QTA0016AWA0001_-_Q R__2.pdf

VETS 2 GWAC

QTA0016AWA0001

QUESTION AND RESPONSE DOCUMENT #2

Thank you for your interest in VETS 2.

In addressing questions it is the Government’s position that if the solicitation’s position is self-evident, the response to a question may simply be that the solicitation already addresses the matter in the manner the Government intended for it to be addressed, or “The solicitation is clear”.

While the Government may include one or more specific solicitation passages in a response to a question, interested parties are reminded that section L.3 of the solicitation states, “Offerors are instructed to read the entire solicitation document, including all attachments in Section J, prior to submitting questions and/or preparing an offer. Omission of any information from the proposal submission requirements may result in rejection of the offer.”

Questions were not extensively edited for grammar, punctuation or spelling. Not every question is shown. Only those questions, or portions of questions, that were deemed frequently asked and/or those that were deemed to benefit the procurement process are shown.

Questions and responses are organized into topic areas shown below. Interested parties stand to benefit from reviewing all statements, questions, and responses.

• Contractor Teaming Arrangements

• Cost/Price

• Organizational Risk

• Other

• Past Performance

• Preproposal Conference

• Proposal Submission

• Relevant Experience

• Representations & Certifications

• SDVOSB Set-Aside

• Systems, Certifications, and Clearances

This is the second Question and Response Document. The first was posted on May 2, 2016.

Additional Question and Response Documents will be posted to FBO as appropriate. It is the responsibility of the offerors to periodically check the solicitation on FBO for more information.

As a reminder, Offerors shall address all questions via e-mail to the VETS 2 GWAC PCO at VETS2@gsa.gov. All questions must be submitted in the format identified in L.3.5 of the solicitation.

mailto:VETS2@gsa.gov

Contractor Teaming Arrangements Q&R # Question Response

2.1

Do all subcontractors need to be included in this proposal or can subcontractors be after contract award?

Section L.5.1.3.2 of the solicitation provides the conditions for utilizing subcontractors within a VETS 2 proposal.

As stated in Section G.16 of the solicitation, The Government has not pre-approved any subcontractors in making awards for the Master Contract. If a Contractor proposes a subcontractor for work performed under an Order, the Contractor must comply with FAR 52.244-2 and FAR 44.2. It is recommended offerors review this clause to understand when consent to subcontract is required at the task order level.

2.2

Section G.16.1 discusses the limitations on subcontracting. Can non-SDVOSBs be included within a proposal, so long as SDVOSBs provide at least 50% of the services?

Section G.16.1 describes the limitations on subcontracting following contract award.

Section L.5.1.3 provides the requirements for utilizing a Contractor Teaming Arrangement for your VETS 2 proposal.

2.3

For L.5.1.3.2, if the Prime is bidding with a subcontractor, is there a date that the Government needs to see the evidence of a previous Prime-sub contractual agreement?

It is evident section L.5.1.3.2 includes no requirement for a previous agreement. L.5.1.3.2(4) provides the requirements for submission of a Subcontractor Letter of Commitment for each proposed subcontractor.

2.4

Can a Prime offeror team with another company they have previously supported as a subcontractor on contract? Or is the Prime offeror only allowed to bring on a subcontractor they have previously executed with when the offeror was the Prime on one of the offeror’s own Prime contracts?

The solicitation is clear. Section L.5.1.3.2 identifies the conditions for including proposed subcontractors within a proposal.

2.5

Will GSA accept a formal Contractor Team Arrangement as defined in FAR Subpart 9.6 as a partnership (but not as a Joint Venture) in order to claim evaluation elements held by CTA team members for the VETS 2 solicitation?

The solicitation is clear. Section L.5.1.3.1 identifies the conditions for submitting a proposal as a partnership or joint venture.

2.6 Must a Section K be submitted from each JV member company?

Section L.5.1.3.1 is clear with the requirements for offering as a joint venture.

2.7 Please clarify the submission requirements provided in L.5.1.3.1 and L.5.7.1 for relating to financial resources for populated joint ventures.

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Section L.5.7.1 has been updated.

2.8 Is it correct that the Prime alone is to submit rates and no rates are to be provided by any subcontractor?

The solicitation is clear with the Cost/Price proposal requirements.

2.9

What is the Government’s process for vetting and approving teammates, if none are included in the offeror’s proposal submission, upon contract award? What is the value to proposing as a sole offeror vs. proposing with a new business arrangement?

