Questions_Responses_1_from_Draft_RFP_15JUN26_SAMgov_Posting.pdf

General Reference location Question/ Assumption / Comments Response

Does Human Resources Solutions envision future

RMAS task orders that may require workflow automation or case management capabilities supporting personnel securityrelated functions such as onboarding, access authorization, or workforce vetting?

Security Related functions could be performed as an ancillary task under business management services but historically has not been a primary function under

RMAS.

Will future task orders potentially involve contractor onboarding, DISS-related activities, clearance eligibility tracking, suitability processing, or Trusted

Workforce related requirements?

Security Related functions could be performed as an ancillary task under business management services but historically has not been a primary function under

RMAS.

Are there anticipated requirements where integration between Human Resources functions and personnel security processes may be beneficial, particularly for managing contractor or workforce lifecycle activities?

Security Related functions could be performed as an ancillary task under business management services but historically has not been a primary function under

RMAS.

From your perspective, are there specific mission areas within RMAS where a company specializing in

Personnel Security automation and workforce onboarding workflows would be best positioned to support prime contractors or the Government?

Security Related functions could be performed as an ancillary task under business management services but historically has not been a primary function under

RMAS.

We understand that H2F is moving under PAE

Ground Manuever. Will the recompete for H2F task order be recompeted under this IDIQ or move to one managed by PAE GM?

We currently work hand in hand with PAE Maneuver Ground and are set to continue this relationship. The contract strategy for future H2F requirements is undetermined at this time based on many influencing factors.

Will the Ready and Resilient (R2) task order (formerly

Master Resilence Training (MRT) be consolidated under the H2F task order for the recompete?

The future acquisition strategy for the Master Resilience Trainers is undetermined at this time.

What is the maximum number of QCs that can be used?

Refer to the specific criteria within Section L of the draft RFP (L.2.1, L.2.1.4.1, L.2.1.4.1.1, L.2.1.4.1.2, L.2.1.4.1.3). It's the responsibility of the Offeror determine what they deem necessary to meet the RFP requirements and abide by the required page limitations set forth with Section L.

Can a QC be used for more than one Task Category? Yes, however it's the responsibility of the Offeror to clearly outline how the provided QC demonstrates the Offeror's ability to meet the evaluation criteria requirements.

What is the maximum number of past performances that can be used?

As stated in L.2.1.5, "Past performance information for all QCs submitted under the

Technical Factor above AND any additional Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime Offeror in performance of awarded during the past five (5) years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation." Additionally, any submissions shall meet the recency and relevancy definitions as stated in M.3.2.2 b) . Additionally Offerors are required to abide by the required page limitations set forth with Section L.

Can we provide additional past performances beyond what is provided to match our QCs?

As stated in L.2.1.5, "Past performance information for all QCs submitted under the

Technical Factor above AND any additional Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime Offeror in performance of awarded during the past five (5) years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation." Additionally, any submissions shall meet the recency and relevancy definitions as stated in M.3.2.2 b) . Additionally Offerors are required to abide by the required page limitations set forth with Section L.

Can PPQ’s come from a prime contractor vs. only the government?

As stated in L.2.1.5.5 for RMAS: "For all contracts identified in Past Performance

Factor Volume II, L.2.1.5.1 Section 1, Contract Descriptions, a Past Performance

Questionnaire must be completed and submitted. The Offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to both the

Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past / current contract. The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete

Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the cognizant

Contracting Office no later than the proposal due date, to michele.l.walston.civ@army.mil, jacqueline.m.smith95.civ@army.mil, and morgan.f.ziatyk.civ@army.mil."

As stated in L.2.1.5.5 for PLS: "For all contracts identified in Past

Performance Factor Volume II, L.2.1.5.1 Section 1, Contract Descriptions, a Past

Performance Questionnaire must be completed and submitted. The Offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to both the Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past / current contract. The POCs shall be instructed to electronically complete Part II of the questionnaire and e-mail the entire questionnaire to the cognizant Contracting Office no later than the proposal due date, to rodolphe.a.primeau.civ@army.mil, and karyn.a.bohli.civ@army.mil."

