Q A_Set___3.xlsx

Sheet1

Sheet2

Sheet3

Microsoft_Office_Excel_Worksheet1.xlsx Current List

Question Answer

Reference SAQMMA13R0044 RFP Section H – 016 Key Personnel: Country Site Managers for Afghanistan, Colombia, and Iraq are listed as key personnel by the Government. Does the Government leave the determination as to whether the other Country Site Managers are key personnel to the contractor, or does the Government dictate that the Country Site Managers for Pakistan and Peru are also key personnel?

Reference PWS Paragraph 7: Are Peshawar and Quetta considered FOLs, or are PSO functions handled only from Islamabad in Pakistan?

Reference PWS Paragraph 8.A.: “Concept of Operations: The contractor will establish and sustain a Main Operating Base (MOB) in Kabul, a Forward Operating Base (FOB) in Kandahar and the capability to deploy a temporary FOL in support of field operations.” -- Does the Government expect the contractor to maintain a complete deployable PSO FOL team to establish and run temporary FOLs, or is the contractor expected to perform this with organic assets in Afghanistan?

Reference PWS Paragraph 10.A.: “Concept of Operations: The contractor will establish and sustain a Main Operating Base (MOB) at Baghdad International Airport (BIAP) - Sather Air Force Base , Forward Operating Bases (FOB) at LZ Embassy (LZE), Erbil, and Basrah.” -- Does the Government expect FOLs operated by the PSO at all of these locations, or is the LZE FOL supported by the PSO at BIAP?

Reference PWS 3.c.1.b.: “Support for 3 Strategic Planning Session. Cost may include facility for the sessions and TDY cost for the PSO OCONUS personnel who will need to attend sessions.” -- Are these sessions in Melbourne? Will it be at one of the hotels?

Reference PW 3.C.6.b.: discusses 4X EAP reviews and Drills. The Reviews maybe covered under labor but the drills conducted quarterly at "each country location" may require safety and quality staff TDY from Melbourne to these sites. So travel, per diem, etc. Are adequate Government furnished facilities available for conducting these meetings, or should the contractor price other facilities as an ODC?”

Under B-1 Program Overview, the Government states their plan to compete four other contracts “concurrently” with PSO. They are: Aviation Maintenance, Flight Operations, Logistics, and IT Services. The RFP further states the requirement for no conflict between these contracts and thus requiring any member of the PSO team from participating as a prime or a sub on the other four solicitations.

A. In the SOW Section Associate Contracts, the RFP adds Training and Safety Compliance as other contracts for INL/A. No statement was made regarding OCI between PSO and these other two contracts (Safety and Training). Is there an OCI concern?

The Government is firm regarding the Associate Contract relationship between all procurements A. Does the government envision the PSO contractor to enter into separate and individual Associate Contractor Agreements (ACA) with the other four primes?

B. If so, can the government define the elements of the ACA they expect to see including sharing of information, data and technical knowledge, and resources? Since the government puts emphasis on the ability of the PSO to integrate the entire INL/A operation in a seamless manner is there an expectation that the other Primes are set up to work under an ACA?

C. Factor 2 of Section M discusses in detail the responsibility of the PSO contractor to “implement a professional work ethic among associate contractors and the USG” by teambuilding and integration of activities. What contractual power do you envision the PSO contractor as having as to direct the other contractors to provide information or data necessary to resolve an issue at the “system” level? The ACA may help alleviate some potential issues arising in the conduct of the work, but is the government prepared to resolve issues arising from the “associate” contractors’ execution of their respective efforts?

D. Since overall success is a team effort, is the government emphasizing PSO Factor 2 on the other contracts?

E. Is there an Incentive Plan or Award Fee structure envisioned for the five associated contracts to monetarily award or punish the Pillar Primes for inter-contract collaboration and team work?

a. Yes b.

In 3.C.2.c of the PWS QASP Solution the software program will require user licenses. Does the government have an estimate of how many licenses will be needed?

Is it the government intention to extend the proposal due date past January 8, 2014?

Section J, Attachment 1, Exhibit A, TOR 2013-0001, refers to a Performance Work Statement provided in Section J, Attachment 1, Exhibit B. Situation: Exhibit B was not provided with the Amendment.

Amendment 1 Section J-List of Attachments does not list an Exhibit B in in the List of Attachments

To remove any ambugity for all Offeror's, suggest USG provide Exhibit B for the Sample Task Order, and update Section J-List of Attachments accordingly.

I would like to respectfully ask for an extension to the aviation requirement past or beyond 9 January.

On behalf of our team I would like to request a 30 day extension to the current due date of this proposal (8 January 2014).

The subject solicitation is due January 8, 2014 at 4pm Eastern. Is it the Government’s intent to extend the proposal due date? If so, we request at least a thirty day extension.

Due to the holidays and the recent amendment is there any way you would consider a two week extension to the solicitation due date.

Would the Government consider extending the due date for receipt of proposals by fourteen (14) days?

The proposal requirements under this RFP including the additional revisions and requirements set forth in Amendment 001recently posted on December 5th are quite extensive. For offerors to prepare and submit a complete proposal by the current due date of January 8th is considered a relatively short time frame especially in view of the approaching Holiday’s and business closings.

