Q_A_-_DOCUMENT_2.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 13 KB Posted
- Attached to
- ENTERPRISE ARCHITECTURE SUPPORT SERVICES Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- PBGC01-RP-16-0001
- Issued by
- Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation
About this file
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| Q__A_-_DOCUMENT_3_18_2016.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| AMENDMENT_03_-_signed.pdf | ||
| AMENDMENT_2_-_3_17_2016_-_SIGNED.pdf | ||
| Attachment_4_-_03_15_2016.pdf | ||
| LABOR_CATEGORIES-03_15_2016.pdf | ||
| AMENDMENT_I_-_03_15_2016_-_signed.pdf | ||
| Attachment_1.pdf | ||
| Attachment_4.pdf | ||
| FormSF1449_-_02_26_2016_PM.pdf | ||
| Attachment_2.pdf | ||
| Attachment_3.pdf |
Show all 11
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
| Question # | Question: | Answer: |
| 41 | The labor category “Security SME” and 1,880 estimated hours appears as line 8 in the pricing tables for each of the four option periods. It does not appear In the Base Year Period of Performance: 08/18/2016-08/17/2017 pricing table. Did the government intend to include the labor category “Security SME” with estimated hours 1,880 as line 8 in the base year period of performance pricing table? | See response to question #40 above. |
| 42 | In attachment 4, Why does the EA lead have more than the regular project working hours of 3760? Does this mean there is a need of second enterprise architect lead? | On occasion, we may have several task orders awarded simultaneously. Each task order needs one EA lead. |
| 43 | In the labor category minimum requirements on Page 29, point 7, it is mentioned that Security SME is a non-key person. Whereas in attachment 4 there is no mention of Security SME. Will there be any amendments that will reflect changes? | See response to question #40 above. |
| 44 | Is this requirement on schedule to execute a contract with the selected vendor doing the current fiscal period? | Yes. |
| 45 | As you know, Battle Resource Management, Inc., (BRMi) is the incumbent for these services - PBGC01-D-11-0010. As such, are you accepting a solicitation from the incumbent, BRMi, for this new RFP, PBGC01-RP-16-0001? Or, from PBGC’s perspective, does BRMi have a conflict of interest? | PBGC will accept proposals from vendors that follow the instructions outlined in the solicitation and address all the evaluation criteria listed in section M. |
| 46 | Page 3 of 63 – Page 4 of 63 provides a period of performance date of 08/18/2016-08/17/2017. Page 22 of 63, Section F1. Period of Performance lists mm/dd/2016 – mm/dd/2017. Would the Government please confirm the period of performance? | The future contract will have one base year and four (4) option years. |
| 47 | Page 28 of 63, Data Architect Lead states, “…with Data Integration Developer…” Please clarify if the Data Integration Developer is a Government staff member? | Data Integration Developer can be federal staff or other contractor in the development area. |
| 48 | Page 37, section H.6 states, “PBGC has identified the following personnel who will be held responsible for the duration of the contract.” With this being an ID/IQ, and proposing contract Key personnel without an awardable “Task Order” how does PBGC expect small businesses to support this ID/IQ requirement? Should this clause only be applicable to an “Awarded” Task Order? | This clause is applicable to the IDIQ. |
Sheet2
Sheet3
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .