contractor Implementation of Cybersecurity Requirements,” the DoD indicated that it was implementing a phased roll-out of CMMC, and that until September 30, 2025, the inclusion of clause 252.204-7021 in solicitations or contracts would require approval by the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (USD(A&S). Can the Government provide clarity around its intent in including this CMMC requirement within the larger IDIQ, to include confirmation that its use has been approved by the USD(A&S)? | |||||
| 8 | Page 62 | 2.0 ELECTRONIC |
PROPOSAL
FORMAT Section/ Paragraph
| 2.0 | Under the Q&A responses, Item #3. Page 62. 2.0 Electronic Proposal Format. Section/Paragraph 2.0. The question asks; “Instructions provide guidance for Graphs which differ from Graphics or illustrations such as Organization Chart and process graphs. Can graphics or illustrations be presented in no smaller than a 10 pt font with no grid?” The Government’s response was; “10 pt font is only allowed when a grid is present.” | Given the limited page count, the large volume of information we are being asked to provide, and most Proposal standards, we would like to request that all Tables and Figures can utilize the 10 pt font | ||||
| 9 | Page 66 | L | Part B - 1.6 | Note 1: The SB Subcontracting Plan must be submitted to be eligible for award; however, the acceptability of the SB Subcontracting Plan content will be assessed separately. Therefore, changes to the SB Subcontracting Plan to correct issues may occur after selection of the successful Offeror, during the contract award process, and will not be considered a part of discussions. | NDAA 2013 requires that a SB Plan includes dollar amounts, however, please confirm that as this is an IDIQ MAC and no pricing is required that percentages will be sufficient. | |
| 10 | Page 69 | L | 2.0 Volume 2: Past Performance | Under the Q&A responses, Item #13 the response to the question was "The Offeror shall submit two Past Performances for each subcontractor" | Please confirm that Past Performance for Subcontractors is optional and that it may be "up to" 2 submittals for each subcontractor. | |
| 11 | Item 31 (4/9/21) | Q&A RESPONSES | Compensation Plan | The Government's response is as follows: The provision found at FAR 52.222-46 -- Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees, |
if applicable per FAR 22.1103, requires Offerors, as part of their proposals, to submit a total compensation plan setting forth salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract. This requirement does not distinguish between Prime and Subcontractor “professional employees who will work under the contract,” but states: submit a total compensation plan for the professional employees who will work under the contract.
Although the provision at FAR 52.222-46 is silent with respect to flow down, it should be noted that the Prime Contractors are responsible for the actions of their subcontractors, as well as meeting proposal compliance obligations.
Clarifying language for submitting subcontractors Total Compensation Plans separately has been added in Section L, Part A, 2.0, paragraph 3, sentences 3-7. In item 31 of the Q&A responses released 4/9/21 it mentions setting forth the salaries and fringe benefits for the proposed professional employees – as there is no cost proposal and therefore no salaries is it the government’s intent that we should list the PM’s salary and fringe benefits (cost information) in the Compensation Plan? For subcontractors who are not proposing staff at this time, please confirm that salaries are not required for subcontractor Compensation Plan(s). It is the Government's intent that salary and fringe benefits shall be included in the Compensation Plan for all professional staff. Sections 3.14.4 and 3.14.5 of the PWS have been updated to show more clearly which labor categories are considered by the Government to be professional staff and are designated with a BLS Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) Code in the far right column of 3.14.5. The Offeror shall be include these labor categories for both the prime contractor and the subcontractors in the Compensations Plan. The table in the Level of Effort, Section B of the RFP has been updated to correspond to the updates applied in the PWS.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .