ProTech 2.0 Fisheries Draft RFP Feedback - Responses.pdf

ProTech 2.0 Fisheries Domain Questions and Answers Form Draft RFP

Questions and Answers The following answers are provided in response to all questions received by the deadline posted for the Draft RFP.

Section B, Supplies or Services and Price/Cost # Question Response 1 Section B pg 9 - Will the task order expressly state that project management support costs at the task order level can be included?

This depends on the order requirements and we can review our internal ordering guide to ensure proper guidance is included for the acquisition servicing divisions to reference.

Section C, Description/Specifications/Performance Work Statement # Question Response 2 C.3.1-C.3.6 - “Elements (Task Areas)” - Please would you confirm/clarify that a bidder does not have to have experience in all subsections for a chosen Section c.3 element (task area)?

The Offeror is not required to have experience in all elements (C.3.X.X) listed under a task area (C.3.X). However, an Offeror would need to demonstrate experience for each requirement listed within an element.

3 C.3.1.1- “Provide support for data calibration, conversion, coding and validation;

data quality assurance and quality control; and data stewardship and dissemination capabilities.” - Does a bidder have to demonstrate experience with each of the items or can exceptions be taken to one or more of the listed items?

Yes, an Offeror would need to demonstrate experience for each requirement listed within an element. If an Offeror does not demonstrate experience for each requirement within an element, this will decrease confidence.

How does NOAA define a scope element being involved in a contract as far as technical corporate expertise?

When demonstrating technical corporate experience, vendors should identify their team's experience performing the entirety of a scope element to signify they meet the requirements of the scope element. Providing additional instances (contracts) is viewed as providing more depth and breadth and may increase confidence.

5 Task areas do not include facilitation services (e.g., providing third-party, neutral facilitation services, developing meeting ground rules, employing tested participation techniques that work toward building consensus (if that is the intended goal of the meeting) and collecting input from all participants).

However, Task Orders for these services were implemented for ProTech Fisheries 1.0, so we assume that 2.0 may also include Task Orders for these services. If so, they need to be added to the Task Areas and Labor Categories.

Facilitation has been purposely left out of the 2.0 scope. There was little use of it under 1.0 and there are other contract vehicles available for facilitation services.

Veterinary Services are included as a separate labor category, but there is no mention of veterinary services under Task Areas. Note that the RFP for 1.0 had a specific Task Area for veterinary services.

The Veterinary Services labor category has had limited use in ProTech 1.0 with C.3.3.6 devoted to the service and C.3.3.1 also providing scope. In the ProTech 2.0 scope, NOAA has limited its scope need for veterinary services. C.3.3.1 of 2.0 retains scope for animal husbandry and response to stranding events, both of which may require a licensed veterinarian depending on the needs of the task order. ProTech 2.0 will retain the Veterinary Services labor category in support of the limited veterinary scope need related to C.3.3.1.

7 C.3.5.2 should also include Letters of Authorization which is another option for MMPA permit type in addition to Incidental Harassment Authorizations.

Thank you for the comment and this element has been revised.

Section D, Packing and Marking None

Section E, Inspection and Acceptance None

Section F, Deliveries or Performance None

Section G, Contract Administration Data # Question Response 8 G.2.1 - Should NOAA mention who will be the ProTech Fisheries PM and describe his/her roles There are only two roles, Contracting Officer and Contracting Officer's Representative (COR), assigned at the IDIQ levelt. Section G.2.1.2 will include the name of the COR for the ProTech Fisheries Domain. The COR interfaces with the main client, NMFS and is the liaison between the line office and the IDIQ contractors. Please note that Section H.3 for newly added information regarding the IDIQ Manager.

9 G.2.1.2 - List completion of IDIQ CPARS under the COR responsibilities Revised this section to incorporate CPAR feedback.

10 G.10.d.6 - misspelling "S. Government" This was meant to say "U.S. Government" and has been corrected.

Section H, Special Contract Requirements # Question Response

H.14 - Will NOAA not require the IDIQ Project Manager as Key Personnel?

That is correct. There will not be any key personnel incorporated at the IDIQ level; however, there must be an IDIQ Manager identified at time of offer and throughout the ordering period of the contract. This requirement has been added as Section H.3.

12 H.15.b.2 - web link does not work This will be corrected.

Section I, Contract Clauses

# Question Response 13 Section I 52.223-16: Under what circumstances, if any, would the Contractor need to provide computers for contractor personnel that would meet the requirements of 52.223-16 (b)?

Upon further review, the chance of FAR 52.223-16 being applicable at the order level is very low. Therefore, this clause will be removed and if needed, can be incorporated at the order level.