The solicitation is clear. As stated in Section G.16 of the solicitation, The Government has not pre-approved any subcontractors in making awards for the Master Contract. If a Contractor proposes a subcontractor for work performed under an Order, the Contractor must comply with FAR 52.244-2 and FAR 44.2. Suggest reviewing Section M.6 for the point values for each evaluation element.

2.10

L.5.1.3.2 Proposed Subcontractors, if applicable, #5 states “The offeror must submit a completed Attachment J.P-6 identifying the company that performed each Relevant Experience Project, the performing company’s relationship to the offer and their current SDVOSB status. Current SDVOSB status is based on the representation made in Section K for the proposal.”

Can the offeror use subcontractors that are not SDVOSB certified, i.e. VOSB?

Per 52.219-27, Offers are solicited only from service-disabled veteran-owned small business concerns.

Section L.5.1.3.2 states an offeror may agree with one or more other small businesses to have them act as its subcontractors under a potential VETS 2 award.

Section L.5.1.3.2 (5) is specific to completion of the Attachment J.P-6 and does not impose any restrictions on the type of small businesses that may be utilized as proposed subcontractors.

2.11

Approved DoD Mentor Protégé program participants are not discussed in the VETS 2 Solicitation. Will Large companies (Mentors) be allowed to provide past performance as a subcontractor to the SDVOSB Prime (protégé) firms?

The solicitation is clear. Suggest reviewing L.5.1.3.2 for the conditions applicable to proposed subcontractors.

Cost/Price Q&R # Question Response

2.12

Regarding B.11, will we be required to submit travel cost estimates as part of this proposal or for future task orders?

As stated in B.11, For those task orders requiring travel, the Contractor shall include estimated travel requirements in the proposal as required by the

OCO.

Section L.5.6 is clear with the Cost/Price proposal requirements and it is evident that no travel cost estimates are to be included within the VETS 2 proposal.

2.13

Do we need to provide OCONUS rates for this proposal? If not, then will be allowed to provide different rates for OCONUS work when it is required?

Section L.5.6 is clear with the Cost/Price proposal requirements. Suggest reviewing Section B.8.4 for applicability of master contract maximum rates.

As stated in B.12, "Individual task orders may identify pricing specific to work performed

OCONUS."

2.14

In the event that the requirements set forth in the labor category descriptions for future services exceed those provided at this stage, will higher rates be acceptable?

This question introduces a hypothetical post-award situation that cannot be definitively answered at this time. As stated in B.8.4, "The OCO is responsible for considering the level of effort and the mix of labor proposed to perform a specific task being ordered, and for determining price reasonableness in accordance with FAR 15.4, Pricing, and FAR 16.601, Time-and-Materials Contracts.

Based on the specific task order requirements, the OCO may determine pricing in excess of the maximum rates as fair and reasonable. Situations that may necessitate exceeding the established maximum rates include work outside the Contiguous United States or Top Secret security clearances.

In the rare instance that a Contractor must propose a rate in excess of a maximum rate, the Contractor shall provide the OCO with a detailed rationale supporting the rate. The OCO may consider this submitted rationale when evaluating whether to accept a proposed rate in excess of a maximum rate. "

2.15

Please verify that the CAF is not included in the maximum labor rates.

It is evident within the solicitation that the Contract Access Fee (CAF) is not included in the master contract maximum rates. As stated in B.8.4, the maximum rates include the direct labor cost, general and administrative expenses (G&A), overhead, fringe benefits, and profit.

2.16 Do any of the provided labor categories fall under

SCA?

Suggest reviewing Section B.10, Labor Subject to the Service Contract Labor Standards.

2.17

In the event a future Task Order has requirements which exceed those upon which the rates were developed, e.g. requiring TS or TS/SCI clearances, will the contractor be able to provide higher rates, than those submitted as the maximum ceiling rates for this submission?

Suggest reviewing Section B.8.4 for applicability of master contract maximum rates and situations that may necessitate exceeding the established maximum rates for specific task orders.

2.18

Can employee’s rates and labor categories performed in the Relevant Experience projects be considered “current” to fulfill the duties, if they are not still employed by our company?

The solicitation is clear. As stated in L.5.6.1, If an Offeror does not currently have employees to fulfill the duties under a labor category or labor categories, the Offeror must explain its methodology for establishing Prime Contractor labor rates for such categories.