Do Small Business offerors need to provide a small business participation plan?

If your question is in reference to FAR 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting

Plan, these are only required for large businesses. All offerors are required to submit on Small Business Particiaption Past Performance demonstrating compliance with FAR 52.219-8, reference L.2.1.5.7.

Is the sample Task Order an Awardable TOR? No. As stated within L.2.1.4.3 of the draft RFPs, "The Sample Task is representative of the types of tasks that may be solicited during the PLS IDIQ

MATOC period of performance and is intended solely for proposal evaluation purposes only."

Going into the next generation, how does HR

Solutions assess its own current competitive landscape among available contracting vehicles?

Based on historical utilization and performance we believe the HR Solutions vehicles will continue to be a viable source for requiring activities. Additionally the assisted acquisition and management services offered set us apart from our competitors.

How is HR Solutions differentiating from other Army vehicles, such as MAPS, and broader government options such GSA schedules, OASIS+, etc?

Our assisted acquisition and management services differentiates HR Solutions from other Army vehicles and broader government options.

HR Solutions is the designated preferred source for acquiring and managing HR service contracts in the

Army for the next generation. What barriers exist to achieving this designation again for Generation VI?

The designation for preferred source are tied to our program not specifically to the contract vehicles however we intent to work with DASA-P to renew the policy to ensure awareness.

Is there a minimum size (FTE or dollar value) that

HRS will require to accept task orders for competition on the HR Solutions PLS or RMAS IDIQ?

HRS assesses potential requirements when they come in to determine if the requirement would be appropriate to pursue at an enterprise level.

How does HR Solutions plan to market the vehicle beyond the Army and DOD? Are there task orders from other agencies in the pipeline?

For centrally managed task orders we will target organizations within DoW.

Decentralized ordering may be allowed for other requiring activities.

How many awards does the Army anticipate making for PLS and RMAS?

The Government intends to make multiple awards under both suites as stated within M.1 of the draft RFPs, and cannot share any additional information as to the number of awards.

Does achieving Green/Acceptable rating for the

Technical Factor and a Neutral or higher rating for the Past Performance Factor guarantee an award? In this scenario, what factors would result in no award?

As stated in M.1 of the draft RFPs, "The Government intends to make multiple awards in accordance with FAR 16.504-3. Award(s) will be made to all proposals that are deemed responsive, acceptable and qualifying in accordance with FAR

15.104(b)(1)(ii)(A) and the instructions contained within this RFP, with the Source

Selection Authority (SSA) giving appropriate consideration to the following two (2) evaluation factors: Technical and Past Performance." It further states, "The

Government will conduct an integrated assessment of each proposal to determine eligibility for award. To be considered for award, Offerors must receive a

Green/Acceptable rating for the Technical Factor and a Neutral or higher rating for the Past Performance Factor. Additionally, any other than small business Offeror must have an acceptable Small Business Subcontracting Plan to receive an award in accordance with FAR 19.109. Only those proposals that meet these standards across all factors will be eligible for award."

RMAS Reference location Question/ Assumption / Comments Response

Page 3, Paragraph 1 Question on Disclosure of Labor Rates (FOIA Risk):

The Draft PWS states that labor rates submitted at the TO level may be subject to FOIA release but can be protected under FAR 52.215 1(e).

Question:

Can the Government confirm whether fully burdened labor rates submitted in future task order competitions will be treated as source selection sensitive and therefore categorically exempt from release under 5

U.S.C. §552(b)(3) or §552(b)(4)?

Reference Section A, General Information Item #4 "Disclosure of Labor Rates and

Pricing Information (Task Order Level). "If an Offeror considers its labor rates, pricing methodologies, or associated financial data to constitute protected trade secrets or confidential commercial information exempt from disclosure under FOIA Exemption 4 (5 U.S.C. (S) 552(b)(4)), the Offeror must clearly mark the applicable portions of its proposal in accordance with the legend prescribed at FAR 52.215-1(e). In the event the Government receives a FOIA request for labor rates or pricing data that an Offeror has marked as confidential, the Government will strictly comply with the submitter notification and objection procedures set forth in Executive Order 12600 prior to making any disclosure determination."

Page 3, Paragraph 6 Question on eCRAFT Data Requirements: E2

(eCRAFT) is expected to be required for all cost type

CLINs.

Question:

Will the Government provide standardized labor category mappings, data definitions, or data dictionaries for the eCRAFT tool prior to the first task order competition?

As stated within Section A, paragraph 6 of the draft RFPs, "The ACC is in the process of deploying the Electronic Cost Reporting and Financial Tracking

(eCRAFT) Enterprise tool (E2) to all ACC organizations. E2 is a tool designed to enhance cost reporting and financial tracking utilizing standardized labor categories, authoritative data, and automated reports. E2 is expected to be deployed in Fiscal Year 2026 and its utilization is required for service contracts/orders that contain Cost type Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs). While pricing is not requested at the IDIQ level per Sections L and M of this solicitation, Offeror(s) are advised information listed within Section J, Attachment 0005 of this solicitation may be requested at the TO level for any requirements to which eCRAFT applies." Additionally, Section H.2 further discusses eCRAFT.

Page 17, Paragraph 2 (Local Travel) Question on Travel Outside 50 Mile Radius: Travel within 50 miles is not reimbursable unless specified in the TO.

Question:

Will the Government allow per TO exceptions for high density metro regions (e.g., NCR) where standard commuting distances exceed 50 miles?

As stated, if the radius varies for a requirement, specific terms will be identified at the task order level.

Volume II Past Performance instructions (Section L.2.1.5 and associated PPQ requirements) and

Section M Past Performance evaluation.

Past Performance. For PPQs, can CPARS be used as a substitute?

It is unclear what is meant by the question of CPARs being a substitue for PPQs.

As stated within paragraph M.3.2.2 of the draft RFPs, it states in part, "The

Government may use data provided by the Offeror in its proposal and data obtained from other sources, including Contractor Performance Assessment

Reporting System (CPARS), data from other Government systems and files or data obtained through interviews with personnel familiar with the contractor and their current and past performance under Federal, State or Local Government and/or commercial contracts for same or similar services as compared to the NAICS code

541612."

Section L.2.1.4.3 Sample Task, Page

184 and continuing.

Sample Task Evaluation. Will the Government confirm whether the Sample Task is evaluated solely for technical approach and understanding, or whether proposed staffing quantities and labor mix will also be evaluated?

Reference Section M 3.1.3 "The Government will evaluate the Offeror's adequacy, completeness and feasibility of their Technical Proposal for the Sample Task

PWS."

efficiency and innovation as discriminators under the Sample Task factor?

Section L.2.1.4.3.2 Staffing Approach, Page 184-185.

Sample Task Evaluation. Will the Government evaluate staffing efficiency and innovation as discriminators under the Sample Task factor?

Criteria for the Sample Task Staffing Approach is delineated under L.2.1.4.3.2 and

M.3.1.3.2.

Executive Summary, Section A, Page

4.

Evaluation Methodology. Will the Government provide additional details regarding the specific criteria used to determine whether an offeror is

"qualifying"?

Refer to M.1, Basis of Award which states in part, "The Government intends to make multiple awards in accordance with FAR 16.504-3. Award(s) will be made to all proposals that are deemed responsive, acceptable and qualifying in accordance with FAR 15.104(b)(1)(ii)(A) and the instructions contained within this RFP, with the Source Selection Authority (SSA) giving appropriate consideration to the following two (2) evaluation factors: Technical and Past Performance."

Attachment 0008 Past Performance

Questionnaire As part of this evaluation, we have requested that the Offerors provide information about their past performance on recent and relevant federal, state, or local

Government or commercial contracts as compared to the North American

Industry Classification System

(NAICS) 541612

Given the broad scope of 541612 and that both

RMAS and PLS fall under 541612, it would mean that projects could be equally relevant for both solicitations. Instead, would it be possible to include the specific high level PWS tasks for RMAS?

While both the RMAS and PLS draft RFPs utilize NACIS 541612, the Offeror is responsible for understanding the differences in the scopes for each suite to determine the relevancy of the submitted contract as defined under L.2.1.5, M.2.2 and M.3.2.

L.2.1.3 pg 178 Please confirm that the Summary Section does not count against page count.

Upon review of Section L.2.1.3 Content Requirement, the Government has identified areas of this section that require revisions. The Government intends to update "Summary Section" language requirements for this section prior to final

RFP release however the Government does not anticipate it counting against the page count.

L.2.1 pgs 175-177 and L.2.1.3 pg 178 L.2.1.3 states: “Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the

Narrative discussion.” However, the table in Section

L.2.1 does not show a TOC and Summary Section for each volume. Please confirm the TOC and Summary

Section requirement should be reflected in the table for each volume.

Upon review of Section L.2.1.3 Content Requirement, the Government has identified areas of this section that require revisions. The Government intends to update "Summary Section" language requirements for this section prior to final

RFP release.

L.2.1.6 pg 190 The instructions do not mention the Small Business

Subcontracting Plan (SBSP) that was listed in the

L.2.1 table. Please provide instructions for the SBSP.

For RMAS Specifically, Small Business Concerns are not required to submit a

Small Business Subcontracting Plan IAW FAR 19.109(e)(2), accordingly FAR

52.219-9 will not appear in the final RFP version.

RMAS SOW Where does the Government anticipate the greatest growth in requirements over the next five years?

Soldier health and fitness, holistic wellbeing functions are an Army priority.

RMAS SOW What percentage of future ordering activity is expected in each major RMAS functional area?

We do not have predictions by functional area.

RMAS Solicitation Does the Government intend to restrict a subcontractor or teaming partner from participating on multiple offeror teams at the IDIQ proposal stage, or may subcontractors support multiple prime offerors provided appropriate firewalls and non-disclosure protections are maintained?

The government will not limit prime contractors subcontract agreements.

Subcontractors are not limited to establishing a relationship with only one prime contractor.

RMAS Solicitation Would the Government clarify whether Prime

Contractors awarded an IDIQ contract may add, remove, or substitute subcontractors and teaming partners after award for purposes of competing for individual task orders, provided all applicable subcontracting and organizational conflict of interest requirements are satisfied?

Yes; however holders shall still abide by FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on

Subcontracting.

RMAS Solicitation May a company submit one proposal as a Prime

Contractor while also serving as a subcontractor on one or more other offerors’ proposals?

Yes

L.2.1.4. (f) pg 180 The instructions state: “Offerors shall submit supporting documentation to substantiate each corporate knowledge reference.” Please confirm documentation is not considered part of the page count.

Information submitted as part of your proposal is included within the page count unless specifically stated otherwise. Additionally, refer to L.2.1.4.1, specifically: In order to be deemed responsive, each submitted QC under the Corporate

Knowledge Subfactor shall contain the following supporting documentation to substantiate each contract: 1) Summary of Project and 2) Technical Relevancy

Narrative.

L.2.1.4. (f) pg 180 The instructions state: “Offerors shall submit supporting documentation to substantiate each corporate knowledge reference.” Please confirm documentation can be in an annex to Volume I.

Information submitted as part of your proposal is included within the page count unless specifically stated otherwise. Refer to L.2.1.4.1.

L.2.1.5.5 Section 5, Past Performance

Questionnaire

Per L.2.1.5.5 Section 5, Past Performance

Questionnaire: To reduce burden to our existing

Government clients, would RMAS allow for the submission of recently (e.g., within the last 24 months) completed and submitted Past Performance

Questionnaires for relevant bids?

Offerors may choose to submit contracts within the last 24 months, however recent is defined as within the past 5 years as stated in M.3.2.2.

L.2.1.4.2.1 Subfactor 2, Management

Approach

Per L.2.1.4.2.1 Subfactor 2, Management Approach:

To determine maximum past experience alignment for this requirement, would the Government please provide a working definition for the Outside of the

Continental United States (OCONUS) requirement, e.g., would support of Hawaii and Puerto Rico satisfy this requirement?