Additionally, the calendar year for most businesses will end December 31st. To conclude year end accounting closings including any necessary audits to comply with the RFP Cost/Pricing requirements will be very difficult to meet given the January 8th due date.

The additional fourteen days will facilitate the ability for offerors to provide more fully developed proposal submissions.

It would be appreciated if the Government could respond to our extension request prior to December 25, 2013.

Sir, our insurance underwriters and medical benefits providers are expressing challenges receiving, fully compliant, competitive quotes as a result of the holidays and reduced staffing within their respective industries.

As a result, we request the government consider a 14 day extension on solicitation: SAQMMA13R0044, Aviation Program Office Support Services-so that we can submit a fully compliant and best value offer to the government.

These are all requests for extension.

• Question #62 from the posting on 12.18.13. The issue central to this and a number of questions included in the Q&A remains unclear; the government has already requested base contract pricing for the 10 year duration. What is the basis for requiring the contractor to price the labor categories for out-years as ‘options’ when the task order has been defined as base plus two one-year options? In addition, there are formulas associated with each of the out-years, which would make it appear as though the government desired hours and labor rates for proposed categories under each of the CLINS in spreadsheet in Attachment_5.Pricing_Tables_3DEC13, Tab 9. Would the government please reconcile the instructions and provided tables to better correlate, reducing ambiguity or confusion? Oren + (The intent is to have FFP labor rates for 10 years and pricing of the Task Order for three years, e.g., Base + Two Priced Options). Actually the first task order document will be for the Base Year Pricing, thereafter, a separate and distinct task order will be issued for each subsequent period of performance.

Regarding the Facility Secret Clearance. This is a matter of responsibility, which is under the purview of the Small Business Administration. Unless access to classified information is required prior to award, the Department of State has no precedent for requiring a small business to possess a Facility Secret Clearance at the time of proposal submission. This requirement appears to seek only to unfairly restrict competition. Would the government please consult with the small business competition advocate and consider amending this requirement to consider an interim clearance,, companies who have already initiated the clearance process and anticipate to have had it issued prior to time of award, and/or include team members who possess the proper clearances currently?

Regarding the answer provided to the question in line 6 of questions posted on 12.18.13, risk is typically looked at in terms of cost, schedule, and performance. Size of a company is not generally a good indicator of risk. The notes included may be the opinion of the contractor officer, but they are not fact and appear to indicate a bias. These could be taken by smaller contractors as a means of discouragement, serving to discourage competition, not encourage maximum competition. Please consider all qualified small businesses and their teams for the merits of their proposal. ? The NAICS Code and small business size standard do not appear to be referenced in the solicitation. Shall we assume that the applicable NAICS Code is 541330, Engineering Services, with a small business size standard of $35.5 million?

During the Industry day held on January 9, 2013, Mr. Jesse Lowman indicated that the NAICs code would be 541330 Exception No 1 with a size standard of 35.5 million. Please clarify in writing that this is the correct NAICs code for this procurement. To answer both questions, below are the seven procurements and the respective NAICS codes. The 541330 code for the PSO, Maintenance, and Logistics reads as follows:

(1) Program Management: NAICS Code 541330 Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business.

(2) Flight Services: NAICS Code 541330; full and open competition.

(3) Maintenance Services: NAICS Code 541330; full and open competition.

(4) Logistics Services: NAICS Code 541330; full and open competition.

(5) IT/ Communications Services: NAICS Code 517909; HUBZone.

(6) Training: NAICS Code 61152; total small business set-aside.

(7) Safety Compliance: NAICS Code 541990; total small business set-aside.

Notes regarding NAICS code 541330;

we believe the 541330 NAICS code best fits the above Department of State aviation procurements for many reasons. For the PSO, using the special $35.5M size standard for Engineering Services - Military and Aerospace Equipment and Military Weapons as it is the most well aligned NAICS code for the broad range of aviation tasks needed within the SOR. By using this NAICS size standard, DOS AW further reduces risk by allowing for larger small business to participate, particularly those supporting other DOD aviation commands.

From the posting on 12.18.13, the government was evasive in the response to question #60. Given the status of this procurement as an SDVOSB set-aside and the requirement under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.5, which prohibits any condition or action that has the effect of unnecessarily restricting acquisition or competition, would the government consider amending the requirements for the sample task order, which appear to be written in such a manner as to unnecessarily limit the pool of contractors who could realistically bid on this effort to those with intimate knowledge of current/historical operations? ? Given the status of this procurement as an SDVOSB set-aside and the requirement under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.5, which prohibits any condition or action that has the effect of unnecessarily restricting the acquisition of commercial items or competition in the contract actions of the agency, would the government consider amending the requirements for the sample task order, which as currently written favor incumbent contractors, present potentially undue risk for a contractor who does not have access to historical data such as the incumbent as the sample task order may become a task order under the contract and appears to be written to encompass the scope of work required under this effort, and unnecessarily limit the pool of contractors who could realistically bid on this effort? There is no incumbent contractor providing these services.

Would the government please consider an extension?

Attachment 14, Past Performance Questionnaire:

If available, please provide the Past Performance Questionnaire in Word format for ease of completion.

Reference H-007 Insurance Requirements:The DOS Air Wing RFP does not relate to any aircraft flight or vessel work being done by the Contractor.