Section J, List of Attachments None

Section K, Representations, Certifications and other Statements of Offerors None

Section L, Instructions, Conditions, and Notices to Offerors # Question Response 14 L.11.4.1.Part 3 - Will NOAA limit corporate experience to a set number of years? Yes, experience must be performed within the past five (5) years. See Section L.11.2.2.

15 Please define last 5 years - from date of Final RFP? Date of submission? Within the past five years of the proposal due date.

16 Who will be participating on management orals in Phase 2 from NOAA? Individuals participating in the evaluation process of Factor III.

17 Please clarify how the DEIA plan requested differs from the Affirmative Action

Plan that vendors are currently required to have in place.

The DEIA Plan requirement will not be included in the final RFP.

18 L.10 (pg 82) Phase 1 and Phase II instructions regarding volumes doesn’t align with volumes referenced in L.11.1 table. Please confirm which Volume roman numeral numbers are associated with which volumes.

This will be corrected.

Does the Uncompensated Overtime Policy apply only to direct charge employees working and funded under a 2.0 ProTech Fisheries task order?

Yes. Per FAR 52.237-10, uncompensated overtime means the hours worked without additional compensation in excess of an average of 40 hours per week by direct charge employees who are exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act.

20 If an offeror responds as a Joint Venture (JV), we recommend further instructions and clarification in the final RFP for volume requirements, specifically regarding the definition of “Prime Offeror.” For example, for Section IV – Representations and Certifications, clarification is needed on if the Representations and Certifications is needed solely for the JV or if needed for the individual JV members as well. This also applies to Section III – CAGE, Unique Entity ID and TIN, in which a Prime Offeror must submit financial documents and evidence of an adequate accounting system. Clarification is needed on if the financial documents must be submitted from both JV members and if the adequate accounting system can be provided by one JV member.

Thank you and this will be clarified in the final RFP.

21 For Volume IV Management Approach, Part 1 – Oral Presentation, the draft RFP only allows three (3) total offeror participants from the Prime Offeror to attend.

Can the Government please consider allowing team member representatives (subcontractor or CTA) to participate in the Oral Presentation?

Thank you and we will take this into consideration.

22 RFP L.11.4.3, Volume V – Past Performance, page 96. First paragraph, first sentence requires past performance information for up to eight (8) contracts.

Considering small business contracts may be limited in scope relevant to the PWS, small businesses may be challenged with referencing the depth need to score higher technically with the limited number of contracts. Will the Government consider increasing the maximum number of contracts for past performance?

The limit remains unchanged.

23 L.10 General Instructions -“2. Phase Two – Evaluation of Written Proposals and Selection. This phase requires a further written submission (Volumes II, IV, and V) and an oral presentation.” - Should Volume II actually be Volume III?

This will be corrected in the final RFP.

24 Should Volume VI be added to this list? Volume IV is the oral presentation.-So, should this list be Volumes III, IV, V, and VI?

This will be corrected in the final RFP.

25 L.11.1 Format- “Offeror’s proposals must consist of Volumes I through V, as set forth in the below Table.” -Should sentence say Volumes I through VI?

This will be corrected in the final RFP.

26 L.11.1 Format Phase One, Volume III has M.4.1.1 reference. Phase Two - Volume III has M.4.1.2, Volume V has M.4.3. There is no DRFP Section M.4.1.1.

Should this reference be M.4.2.1? There is no DRFP Section 4.1.2. Should this be M.4.1.3? There is no DRFP Section M.4.3. Should this be M.4.4?/L.11.1 Format “Offeror’s proposals must consist of Volumes I through V, as set forth in the below Table.”

This will be corrected in the final RFP.

27 “1. a. Example: (company name) – (TBD) -Ph1 -Vol1.pdf” In the table on page 84, Volume I-Administrative uses the Roman numeral format for the number 1 and Phase One is written in full rather than represented by a number. In the example regarding naming convention the conventions used in the table are not adhered to. Which numbering convention should be used, the table or the example?

The example has been revised to align with the table format.

28 L.11.4.3 Volume V -- Past Performance, Section I is called Reference Information. Section II is called Contract Description and Performance. Section III is called Past Performance Assessment Questionnaire. Section I is called Contract Descriptions. Section II is called Performance. Section III is called Past Performance Questionnaire. Which section names are correct?

This will be corrected in the final RFP.

29 There is a two-page limitation for Section II Contract Description and Performance in DRFP L.11.4.3. Would it be possible to allow more pages because contract descriptions and narratives of up-to-eight contracts could well exceed two pages?

This will be taken into consideration.