Per FAR 2.101 Contiguous United States means the 48 contiguous states and the

District of Columbia, so for example, Hawaii and Puerto Rico would be OCONUS locations.

PLS Reference location Question/ Assumption / Comments Response

Page 17–18, Paragraph C.2.3.2 Telework & Alternate Work Location Requirements:

the draft PWS discusses telework authorization and

COOP requirements.

Question:

Will the Government define, at the TO level, which positions are strictly on site versus telework eligible, and will a standard Government telework approval template be provided?

Place of performance will be identified in the task order PWS. Regular, reoccurring telecommuting (telework) may be authorized at the TO level depending on the nature of the work to be performed. The Government may permit telework by Contractor employees when determined to be in the best interest of the

Government in meeting TO requirements and mission needs.

Page 17, Paragraph C.2.3.1 Surge Support Requirements: surge support is identified but no quantitative thresholds are provided.

Question:

Can the Government clarify the expected frequency, duration, and magnitude of surge events for pricing and workforce planning?

Task orders will be firm fixed price, performance based and contractors may require surge support to meet the performance requirements within the awarded price. Surge support requirements would be identified at the task order level using optional tasks to execute as required.

Page 35, Paragraph C.2.13.6 Cyber Awareness and privileged access requirements are described.

Question:

Will the Government specify at the TO level which roles require privileged access certification under

DoDM 8140.03?

Yes

W15QKN26RA016, Section A

Executive Summary, Pages 3-4

Contract Award Strategy - Reserved Awards. The solicitation states that award will be made under a full and open competition with a portion of awards reserved for small businesses. How many awards does the Government anticipate making overall, and how many awards are anticipated to be reserved for small businesses?

The Government intends to make multiple awards under the PLS suite with a portion reserved for small businesses as stated within the draft RFP, and cannot share any additional information as to the number of overall awards or number of awards reserved for small businesses.

W15QKN26RA016, Section L

Proposal Instructions (Key Personnel

Resume Requirements) and Section

M Technical Evaluation

Key Personnel Evaluation. Will the qualifications of the Contract Manager and Alternate Contract

Manager be evaluated on a pass/fail basis, or as part of the Technical evaluation factor?

The Offeror's submitted qualifications will be evaluated on an acceptable or unacceptable basis as part of Technical section L.2.1.4.2.2 Subfactor 2, Staffing

Approach.

W15QKN26RA016, Section L Volume

II Past Performance Instructions

Past Performance Questionnaires. As an alternative to a PPQ, will CPARS and other Government performance records be sufficient?

As stated in L.2.1.5.5, "For all contracts identified in Past Performance Factor

Volume II, L.2.1.5.1 Section 1, Contract Descriptions, a Past Performance

Questionnaire must be completed and submitted. The Offeror shall complete Part I of the Past Performance Questionnaire and e-mail the questionnaire to both the

Government contracting activity and technical representative responsible for the past / current contract." It further states, "The Offeror shall also e-mail to the KO and both CS a list of all the POCs who were sent a questionnaire as part of the proposal submission. The Government must receive this list no later than the proposal due date."

W15QKN26RA016, Executive

Summary Page 2; Section B CLIN

Structure Pages 6-9

Task Order Contract Types. Does the Government anticipate any predominant contract type (FFP, FFP-

LOE, CPFF) for future task orders under this vehicle?

Historically FFP contract types have been utilized on PLS TOs; however the

Government reserves the right to utilize and solicit any of the contract types contained at the IDIQ contract at the TO level.

W15QKN26RA016, Section A

Executive Summary Page 4

Small Business Reservation. Will small business reserved awards be further allocated by socioeconomic category (8(a), HUBZone, SDVOSB, WOSB), or only by small business status?