Are there unstated requirements for DOS Air Wing personnel to be pilots of aircraft or involved in vessels in performance of the DOS Air Wing contract? If not, we recommend that these requirements be deleted from the RFP.

No, not in the instant?? contract. However, possible future requirements may require it.

PWS line item 3.C.3.c requires the solution to be scalable to up to 1,500 users. Question: How many users does DOS anticipate for the first 3 years of performance as it applies to Task Order #1? This has a large impact on the price proposal depending upon the number of users who require licensing.

Amendment 1 added the requirements for Peru and Pakistan to the PWS; however, H-016 Key Personnel does not include the Country Site Managers for Peru and Pakistan as Key personnel. Question: Should resumes and commitment letters be provided for these additional key personnel?

Attachment 5.Pricing Tables 3 Dec 13, table 6. IDIQ Prices Question: The QAS labor category is not a requirement for OCONUS?

SAQMMA13R0044_Amendment_001_Final-_3DEC13 and Attachment J-5. In the Key Personnel Chart, a Subject Matter/ Industry Specialist is listed as the Labor Category for the Program Safety Officer PWS Position Title; however, the labor categories listed in Attachment J-5 has a SME II and a Safety Project Manager but no Subject Matter/Industry Specialist. Did the Government intend to identify one of the two aforementioned labor categories as the Labor Category for the Program Safety Officer PWS Position Title, or is Subject Matter/Industry Specialist an additional labor category that needs to be added to the Attachment J-5?

PWS_RFP_PSO_3_Dec_13 & Q&A_Set_2 . In reference to Q&A Set 2 row 35, if it is not the responsibility of the PSO Contractor to provide security. Please advise which associate contract will provide security and what the reporting requirement(s) is/are for the PSO.

PWS_RFP_PSO_3_Dec_13 & Q&A_Set_2 . The Questions relative to PWS paragraph 1.A.8 was cited in row 30 of the Q&A Set 2 document posted on FBO on Dec 12/18/13. The Government’s answer provides USG billeting; however, it does not address the follow-up questions concerning if a non-USG contractor will be providing such facilities, or if it’s the responsibility of the PSO Contractor to obtain billeting for its employees. Furthermore, the answer does not respond to the question as to whether there will be a CLIN assigned to billeting and other base support costs should billeting not be provided by the Government.

Q&A_Set_2. Based on the Government’s response to the question in Row 54 of the Q&A_Set_2 document, will the Government amend the solicitation to remove the following requirement from Section 8.1.2 - Oral Technical Proposal Presentation Media on page 139 of the Amendment 0001 Solicitation?

From Section 8.1.2, “Oral technical proposal presentation slides shall be submitted in advance with the written proposal submission.”

Question: Is it intended that the IS-BAO requirement be deleted from the RFP in a subsequent release?

Question: Is it your intent for the PSO to develop a plan for the INL/A to obtain an IS-BAO Level II certification that the ACA’s will be required to participate in and support?

Question: Will the USG please clarify how the PSO support contractor is to achieve ISO-BAO LEVEL II CERTIFICATION given the contractor will not be operating or maintaining aircraft, will not have access to the aircraft and will not be setting up a flight department that is staffed with the aircrew members and operating and maintenance personnel?

We respectfully request that the USG consider deleting this requirement or revising the IS-BAO Level II certification requirement to a requirement that the PSO Contractor act as a facilitator/subject matter expert, and/or oversight agent to assist the Air Wing and Associate Contractors in achieving Level II certification. Or, that the PSO Contractor act as an auditing agent. As written today, the PSO Contractor would not be able to meet the Certification Level II requirements given the documented Certification Requirements of IS-BAO-2011.

(See supplemental information for this question that was submitted by the vendor in the RFI file)

Section L, Factor 5, Sub-factor A, Approach to Attract, Acquire, and Maintain Personnel The RFP States: Provide attrition rate statistics associated with key and specialized personnel for the last 3 years.

Question: If the offeror is not the incumbent, they would not have attrition rate statistics for key and specialized personnel. Will the USG please clarify if they want to see attrition rate statistics for key and specialized personnel from any contract held by the offeror? If so, for a joint venture, will the USG please consider the JV’s partner company’s overall attrition statistic rates as an acceptable approach to this requirement?

Reference RFP_PWS_3_Dec_2013, Section 4.C.5.a – Section 10.C.5.a the PWS requirements states for each country that, “Quality Inspections/Audits: Perform inspections and provide inputs to USG quality assurance management information system pertaining to INL/A and NAS eradication operations. The PWS also states that PSO 100% audits = 30 audits per trimester, 10% sample audits of associate contracts = 20 audits per trimester.”

In Task Order 1 Solicitation 11-25-2013 it states that the Anticipated Task Order Period of Performance that shall be used for pricing purposes, is:

Base Year: April 1, 2014 through March 31, 2015 Option Year 1: April 1, 2015 through March 31, 2016 Option Year 2: April 1, 2016 through March 31, 2017

And, in the Detail Pricing Tables (for Pricing Table 9), offerors shall show for each task order year the breakdown of the proposed “Supplies” prices. The breakdown shall consist of at least the following: PWS Line Item Number and PWS Title, etc.

In Attachment 5 Pricing Tables 3DEC13, Tab titled IDIQ Prices, the table shows the following OCONUS labor Categories.