30 L.4.3 PPQ: (Attached J-5) - Should read PPQ (Attachment J-5)? This has been revised.

31 Will NOAA provide Attachment J-5? This will be included in the final RFP.

32 L.8.1- “Communications concerning this solicitation or requests for clarification shall be made in writing to Erika Chavarria , erika.chavarria@NOAA.gov and Virginia Scott, virginia.scott@noaa.gov. “Offerors shall submit questions regarding this solicitation using the following Google Form link (please copy and paste this into your browser):”-Please would you clarify what you mean by communications submitted by email versus the questions submitted via Google Form?

Section revised for clarity.

33 L.8.1 “Please be advised that questions that do not have the appropriate reference information may not be answered.”-What is the “appropriate reference information”

The "appropriate reference information" is the particular RFP section in question.

34 Page 82, Bullets listed as 1. and 2.: These volumes don't match what's in the Section L.11.1 table This will be corrected.

35 Page 84, Phase 1 table: Based on Section M, this should be M.4.2.1 for tech corporate experience This will be corrected.

36 Page 85, Phase 2 table: Reference column has incorrect sections listed This will be corrected.

Section M, Evaluation Factors for Award # Question Response 37 Is the recruitment capabilities evaluation a combination of phase 1 three page write up and DEIA ten page plan in totality? Given the importance of recruiting will the government consider more than three pages to outline companies recruitment capabilities and practices?

The recruitment capabilities are an aspect of the Offeror's management approach that the Government would like to consider for the advisory down-select. After consideration, we will increase the page limit from three to four.

38 In the NOAA ProTech 2.0 Fisheries Domain Industry slides, slide 12 of the Draft RFP Review, states that relevancy for Factor IV – Past Performance (PP) is a “project that is similar in size, scope, and complexity to this requirement. The sizes for the majority of Fisheries Domain Task Orders are between $1 million and $10 million.” However, in the draft RFP, pg. 107, relevancy for Volume V – PP (Factor IV) states that “Fisheries Domain Task Orders range in size between $100,000 and $10,000,000.” In the final RFP, we recommend clarification and consistency on the task order contract values required for past performance relevancy, as this is a drastic difference in contract value. The awarded task orders for the current NOAA ProTech Fisheries Domain, listed via the NOAA ProTech website, lie between the $100,000 and $10,000,000 contract value range. To be inclusive of similar scope projects held by small businesses, we recommend the use of the $100,000 and $10,000,000 contract value range.

That was an oversight and the RFP will outline a range of $100,000 and $10,000,000.

39 M.4 Technical Evaluation - The following table shows the ratings the Government will adding in its evaluation of offers when evaluating Factors I, II (Phase Two) and III. Should Factor II (Phase Two) be Factor III (Phase Two)?

Yes and this will be corrected, 40 M.4.1.3 Phase Two To evaluate Factor II (Phase Two), the Government will review the information contained in the Offeror’s Volume II –Parts 2 and 3 Should the Offeror’s Volume II be the Offeror’s Volume III?

This will be corrected.

41 There is no section M.3. This will be corrected.

42 There is a numbering error in this entire section so the sections are not all numbered correctly. This will be corrected.

43 Page 103: Technical Corporate Experience Self-Assessment Matrix - The dropdown choices will include "one project", "two projects", etc. How does NOAA define "project" here? Or is it up to the Offeror to define what they mean by "project"? For example, can a "project" be a task order? [Note that task orders can often have multiple projects.]

The definition will be included in the final RFP.

Attachment J-1, Labor Categories

# Question Response 44 The levels contained in this draft solicitation are much more functional than the previous version with only 3 levels. It will allow us to provide much more reasonable price categories and flexibility in responding to solicitations.

Thank you for the feedback.

Will the Service Contract Act be applicable to task orders under PTF 2.0?

There is the chance that services subject to the Service Contract Labor Standards (formerly known as the Service Contract Act of 1965) may be incidental at the order level. If that occurs, the Task Order Contracting Officer shall incorporate the applicable wage determination into the TO solicitation.

46 Task areas do not include facilitation services (e.g., providing third-party, neutral facilitation services, developing meeting ground rules, employing tested participation techniques that work toward building consensus (if that is the intended goal of the meeting) and collecting input from all participants).

However, Task Orders for these services were implemented for ProTech Fisheries 1.0, so we assume that 2.0 may also include Task Orders for these services. If so, they need to be added to the Task Areas and Labor Categories.

The work of Facilitators is very specialized; this labor category is not currently supported by any of the labor categories for 1.0 or in the draft for 2.0. Note that standard rates for Facilitators are normally much higher than other environmental consultants and, therefore, should have a separate labor category.

See the response to question #5.

47 Do veterinary labor categories need to be included since there is no mention of veterinary task areas?

See the response to question #6.