As stated within M.1 of the draft RFP, "The Government intends to make multiple awards in accordance with FAR 16.504-3. Award(s) will be made to all proposals that are deemed responsive, acceptable and qualifying in accordance with FAR

15.104(b)(1)(ii)(A) and the instructions contained within this RFP, with the Source

Selection Authority (SSA) giving appropriate consideration to the following two (2) evaluation factors: Technical and Past Performance." For awards of the IDIQ contracts, a company must be a small business under NAICs 541612 to be determined a small business. Further allocations by socioeconomic category may be done at the TO level for future requirements.

W15QKN26RA016, Section C.2.1 and

C.2.1.1 Pages 11

Ordering Guide. The solicitation references a future

HR Solutions Decentralized Ordering Guide. Will that guide be released before proposal submission so offerors may understand future ordering procedures?

No guide is anticipated to be released at this time.

W15QKN26RA016, Attachment 0005, Executive Summary Page 3;

Attachment 0005 eCRAFT Requirements. The solicitation states eCRAFT information is not required at the IDIQ level.

Can the Government confirm that no eCRAFT attachments, labor mappings, or reporting templates are required with the IDIQ proposal submission?

As stated within Section A, paragraph 6 of the draft RFP, "The ACC is in the process of deploying the Electronic Cost Reporting and Financial Tracking

(eCRAFT) Enterprise tool (E2) to all ACC organizations. E2 is a tool designed to enhance cost reporting and financial tracking utilizing standardized labor categories, authoritative data, and automated reports. E2 is expected to be deployed in Fiscal Year 2026 and its utilization is required for service contracts/orders that contain Cost type Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINs). While pricing is not requested at the IDIQ level per Sections L and M of this solicitation, Offeror(s) are advised information listed within Section J, Attachment 0005 of this solicitation may be requested at the TO level for any requirements to which eCRAFT applies." Additionally, Section H.2 further discusses eCRAFT.

Attachment 0008 Past Performance

Questionnaire As part of this evaluation, we have requested that the Offerors provide information about their past performance on recent and relevant federal, state, or local

Government or commercial contracts as compared to the North American

Industry Classification System

(NAICS) 541612

Given the broad scope of 541612 and that both

RMAS and PLS fall under 541612, it would mean that projects could be equally relevant for both solicitations. Instead, would it be possible to include the specific high level PWS tasks for PLS?

While both the RMAS and PLS draft RFPs utilize NACIS 541612, the Offeror is responsible for understanding the differences in the scopes for each suite to determine the relevancy of the submitted contract as defined under L.2.1.5, M.2.2 and M.3.2.

L.2.1.5 VOLUME II - PAST

PERFORMANCE FACTOR.

"Relevancy"

"Relevancy" is considered any contract or TO award that has been awarded under NAICS code

541612 or similar efforts. Question: Currently there are task orders under the current IDIQ that have been awarded under the 541611 NAICs code - will similar efforts be considered equally or for consideration will the government change those task orders to align with the base IDIQ of 541612.

As stated within L.2.1.5 it states in part, "Relevancy is considered any contract or

TO award that has been awarded under NAICS code

541612 or similar efforts." It is the responsibility of the Offeror to describe the how the work performed under NAICS 541611 is considered relevant under NAICS

541612.

Can a Mentor-Protégé Joint Venture (JV) submit a bid for the HRS PLS requirement if only the Mentor entity holds a Secret Facility Clearance (FCL), and the JV itself does not currently possess an FCL? If permissible, please clarify whether the Mentor’s existing FCL may be utilized to satisfy the solicitation security requirements, or whether the JV and/or all performing entities must independently obtain the required FCL prior to award or performance.

Reference L.1.1 Proposal Submittal Requirements, Item #7 under "Joint Ventures /

Small Business Teaming Arrangements"

Can we use our current HRS PLS IDIQ as a QC or past performance?

As stated under L.2.1.4.1 in part, "If a QC is a TO under an IDIQ, BPA, BOA, or

FSS contract the substantiating documents must specifically pertain to the TO contract; the documents for the Master Contract, BPA, BOA or FSS contract cannot be used to substantiate any of the minimum criteria or qualifications. Similarly, an

IDIQ contract, BPA, BOA or FSS contract may not be used as supporting documentation to demonstrate minimum criteria, experience, or qualifications as performance is conducted at the order level."