CLIN RFP-specified Labor Category Positions Per Year

X006 Country Site Manager 5 X007 FOL Site Manager 4 X019 Safety Specialist 5 Question: Will the USG please clarify/verify that there are no OCONUS requirements for all three base years for Quality Specialist. If there are no requirements, will the USG please clarify how they anticipate the offer to meet the quality assurance requirements of PWS Section 4.C.5.a – Section 10.C.5.a?

PSO RFP PWS 3 Dec 2013 states in Section “2.C.2.a Force Protection Training: Propose a minimum level of force protection training you recommend for select duty positions and select locations. Implement and maintain an employee training program which provides those levels of Force Protection and/or terrorism awareness as proposed and accepted.”

Question: Will the USG clarify if the offeror is to propose to the requirements listed in the PWS? If so, will the USG please specify in which volume and under which factor the offeror is to propose these requirements and will it count towards page count.

PSO RFP PWS 3 Dec 2013 states in Section 2.G.1 States, “Government Property Accountability: Maintain property accountability for USG property under PSO custody.”

Question: There is no position description or labor pricing requirements for a property custodian listed in the RFP or pricing matrix. For compliance and pricing considerations, will the USG please clarify under which existing labor category the offeror shall perform and price this requirements?

Discussion: SAQMMA13R0044 - Amendment 001, H-016: In order to ensure a smooth and orderly startup of work, it is essential that the key personnel specified in the Contractor's proposal be available on the effective date of the contract.

Sub-Factor Resumes and letter of commitments are required for key personnel.

Question: Is it INL/A's intent to staff the Country Site Managers at contract start date at the remote locations before the PSO is fully stood up?

1. PSO Section L Factor 3.

Discussion: The PWS discusses the management of projects in a number of paragraphs, e.g., 1.A.1.c, 1.A.3.a, 1.A.5, 2.A, 2.C.3.a, 3.C.2.b, 3.C.5.a, etc. Question: The PPI states, ‘Submit a sample IMS which identifies the 3 most critical projects among your requirements’. Are the projects we are to chose from the ones listed in PWS 3.C.2.b under Related Information where it lists the following project types:

a. Nationalization

b. Aircraft Ferrying

c. Major Logistic Movements

d. Aircraft Procurements

e. Retrofit

f. Spare Repair Engine Overhaul

g. Leased Aircraft

h. Critical Flight Safety Program

i. Construction Projects

j. Associate Contract Projects

The recently released draft of the Maintenance PWS states in C.3.25 that the Maintenance Associate Contractor will become the IPT lead. However the most recent PSO PWS states in 1.A.6 that the PSO will continue to be the IPT lead. Question: Can you clarify who will lead the MIS IPT and who will be the MIS Project Manager?

The recently released draft of the Maintenance PWS states in C.3.25 that the Maintenance Associate Contractor will become the MIS Project Manager. Question: Can you clarify when the PSO will hand off project management duties for the MIS to the Maintenance Associate Contractor?

PSO PWS 2.C.3.a, 3.C.2.b Discussion: The PWS 3.C.2.b indicates we are to anticipate actively managing 40 projects per year, closing out 12 projects per year, and setup of 12 new projects per year. Per PWS 2.C.3.a, under Estimated Quantity, it asks for 1 X Data Set for each of 12 anticipated projects. Question: can the USG provide a list of the 12 anticipated PSO projects for the base year?

J-11 Labor Category Safety Manager and Safety Specialist Discussion: the minimum education requirements are identical. The experience requirements are identical except for the statement in Safety Manager where it stipulates Formal background in SMS desired, along with demonstrable technical writing skills. Certified Safety Professional (CSP) is desirable. The two position descriptions and minimum requirements are basically the same, except that it states it is desirable for the Safety Manager have “formal” training. Question: Is it the governments desire to have the Safety Manager and Safety Specialist with the same qualifications and experience?

Solicitation Section H-035.

Discussion: Stipulates that billeting services are available to in Iraq and Afghanistan to US contractor personnel. Question: Will sufficient billeting space be available to PSO personnel while incumbent contractor is still present in addition to the new associate contractor personnel that will start to arrive after award of the 3 pillar contracts?

PWS 6.A

Discussion: The PWS indicates that the MOB for Peru is Pucallpa. Question 1: Are the USG provided accommodations at Pucallpa and other FOLs suitable for permanent assignment of personnel. Question 2: How many accommodations/billeting units will be provided at the MOB (Pulcalpa) for PSO personnel.

PWS 4, 6, 7. Question 1: Based on the answer to question 27 in Q&A 2, does the USG provide lodging and meals for PSO personnel in Quetta at contractor or government expense, i.e, does the contractor reimburse the government for those services provided by the NAS? Are any other services provided such as DPO access, Resuscitative Care, Local Access Badge, etc., in locations other than Iraq and Afghanistan? Question 2: Are billeting spaces limited to a specific number for the PSO contractor at FOL/MOB sites?

H-035 D Discussion: In Iraq and Afghanistan both DOS and DOD provide a list of provided services that PSO personnel will utilize at the MOB and FOL/FOB sites, however they vary by agency. Question: Which agency, DOD or DOS, is currently providing services at the specific locations specified in the PWS, e.g., is DOD providing services at Erbil or DOS? Please provide a location list that specifies what agency is providing the service at each FOB and MOB location.