Attachment J-2, Sample Monthly Contract Progress Report None

Attachment J-4, Technical Corporate Experience Self Assessment and Validation Matrix # Question Response 48 Please define “project”. Is project defined at the task order or contract line-item number level?

See the response for Question #43.

49 Can experience be claimed for subcontractors where the subcontractor is named in the winning proposal as the responsible party for providing project management for the task order but the work is performed by the prime?

This will be clarified in the final RFP.

50 Specific work duties on task orders can change over the course of the task order’s period of performance, including option years. In determining 5-year relevancy, can experience be claimed for duties performed at the beginning of a task order that are no longer performed at the end of a task order? For example, a single task order performs task A more than five years ago and task B less than five years ago. Can both task A and B be claimed as experience because the period of performance ended less than five years ago?

Yes, as long as the experience being proposed was performed within the past five (5) years from proposal due date.

51 Do we need to address every point in a subpoint to claim experience? For example “provide support for data calibration, conversion, coding and validation;

data quality assurance and quality control; and data stewardship and dissemination capabilities.”

See the response to question #3.

52 Please confirm there is no way to capture both prime and team experience and that team experience is only rated when prime has no experience.

This will be clarified in the final RFP.

53 Is there meant to be a second tab in J4 (validation matrix) to be used only in phase 2?

Yes and it will be included in the final RFP.

54 In completing Volume III – Part I – Technical Corporate Experience Self- Assessment Matrix, offerors are only required to list whether they themselves as the prime or if the team possesses experience, including the number of similar projects in alignment with the PWS elements. With this project information not being verified until Phase Two, scoring may be skewed with offerors not receiving an advisory notice to proceed to Phase Two due to the overall breadth and depth score, while offerors with higher scores are instructed to proceed to Phase II with projects that may not be deemed relevant or recent. We recommend inclusion of further validation in Phase One.

We will take this into consideration.

55 How does NOAA define extensive experience? This will be defined in the final RFP.

Attachment J-5, Cost/Price Template for Ceiling Rates - PHASE 2 ONLY

None General question(s)/comment(s) not applicable to any specific section or attachment in the Draft RFP:

# Question Response 56 I would recommend that in addition to identifying the primary NAICS code, that

NOAA also identify the non-primary NAICS codes associated with the work (e.g., 541620 and 541690). This will help ensure that all of the businesses that provide those services, which make up a large portion of the work under ProTech, will appropriately be aware that this work is included under the master contract.

Per FAR 19.102(b)(2)(1), this solicitation will only have a single NAICS assigned as it will be issued before October 01, 2022.

57 Also, it was mentioned in the industry day phone call that relevant experience would need to be work from 1,000,000 to 10,000,000, though on page 90 it describes the range as 100,000 to 10,000,000. The range from page 90 seems like an appropriate range for small businesses in these NAICS categories. I am not sure where the confusion came from, but I definitely think that the range of 100,000 and above is more appropriate than a $1,000,000 minimum threshold given the size of awards under the current ProTech contract.

See the response to question #38.

58 During the April 6 Industry Day a slide presented defined relevant past contract experience as having a value from $1M to $10M. In the Draft RFP the size of anticipated Task Orders is $100K to $10M. A $1M threshold is a high bar for small businesses. Would the Government lower the threshold from $1M to $100K to align with anticipated Task Order size.

See the response to question #38.

59 Will NMFS also be evaluating our DE&I plan during Phase 1? No.

60 Does NOAA need to address/include the market research refresh opportunities at the IDIQ level that it currently conducts in the new ProTech RFP?

Thank you for that feedback and we will add this information to Section G.

61 In regards to size of business concern, when is the size determined? At time of proposal submission or at time of contract award?

Per FAR 19.102(c), the size standard in effect would the company size on the date the solicitation is issued.

62 Please confirm expected time of award and what will happen during the overlap between 1.0 (ending 9/29/23) and 2.0.

The expected time of award for ProTech 2.0 Fisheries is September 2023. While we do not anticipate an overlap, should the need to exercise 52.217-8 for the current contracts arise, the ordering period for 2.0 contracts will begin at the end of the current period of performance.

63 The entire DRFP is not searchable, give the reader the ability to highlight, copy/paste, etc. Would it be possible to release a FRFP that has these features?

Yes. The final RFP will converted into a searchable format.

64 For Past Performance, it was noted during the Industry Day that CPARS would not be accepted as they were for the Pro-S Domain 2.0. Is there any flexibility with this, as getting POCs to complete PPQs can be challenging for contractors.

Thank you for this feedback and we will take it into consideration.

65 The document was difficult to export out of PDF format. Understood and the final RFP will be in a more user-friendly format.

66 Please make sure that the final RFP is a searchable PDF. Yes. The final RFP will converted into a searchable format.