L.2.1.4.1 pg 179 - "Offerors shall submit evidence of Qualifying

Contracts (QC) to demonstrate their

Corporate Knowledge against the required PLS Task Categories identified at L.2.1.4.1.1 and

L.2.1.4.1.2. Further, Offerors shall select TWO (2) additional Task

Categories to provide QCs for evaluation that demonstrate the

Offerors Corporate Knowledge under the overarching PLS Program Scope under Section L.2.1.4.1.3."

Please define “Offerors”. May Volume I - Technical

Factor; Subfactor 1, Corporate Knowledge include

QCs from “major subcontractors”? We understand the

Government wants the prime Offeror to represent itself as an acceptable potential awardee. However, most Offerors will be bidding with teams that help cover the breadth of task requirements, and it would benefit the Government to evaluate team capabilities, even a limited allowance.

"Offerors" are referred to as the prime contractor bidding on the effort.

L.2.1.4.1 pge 179 - "To be considered a QC under the Corporate Knowledge subfactor, each submitted contract for each Task Category shall meet the following criteria:

a) Be any of the following:

1. A single contract - including prime contracts, subcontracts, and commercial contracts"

Please confirm that QCs may be IDIQ/BPA level contracts.

As stated under L.2.1.4.1 in part, "If a QC is a TO under an IDIQ, BPA, BOA, or

FSS contract the substantiating documents must specifically pertain to the TO contract; the documents for the Master Contract, BPA, BOA or FSS contract cannot be used to substantiate any of the minimum criteria or qualifications. Similarly, an

IDIQ contract, BPA, BOA or FSS contract may not be used as supporting documentation to demonstrate minimum criteria, experience, or qualifications as performance is conducted at the order level."

L.2.1.5 pg 187 - "This volume shall contain the past performance information for all QCs submitted under the Technical Factor above

AND any additional Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime Offeror in performance or awarded during the past five (5) years, from the issue date of this RFP"

Would the Government consider extending the window of recent QC and past performance to 8 years, to cover the start of the current HR Solutions

Gen V? There are highly relevant HR Solutions task orders that were executed and ended prior to the 5-year cutoff.

The Government will not consider extending the window of recent QC and past performance to 8 years. Performance must be recent within the past 5 years as defined within the draft RFP.

L.2.1.5.5 pg 189 - "For all contracts identified in Past Performance Factor

Volume II, L.2.1.5.1 Section 1, Contract Descriptions, a Past

Performance Questionnaire must be completed and submitted."

Would the Government consider adding a space on

Attachment 8 PPQ that differentiates the Offeror

(prime bidder) and requesting organization (Major subcontractor), if different? Under current format, if major contractors solicit PPQs of their POC who then forward direct to ACC-NJ, it may create confusion and/or inconsistency among submissions.

There is delineation for this information within the PPQ as currently written. Refer to Part I, Section A.

L.2.1.3 pg 178 - "The Summary

Section shall contain a brief abstract of the file"

May be summary sections be excluded from the page limitations for each volume?

Upon review of Section L.2.1.3 Content Requirement, the Government has identified areas of this section that require revisions. The Government intends to update "Summary Section" language requirements for this section prior to final

RFP release however the Government does not anticipate it counting against the page count.

L.2.1.4.1 pg 179 - "Volume I -

Technical Factor; Subfactor 1, Corporate Knowledge"

Is there a limit to the number of Qualifying Contracts the Offeror may reference?

Refer to the specific criteria within Section L of the draft RFP (L.2.1, L.2.1.4.1, L.2.1.4.1.1, L.2.1.4.1.2, L.2.1.4.1.3). It's the responsibility of the Offeror determine what they deem necessary to meet the RFP requirements and abide by the required page limitations set forth with Section L.

L.2.1.5 pg 187 - "VOLUME II - PAST

PERFORMANCE FACTOR"

Is there a limit to the number of past performances the Offeror may describe in this section?