PWS 4.C.6, 6.C.6, 7.C.6, 8.C.6, 10.C.6 (Safety) and 4.C.5.a, 6.C.5.a, 7.C.5.a, 8.C.5.a, 10.C.5.a. (Quality). Discussion: The required audits, reports , training, and reviews in the referenced sections are the same in number and type regardless of the actual location and size of operation in the specified country. Question: Are the same number of audits, reports, reviews, and inspections required the same in all countries regardless of the number of aircraft, missions flown, and scope of operation?

PWS 6.F.1.b. Discussion: The answer to question 10 in the second Q&A response from the USG stated – ‘In both, the PWS specifies no FOL requirements for PSO. The maps indicate locations where operations may take place.’ However, The PWS does state the following in paragraph 6.F.1.b under the column for Information - FOL Reports: Mission Generation and Tracking: Forward Operating Location (FOL) Manager (PSO) will receive requisite data from associate contractors to provide the in-country SAA and the Colombia Site Manager, Program Support Office (PSO) following data sets; … Question: Perhaps this is a cut and paste error, but can the USG confirm whether a FOL Manager (PSO) is required or not in Peru?

PWS 10.a. Discussion: The Concept of Operation states – ‘contractor will establish and sustain a Main Operating Base (MOB) at Baghdad International Airport (BIAP) - Sather Air Force Base , Forward Operating Bases (FOB) at LZ Embassy (LZE), Erbil, and Basrah.’ Question: Are FOL/FOB site managers required at the Forward Operating Bases LZ Embassy, Erbil, and Basrah?

For Task Order 1 OCONUS personnel, please clarify pricing and program requirements for Life and Mission Support of PSO staff assigned to OCONUS locations. Will the Government (or Logistics or Operations contractor) be proving housing, food, transportation, supplies, equipment, security and other requirements for PSO staff located in Colombia, Peru, Pakistan, Iraq, Afghanistan and related FOL sites? Are there any ODC related expenses (Life & Mission Support or other non-labor requirements) that the PSO contractor must propose in the Sample Task Order (predictable) initial pricing and be responsible for other than labor, DBA Insurance, post hardship differential pay, danger pay, and contractor directed travel to and from CONUS?

Will the government allow the IMS summary and/or sample to be submitted as an attachment/appendix to the volume, and not include it in the page count?

PWS 3.C.2.b. Initial setup will include all other supporting Contracts under DOS Air Wing Aviation Program (~40 contracts, 200 Task Orders). After setup, anticipate 12 new and 12 closed items per year. (Refer to CFSP and Other Tab within this workbook) (Refer to CFSP and Other Tab within this workbook) is not located in the work book, is this a referrenc to attachment, J-8 CFSP and Other Contracts, or is there another document?

Ref RFQ paragraph 8.1 Oral Technical Proposal Presentation.

Given that the government has yet to establish that orals will be required by all, and the production of a 90 minute presentation is a large undertaking that will be difficult to meet given the current timeline overlapping the proposal production process, we would ask for the following consideration.

Could the government require the submission of the slides for the oral presentation once it is determined that oral presentations will be required or upon the establishment of a competitive range. Another alternative could be to require submission of the slides for the oral presentation 3 weeks (or alternative time period) after the submission of the formal proposal documents.

What are the licensing arrangements associated with the line items on the Authorized Software List (e.g. Enterprise License, Limited use License, # of Client Access Licenses (CALs) where appropriate) ?

Will the PSO winner be able to leverage any of the existing licenses in performance of this effort?

Which position are required to be on site at Patrick Air Force Base?

The question was asked if the government would consider raising the page count from 7 to 20, the government responded with a Yes. Does the government intend to release a MOD to change this requirement, as well as the other answers the government answered in Q&A number 2?

Does Bogota, Colombia MOB have existing data servers and data communications networks, including connections with CONUS at PAFB and FOLs, that will be available to PSO (or other INL/A designated contractor) to implement Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients; hardware and software)?

Does Pucallpa, Peru MOB have existing data servers and data communications networks, including connections with CONUS at PAFB and FOLs, that will be available to PSO (or other INL/A designated contractor) to implement Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients; hardware and software)?

Does Islamabad, Pakistan MOB have existing data servers and data communications networks, including connections with CONUS at PAFB and FOLs/FOBs, that will be available to PSO (or other INL/A designated contractor) to implement Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients; hardware and software)?

Does Kabul, Afghanistan MOB (Camp Alvarado) have existing data servers and data communications networks, including connections with CONUS at PAFB and FOLs/FOBs, that will be available to PSO (or other INL/A designated contractor) to implement Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients; hardware and software)?

Does Baghdad, Iraq MOB (BDSC) have existing data servers and data communications networks, including connections with CONUS at PAFB and FOLs, that will be available to PSO (or other INL/A designated contractor) to implement Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients; hardware and software)?

Does CONUS at PAFB or Miramar have existing data servers and data communications networks–including connections with each MOB–that will be available to PSO (or other INL/A designated contractor) to implement Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding, and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients; hardware and software)?

When will the new Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding, and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients) need to import, transform, reformat, etc. data transferred from any legacy systems, databases, files, etc. (before, during, or after transition)?