2.19 On Attachment J.P-10, shouldn’t the reference under the header refer to Section L.5.6.2.1, instead of L.5.2.1 (page 1, under Attachment Title/Header)?

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. The reference has been updated within Attachment J.P-10.

2.20

Is it acceptable to combine the indirect elements of fringe, overhead, G&A, and profit/fee on our J.P-9 submission?

Suggest reviewing the Note within L.5.6.2.3 which states, Offerors with a different indirect rate structure than that identified in Columns D through F may adjust their columns accordingly.

Organizational Risk

2.21

Does an individual company offering as itself need to submit a file for Volume 5?

As stated in L.5.5.1, for scoring for this element, Within the J.P-5 Document Verification and Self Scoring Worksheet, the offeror shall identify if it has previously performed in the same business arrangement as proposed. No additional verification is required for an individual company offering as itself.

Other Q&R # Question Response

2.22

Do you need a GSA Schedule to be eligible to propose for this IDIQ? Do we have to use our GSA schedule (labor categories and rates)?

It is evident within the solicitation that this is not being competed through a GSA Schedule. Suggest reviewing L.5.6 for cost/price proposal requirements.

Past Performance Q&R # Question Response

2.23

Given that references for Past Performance must come from the list of Relevant Experience Projects, can the individual contractual past performance of current corporate officer(s), if being bid as Key Personnel, be used to fulfill the requirement of a Relevant Experience Project?

It is evident that the solicitation does not include any requirement for key personnel. Suggest reviewing L.3.1, Official Legal Bidding Entity, and L.5.2, Relevant Experience.

2.24

Do both the J.P-7 and J.P-8 forms need to be submitted if any of our PPIRS have an incorrect NAICS? Do both the signed J.P-7 and J.P-8 forms need to be submitted?

Suggest reviewing L.5.2.2.1.1 which provides the verification requirements for relevant experience submissions.

As stated in L.5.3, Only in the event PPIRS information is not available will an Offeror be allowed to submit Attachment J.P-8, Past Performance Rating Form.

Preproposal Conference Q&R # Question Response

2.25 We missed the preproposal teleconference. Will there be another?

No additional preproposal teleconference will be held. No slides were used and the teleconference was not recorded.

Proposal Submission Q&R # Question Response

2.26 We will need to submit additional information as described in the NOTE within L.3, in what section do we provide the additional information?

Any additional information shall be included with the evaluation criteria it is being submitted to support.

2.27 Should the table “ABC.VOL6.JP7COSTPRICE.xls” be titled “ABC.VOL6.JP9COSTPRICE.xls”?

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Several example filenames have been updated.

2.28

In the Proposal Format Table, the Verification Scoring Worksheet (Attachment J.P-5) has an File Name of ABC.VOL1.JP4. We believe the file name should be ABC.VOL1.JP5. Please clarify.

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Several example filenames have been updated.

2.29

In the Proposal Format Table, If there are multiple subcontractors, do we bundle all the letters of commitment into one file (ABC.VOL1SubLOC1) or do we submit a separate file for each subcontractor.

Please clarify.

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Several example filenames have been updated.

2.30

In the Proposal Format Table, the Joint Venture and Subcontractor Team Project Listing (Attachment J.P-6) has an File Name of ABC.VOL1.JPX. We believe the file name should be ABC.VOL1.JP6.

Please clarify.

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Several example filenames have been updated.

2.31

The RFP requests that an FPDS report be attached to the J.P-7 Relevant Experience Project Template.

However, the J.P-7 Template is a locked document and it is not possible to attach the FPDS report to the Template. Please explain how to attach the FPDS report to the J.P-7 Template.

The files should be merged into a single PDF file for submission.

2.32

If our customer is not will to return a signed Attachment J.P-8 to us for purposes of a Past Performance rating, can GSA provide guidance for our customer to submit the rating form(s) directly to you?

Section L.5.3.2 of the solicitation is clear, the Offeror must submit all Past Performance Rating Forms, as applicable, with their proposal submission.

2.33

Will the government reconsider the answer provided in Q&R 1, Response 1.10, and allow subcontractors to submit their completed Form 527 in a sealed envelope via the prime?

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Section L.4 has been updated to allow contractor teaming arrangements to submit separate DVD+R’s for Volume 7 – Responsibility within sealed envelopes for each team member.

Relevant Experience Q&R # Question Response

2.34 For L.5.2.2(3), by what date must the one year of performance be completed?

It is evident in L.5.2.2 that this is based on the date proposals are due.