Reference L.2.1.5 which states in part, "This volume shall contain the past performance information for all QCs submitted under the Technical Factor above

AND any additional Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime Offeror in performance or awarded during the past five (5) years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation." It's the responsibility of the Offeror determine what they deem necessary to meet the RFP requirements and abide by the required page limitations set forth with Section L.

L.2.1.5. pg 189 - "All Offerors shall submit information substantiating the

Offeror's past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8, Utilization of Small Business, maximizing opportunities for U.S.

Small Business subcontractors."

Can the government please include more detailed guidance on what is acceptable substantiating information?

The Government acknowledges this comment and will address and clarify in the final RFP.

49 L.2.1.4. (f) pg 180

The instructions state: “Offerors shall submit supporting documentation to substantiate each corporate knowledge reference.” Please clarify what the Government would consider as acceptable documentation (i.e., PWS/SOW).

Reference Section L.2.1.4.1 Volume I - Technical Factor, Subfactor 1, Corporate

Knowledge, Page 180: "Subfactor shall contain the following supporting documentation to substantiate each contract: 1) Summary of Project and 2)

Technical Relevancy Narrative" Reference Section L for additional details

50 L.2.1.4. (f) pg 180

The instructions state: “Offerors shall submit supporting documentation to substantiate each corporate knowledge reference.” Please confirm documentation is not considered part of the page count.

Information submitted as part of your proposal is included within the page count unless specifically stated otherwise.

51 L.2.1.4. (f) pg 180

The instructions state: “Offerors shall submit supporting documentation to substantiate each corporate knowledge reference.” Please confirm documentation can be in an annex to Volume I.

Information submitted as part of your proposal is included within the page count unless specifically stated otherwise. Additionally, refer to L.2.1, which specifically states "Annexes, documentation, and attachments that are submitted by the

Offeror, which are not required as part of the RFP, will count against the page limitations."

52 L.2.1.3 pg 178

Please confirm that the Summary Section does not count against page count.

Upon review of Section L.2.1.3 Content Requirement, the Government has identified areas of this section that require revisions. The Government intends to update "Summary Section" language requirements for this section prior to final

RFP release.

L.2.1. pgs 175 - 177 and L.2.1.3 pg

L.2.1.3 states: “Each file of the proposal shall consist of a Table of Contents, Summary Section, and the

Narrative discussion.” However, the table in Section

L.2.1 does not show a TOC and Summary Section for each volume. Please confirm the TOC and Summary

Section requirement should be reflected in the table for each volume.

Upon review of Section L.2.1.3 Content Requirement, the Government has identified areas of this section that require revisions. The Government intends to update "Summary Section" language requirements for this section prior to final

RFP release.

55 L.2.1.6 pg 190

The paragraph on Small Business Subcontracting

Plan requirement does not mention small business goals. Would the Government indicate what the small business goals, if any, are?

There are no set Small Business Goals. As stated under L.2.1.6, "Small Business

Subcontracting Plan shall be submitted in accordance with FAR 52.219-9 and

DFARS 252.219-7996 (or DFARS 252.219-7997 if the Offeror has a comprehensive subcontracting plan)." Small Business Subcontracting Plans will be reviewed IAW AFARS Part 5119-705-4, Appendix DD and Appendix AA.

59 PLS Solicitation

Does the Government intend to restrict a subcontractor or teaming partner from participating on multiple offeror teams at the IDIQ proposal stage, or may subcontractors support multiple prime offerors provided appropriate firewalls and non-disclosure protections are maintained?

The government will not limit prime contractors subcontract agreements.

Subcontractors are not limited to establishing a relationship with only one prime contractor.

60 PLS Solicitation

Would the Government clarify whether Prime

Contractors awarded an IDIQ contract may add, remove, or substitute subcontractors and teaming partners after award for purposes of competing for individual task orders, provided all applicable subcontracting and organizational conflict of interest requirements are satisfied?

Yes; however holders shall still abide by FAR 52.219-14, Limitations on

Subcontracting.

61 PLS Solicitation

May a company submit one proposal as a Prime

Contractor while also serving as a subcontractor on one or more other offerors’ proposals?

Yes