In reference to the "AWIS Network High Level2B.pdf", will Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding, and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients) implemented by the PSO under this contract have access to the networks identified in the diagram?

Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients) will be needed to meet the requirements of the PSO goals and mission.

Question: Should the PSO IDIQ proposal include the cost of software, hardware, operations and maintenance for these software solutions, or will the procurement of these software solutions (including hardware) be included in a task order under the IDIQ?

Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients) will be needed to meet the requirements of the PSO goals and mission.

Question: Is the PSO required to install and support (O&M) the server and client hardware and software at each site required for these software solutions to operate?

Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients) will be needed to meet the requirements of the PSO goals and mission.

Questions:

a. Will any hardware or software specified (or provided) by the PSO be required to be certified and accredited (C&A) by INL/A or other INL/A-designated DOS department prior to, during, or after implementation?

b. Will the software and hardware be required to undergo an Authority to Operate process prior to implementation and operation?

Does INL or INL/A have any Enterprise Architecture standards, requirements or restrictions that affect the selection of the Program Mgmt., SMS, QASP, Collaboration/Teambuilding and Dashboard software solutions (servers and clients) that will be needed to meet the requirements of the PSO goals and mission?

Referenced section states: “The Department of State requests you submit a cost/price proposal in response to the Performance Work Statement provided in Section J, Attachment 1, Exhibit B.” However, the answer provided in Q & A Set 2 indicates that there is no Exhibit B.

Question: We assume the Sample Task Order and associated cost tables 8 and 9 are not to be priced. Is this assumption correct?

Referenced section states: "Each Offeror may be required to make an oral technical proposal presentation and participate in clarifications led by the Contracting Officer and participated in by the Technical Evaluation Panel (TEP) Members and other representatives of the Government. The oral technical proposal presentation and clarifications, if any, will be held at the unclassified level. The oral technical proposal presentation will be used to assess the Offeror’s capability to satisfy the requirements set forth in the RFP."

Questions:

a. Will orals be required?

b. How will orals be evaluated?

c. What is the relative weighting of the orals sections?

d. How long will the TEP caucus?

e. Will the TEP deliver all clarification questions at the same time, or after each response?

f. How long will the Offeror be allowed to caucus?

g. Can unused oral presentation time be reapplied to either the contractor's Q & A session or caucus time?

h. How will the Government ensure clarifications do not invoke discussions?

i. Will all offerors be given the same questions?

Presentation media are limited to computer-based graphics or normal viewgraph slides. Q & A set 1, question 5 indicates that a video can be used.

Question: We presume this to be a contractor-developed video of products it uses, rather than a vendor marketing video. Is this assumption correct?

Amendment 001, pg. 139 of 155, para. L.8.1.2 Oral Technical Proposal Presentation Media Discussion: Referenced paragraph indicates transition effects may not be used.

Question: Can slide builds be used to show sequences, as long as each build is provided in the slide deck?

Amendment 001, pg. 139 of 155, para. L.8.1.2 Oral Technical Proposal Presentation Media and Amendment 001, pg. 110 of 155, Table 2.2 Proposal Organization Discussion: Amendment 001, pg. 139 of 155, para. 8.1.2 Oral Technical Proposal Presentation Media states: “Oral technical proposal presentation slides shall be submitted…with the written proposal submission.” however, pg. 110 of 155, Table 2.2 Proposal Organization does not designate a volume or section of the proposal in which to place the slides.

Questions: In which volume and section of the proposal submission should offerors place their oral presentation slides?

Section J, Attachment 1, Exhibit A #5 and #7 – the Pricing Instructions for the Sample Task Order reference Pricing Table 9 and the columns titled “PWS Line Item #” and “PWS Title” but there is no Sample Task Order PWS. Please supply this information. Patrick or Jesse - please provide answer.

For the purposes of the task order, please clarify the government’s intent for the contractor to cost all CLINS defined in PWS_RFP_PSO_3_DEC_13.xlsx. Patrick or Jesse - please provide answer.

Can you confirm that it is the government’s intent to have the cost of DBA as a reimbursable expense? The information provided is conflicting on this matter. Page 37 specifies a requirement to submit breakdown; however, Page 42 indicates that coverage is to be at no additional expense to contract. Please clarify. Patrick or Jesse - I recommend to move Section H-007(f) to another place in Section H. We should pay a contractor for its DBA Insurance costs. If you agree, I recommend the following response: The Government will pay the contractor for its allowable DBA Insurance costs. We have transferred Section H-007(f) to _____.

send to legal

Question Answer

Discussion: States that any additional labor categories will be negotiated at task order level, however it asks for additional labor categories be proposed in H-016. Question - Do we propose additional labor categories in the price volume (Table 3, 4, and 5) or propose as part of the Task Order pricing in Table 9?B.4.l Offerors shall propose in its Organizational Plan in Volume II (Technical/Management Volume) any Key Personnel labor categories that are in addition to the Key Personnel labor categories identified in Section H-016.

