RFP-ACT-SACT-18-41_Q&A_.pdf
PDF 169 KB Posted
- Attached to
- WEB DEVELOPER
- Solicitation number
- RFP-ACT-SACT-18-41
- Issued by
-
NATO HQ Supreme Allied Commander
About this file
Q&A 1
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| RFP-ACT-SACT-18-41_Web_Developer-Amendment_2.pdf | ||
| RFP-ACT-SACT-18-41_Web_Developer-Amendment_1.pdf |
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
IFIB-ACT-SACT-18-41 Question & Answer 1
Headquarters Supreme Allied Commander Transformation
Norfolk, Virginia
QUESTION & ANSWERS
RFP-ACT-SACT-18-41
Request for Proposal Number:
Reference:
Date of Issue:
The following questions were raised with respect to subject RFP. Responses are to provide clarification.
Question Response
Q1. Who is the incumbent?
A1. This is a new requirement
Q2. Which company, consultant, employee (in terms of role), etc. has performed this scope of work, in part or whole, during the last 18 months?
A2. See A1
Q3. Must an offeror hold a facility clearance to compete for and/or perform this contract?
A3. No – See Amendment #2
Q4. Must an offeror’s personnel hold active security clearances to perform this contract?
A4. No – See Amendment #2
Q5. May an offer submit only an electronic proposal or must it also submit a hardcopy? Section 12(a) and 12(b) imply a dual submission.
A5. Electronic Proposal is acceptable. – See
Amendment #2
Q6. Can companies from Outside USA can apply for this? (like, from India or Canada)
A6. Refer to Para 4 for the RFP Bidding
Instructions, Page 5, Eligibility
Q7. Do we need to come over there for meetings?
A7. Refer to Para 11 of the SOW (pg. 14), Place of Performance
Q8. Can we perform the tasks (related to RFP) outside
USA? (like, from India or Canada)
A8. Refer to Para 11 of the SOW (pg. 14), Place of Performance
Q9. Can we submit the proposals via email? Refer to Para 11 of the RFP Bidding
Instructions (pg. 6) and Amendment #2
IFIB-ACT-SACT-18-41
Q&A #1
23 May 2018
Q10. In the Sealed Bid Price Proposal, Enclosure 3 of subject RFP, the base period and option period specify
900 hours for each period. In the Period of
Performance, paragraph #10 in subject RFP Statement of Work, the base period is specified as “from contract award (on or about 6 August) to 31 December 2018:
2x800 hrs with an option to extend the contract 1
January – 1 June 2019: 2x900 hrs…” Can you clarify which number of hours (i.e. 800 hrs or 900 hrs) is accurate for the base period, as based on our calculations, the 900 hours would assume a non-standard 40-hour week?
A10. The base period should be 800 hours; see
Amendment 2
File details come from the government source that posted it.