2.35

RFP states at L.5.2.2, “2. No project may be used more than once.” Does this mean that a Prime Contractor that has been awarded successive contracts for the same Program, can only use this as one Relevant Experience Project (REP)? Or can both contracts, with separate unique Contract numbers, be cited as REPs?

Suggest reviewing L.5.2.1 for the definition of a relevant experience project. It is evident that the solicitation includes no restriction on separate contracts being submitted as separate relevant experience projects.

2.36

RFP states, “Each project must have at least one year of performance, unless one of the following situations exist….” Does this mean that a Contract that has a 3 Year Period of Performance that was awarded in September 2015, will not be allowable as a REP because it does not have at least one year of performance. Or does the requirement of “at least one year of performance” mean an Awarded PoP of more than one year?

The solicitation is clear. At least one year of performance must be completed by the proposal due date unless any of the listed exceptions apply.

2.37

In reading L.5.2.2.1.1, what do I need to submit as an award form for verification of work I performed as a subcontractor?

As stated in L.5.2.2.1.1, b. Copy of original contract award form, this may include the following: Non- Government Award Form (Must explicitly identify the Contractor, Non-Government Customer, Dollar Value, and the date the customer awarded/signed)

2.38

Paragraph 1 of Section L.5.2.2.1.1 asks that bidders include in their proposal submission a Federal Procurement Data System - Next Generation (FPDS-NG) Report that provides verification of all information included in Part I of the Attachment J.P- 7, Relevant Experience Project Template for each cited project. The FPDS-NG Contract Detail Report contains 164 columns of information. Is this the report the government wishes bidders to include? If so, can the government identify the relevant columns in the Contract Detail Report they would like bidders to include in their submission? If not, can the government please provide the report name for the FPDS-NG report they would like bidders to include with their submission?

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Attachment J.P- 12 provides additional information on the FPDS Report to be submitted.

2.39

The RFP requests that the attached FPDS report include the column that indicates “Multiple-Award IDV” within the “Multiple Or Single Award IDV” field.

Please identify which FPDS report includes the "Multiple Or Single Award IDV" column. In our experience, the FPDS contract details report has a column titled "Award Type" that specifies if the award is a definitive contract, delivery order, or a purchase order, but does not specify if it is a Multiple Award IDV or a Single Award IDV.

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Attachment J.P- 12 provides additional information on the FPDS Report to be submitted.

2.40

Please verify the report name available as referenced in the FPDS-NG. When accessing FPDS as a contractor, the FPDS report does not have all the data required in Section I of the JP-7 Relevant Experience document.

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Attachment J.P- 12 provides additional information on the FPDS Report to be submitted.

2.41

For a commercial contract reference used as Relevant Project Experience, how should we identify the appropriate Performance Area since commercial customers do not classify their contracts in accordance with NAICS?

As stated in L.5.2.2, the performance area claimed must have been the principal purpose of the project.

Verification of the claimed performance area must be submitted as detailed in L.5.2.2.1.1.

2.42 If a collection of task orders is submitted for a relevant experience project, which FPDS report should be used?

Suggest reviewing Amendment 1. Section L.5.2.2.1.1 has been updated to clarify this matter.

Representations & Certifications Q&R # Question Response

2.43

For Section K, Representations & Certifications, does the offeror only fill out its name, DUNS number, and K.3 since paragraph (d) applies?

Should a copy of SAM certifications be submitted?

The offeror shall submit Section K with its Name and DUNS. The Offeror shall also complete K.3, FAR 52.209-7. The offeror shall also review K.1, FAR 52.204-8(d) and follow the instructions within.

No copies of SAM.gov need to be submitted with a proposal.

SDVOSB Set-Aside

2.44 Is VETS 2 reserved for SDVOSB only, or can VOSB also act as a prime contractor?

This question was addressed in Q&R #1. Suggest reviewing question and response 1.23.

Systems, Certifications, and Clearances Q&R # Question Response

2.45

For L.5.4.1, would the government consider recognizing an accounting system that is DCA compliant as opposed to one that has been audited and verified?

The solicitation is clear. L.5.4.1 details the requirements to claim credit for Cost Accounting System and Audit Information.

2.46 Can we use a third-party CPA firm for our audit of our cost accounting system?

The solicitation is clear. L.5.4.1 details the requirements to claim credit for Cost Accounting System and Audit Information.