Also, offerors shall propose in Volume IV (Price Volume) any additional Key Personnel and non-Key Personnel labor categories pursuant to the applicable instructions in Section L.6.3, Section J’s Attachment 5’s Pricing Table 1, Section J’s Exhibit A in Attachment 1, and Section J’s Attachment 5’s Pricing Table 8. Such instructions instruct offerors to propose such additional categories in only Pricing Table 5, Pricing Table 7, Detail Pricing Tables (for Pricing Tables 5-7), and Detail Pricing Tables (for Pricing Table 9).

Offerors shall not propose additional labor categories in Pricing Tables 3, 4, or 9. However, because additional proposed labor categories may be proposed in the Detail Pricing Tables (for Pricing Table 9), the proposed Services’ prices in Pricing Table 9 shall include prices resulting from any additional proposed labor categories.

Section B-10 Profit Percentages – Part c references negotiated profit percentages for each year (including option years) covered under this RFP but there are no targets listed. Please supply these negotiated profit percentages. Because Section B will be part of the contract resulting from this solicitation, it will contain at contract award the negotiated profit percentages. See the last paragraph in Section M-015.

Section B-11 Fee Percentages – there is no part b (there is a part a, c and d). Was this just an oversight or is something missing? It was an oversight. Parts a, c, and d should be a, b, and c, respectively.

Section B-11 Fee Percentages - Part d references negotiated fee percentages for each year (including option years) covered under this RFP but there are no targets listed. Please supply these negotiated fee percentages. Because Section B will be part of the contract resulting from this solicitation, it will contain at contract award the negotiated fee percentages. See the last paragraph in Section M-015.

Section B-12 Fixed Fee – Part b references a calculation that mentions the withholding of a fixed fee reserve for this contract. Is it anticipated that there will be a fixed fee reserve? Yes, when a cost-plus-fixed-fee task order or cost-plus-fixed-fee line item(s) in a task order are established. See Section B-12 and FAR 52.216-8(b) (Fixed Fee).

Amendment 1 Section 6.3 Price Proposal Instructions – #29 asks the Contractor to include in Pricing Table 6 Other Direct Costs/Materials. Is this where the Government would like the Contractor to show any Post Differential/Hazard Pay, including any indirect costs and fee? See Sections L.6.2.8, L.6.3.20, and L.6.3.27 through L.6.3.31. Offerors shall not include for each year in Pricing Table 6 any other direct costs/materials other than the RFP-specified direct travel cost. Offerors shall follow the instructions identified in Sections L.6.3.27 and L.6.3.28 concerning the inclusion of applicable indirect costs and fee.

Amendment 1 Section 6.3 Price Proposal Instructions – #41 asks the Contractor to provide a rate build-up given the base labor rate, indirects and fee but there is no place in the Pricing Workbook for this. Will the Government provide another spreadsheet with the format that is required for this build-up or would you prefer the Contractor to create and include this in Attachment 5 (Pricing Tables)? See Section L.6.3.4. See also Sections L.6.3.1 and L.6.3.2.

Amendment 1 Section 6.3 Price Proposal Instructions – #44 and #52 ask the Contractor to submit their Pricing Workbook electronically and show all formulas that were used to calculate the fixed fully-loaded hourly labor rates in Pricing Tables 5 and 6. Will supplying these spreadsheets “as is” (i.e. with all formulas intact in the spreadsheet) satisfy this requirement? The Detail Pricing Tables may be submitted in a format of the offeror's choosing. However, offerors shall comply with all solicitation instructions associated with such tables.

Amendment 1 Section 6.3 Price Proposal Instructions – #48 – Does the Government expect that the ceiling indirect costs rates will be different from the Contractor’s provisional indirect rates if the Contractor does not have a FPRA or DCAA-approved Provisional Rates? Not necessarily. Offerors shall use a basis of estimate and methodology of its choosing when determining its proposed ceiling indirect cost rates. If it deems necessary, the Government will question such basis or such rates.

In RFP Section B-7 (b) Travel Costs, Page 13, it states that the contractor will be reimbursed for allowable travel cost. Our CAS and GAAP accounting practices allocate G&A to travel when we invoice. Our accounting practices also apply G&A to Post Hardship Differential and Danger Pay. Will we be allowed to apply G& A to these costs? The contractor will be permitted to apply applicable indirect costs, including G&A, to direct travel costs and all other direct costs, including Post Hardship Differential Pay and Danger Pay, as long as such application is in accordance with the contractor's established cost accounting practices. [Note that CAS (Cost Accounting Standards) will not apply to this contract, as the successful offeror will be a small business. See Section B-13(b).]

RFP states: Page 18 Section B-9, The Government generally discourages overtime, so the Contractor agrees to use its best efforts to avoid (and when applicable, control) overtime. Overtime is defined as time worked in excess of the number of hours in a normal workweek.

Page 131 section 39, Pricing table 7, offerors shall identify under “Proposed” all internal labor categories that do not meet the RFP-specified labor category descriptions in Section J’s Attachment 11 and are intended to be used during contract performance. Offerors shall also propose the associated fixed fully-loaded hourly labor rates for overtime performance in the “40” and “48” columns accordingly.

Based on our assumption, these proposed positions are Exempt. Will the government evaluated the proposed Overtime to be included on the total cost of the proposal?

The assumption is incorrect. See Section L.6.3.33.

The overall proposed price, the principal basis on which the Government is evaluating price as a factor for contract award, does not include the content of Pricing Table 7. See Section M-015.

Pricing Table #1, Section L.7.3.2, requirements c. and f.

Section L 6.3 Price Proposal Instructions. As stated, the hard-copy price proposal shall consist of the follow…

To comply with this hard-copy requirement, it is estimated that each Offeror will submit perhaps 15 pages 11x17 pages for requirement c. and perhaps up to 250 pages to meet the requirement of f. The hard copy presentation will contain static information with no active formulas. This hard copy requirement is in parallel with the electronic price proposal instructions of L.6.3 containing active Excel workbooks and work sheets provided on electronic media. Request reconfirmation that USG requires each Offeror to provide multiple hard copy pages at 8 pt font of static information in parallel with active Excel workbooks and work sheets provided on the electronic media ( L.6.3). The Government maintains its instructions.

Does the current PSO contractor have a “phase out” plan we can use to planning guide for our planned “phase in” activities?

A. Can we enter into an agreement with the incumbent to ensure their support during transition? Or is the government prepared to provide contract coverage to the existing PSO provider to ensure total knowledge transfer. We want to make sure experts and SMEs are available during transition.

There currently isn't a PSO contractor to phase out.

Will the government provide an updated schedule of the solicitation, award date, and contract start date of the other programs in order to capture these dates as part of an Integrated Master Schedule (IMS). These dates will help develop an integration plan to ensure that the PSO can develop a credible plan regarding collaboration with the other primes on critical events. Assume November 1, 2014 Start date for phase-in for other Pillars and start of full contract performance May 1, 2015.

Will the government release their current IMS so we can use this document to identify critical events or milestones during the transition period of the PSO contract as well as the other contracts? We want to be able to discuss risks and identify mitigation approaches for these risks. A major event cannot be changed due to the procurements, but as the PSO contractor we want to know the degree of the risk and how to work around the issues without impacting a major INL/A event, milestone, or delivery. We do not currently have a formal IMS

The current solicitation does not require the submission of the DD254. Does the government request that contractors complete and submit the DD 254? yes

When is the cut-off for questions? 20 December, 2013

The title of "Contract Labor Minimum Requirements (Contractor to Populate)" is listed in FLYDOS. Question: What does this mean "Contractor to Populate"? The referenced issue was corrected at FlyDOS web site.

Task Order 1 Solicitation.11-25-3013 Question: For planning purposes, will the contract award date differ from the contract start date for Task Order 1?

Use dates established in Section L.6.3.6

In the recent set of questions released 12/18/2013, the Government responded to a question regarding the NAICS Code and small business size standard for the Program Office Support RFP. The Government has identified NAICS Code 541330, Engineering Services, Service Disabled Veteran Owned Business as the applicable Code. The basic Code has a size standard of $14.0M. However, NAICS Code 541330 also includes the following three exceptions to the basic Code: Except, Military and Aerospace Equipment and Military Weapons with a size standard of $35.5M; and Except, Contracts and Subcontracts for Engineering Services Awarded Under the National Energy Policy Act of 1992 with a size standard of $35.5M; and Except, Marine Engineering and Naval Architecture, with a size standard of $35.5M.

Question: Is the RFP NAICS Code the base Code of 541330 with a size standard of $14.0M or the exception that applies to Military and Aerospace Equipment and Military Weapons with a size standard of $35.5M. Please specify whether the NAICS Code for this procurement is subject to one of the exceptions.

The NAICS Code is 541330 with the exception that applies to Military and Aerospace Equipment and Military Weapons with a size standard of $35.5M

Attachment J14 - Past Performance. Please confirm whether the Offeror’s Procuring Contracting Officer may complete both Sections 2 and Sections 3 of the Questionnaire if no ACO has been appointed. the Offeror’s Procuring Contracting Officer may complete both Sections 2 and Sections 3 of the Questionnaire if no ACO has been appointed.

Q&A_Set_2. Task Order 1 – “Program Office Support Performance Work Statement” We understand that Attachment 1 - Task Order 1, "Program Office Support Performance Work Statement" is to be used for pricing purposes of the sample task order; however, the Offeror is unable to locate the Task Order 1 – “Program Office Support Performance Work Statement” document on FedBizOps. It is not possible to accurately price Task Order 1 without the “Program Office Support Performance Work Statement”. As such, will the Government load the aforementioned document on the FBO site as well as extend the deadline for proposal responses to 4:00PM EST January 17, 2013 to allow Offerors reasonable time to respond?

PWS_RFP_PSO_22_Nov_13.xlsx (737.81 Kb) Description: Attachment J-1 Task Order 1, Program Office Support Performance Work Statement was posted on FBO 1st on Nov 22, 2013 and then updated in Amendment 001 on December 5, 2013. The proposal due date is January 8, 2014, 4:00 pm Eastern Time.

Discussion: SAQMMA13R0044 - Amendment 001, Factor 5. Organizational Plan. Identify the proposed key personnel you consider to the successful .... Provide a commitment letter and resume for each proposed key personnel.

Question: Does the contractor determine who are the key personnel even if it may differ from H-016? Or does H-016 list the minimum requirement for key personnel?

H-016 Lists the Government determined minimum. Offerors may propose additional key personnel.

For Task Order 1, please clarify office space available for contractor employees proposed in Task Order 001 on site at…