QATS_RFP_-_Amendment_1.docx

SOL-HQ-14-00018

Amendment 1 – Solicitation Question and Answers

Technical Proposal

1. For the Oral Presentations described in Section L-2, Subsection 1.1.2, can the responses be outlined on the flip charts during the two hour response preparation time to facilitate the presentations?

A: The Presenter(s) can structure their responses and use the supplies furnished in whatever way they feel is best suited to responding to the scenarios.

2. For the Oral Presentations described in Section L-2, Subsection 1.1.2, will members of the orals presentation team other than the primary presenter be allowed to add or tag-team comments as necessary?

A: Per Subsection 1.1.2 paragraph (e) – Presentations shall be delivered by the proposed QATS Program Manager and up to 4 other members of the proposed Key Personnel staff.

Therefore, any of the 5 people proposed to present, may speak at any time during the presentation.

3. In Section M-2 Evaluation Factors for Award clarification is requested on the relative weighting of the evaluation Factors and Subfactors. It's understood that the Subfactors under Factor 1 (Technical Capability), including 1.1 (Technical Approach), 1.2 (Key Personnel), and 1.3 (Management and Staffing Plan) are in descending order of importance. Does it follow that the importance of Factor 2 (Past Performance) is less than that of Subfactor 3 (Management and Staffing Plan)?

A: Factor 1 (Technical Capability) is of more importance than Factor 2 (Past Performance). The Subfactors under Factor 1 are components of the larger importance of Factor 1. We are not using relative weighting in the evaluation of the Factors and Subfactors for this solicitation. All Subfactors and Subsections in Factor 1 (Technical Capability), will be used for the evaluation of that Factor alone and will not be individually evaluated against Factor 2.

4. The Performance Standards and QASP process described in Attachment 5 refers to Award Term and Award Term Incentives. An Award Term was identified in the previous RFP, however, it is not in this solicitation. Is this Attachment relevant?

A: Attachment 5 has been amended to remove all references to Award Terms and Award Term Incentives. The contemplated contract will have two (2) Option Periods. No Award Terms are anticipated.

5. Q: The key personnel description for Group Leader-Administrative in Attachment 6 indicates a minimum of 6 years of experience in PC and mainframe based computer systems is required. Organizations of the size needed to support this contract utilize server-based computer systems. Is the mainframe experience requirement still an intended need under this contract?

A: Attachment 6, Group Leader – Administrative has been amended so that it now reads:

At a minimum, the Group Leader – Administrative shall have a B.S. Degree in Computer Science or equivalent from an accredited university or college and a minimum of six (6) years of combined experience in all aspects of environmental measurement information, computerized systems (both PC and server based), and systems analysis. Of these six (6) years of experience, a minimum of two (2) years of systems design, develop, operation, maintenance and testing experience and two (2) years of experience in administrative support functions, including training and records/file maintenance are required.

6. The client authorization letter example in Attachment 10 references the ESAT rather than QATS contract.

A: Attachment 10 has been amended to remove references to ESAT.

7. For various sections of the Technical Proposal, page limits are specified. The spacing to be used for proposal preparation does not appear to be specified in the solicitation. Can we use single spacing for the Technical Proposal?

A: Section L-2, Technical Proposal Instructions, has been amended to incorporate the following sentence:

“The Technical Proposal shall be Single Spaced.”

8. For the Past Performance section, completed questionnaires are requested back from the clients to the EPA Contract Specialist by March 11, 2016 (the due date of the solicitation). Is the specified date of March 11, 2016 correct for receipt of completed questionnaires from clients?

A: The due date for both the submission of proposals and for receipt of completed questionnaires from clients has been amended to March 18, 2016.

Price Proposal

1. In Section B-1 the Contract Base Period (Years 1 and 2:24 months) table includes the column headings “Personnel Classification” for the key personnel followed by "Skill Level" (TBD); however, the tables for Option Periods I and II include only the column “Labor Classification”. The price proposal model on page 64 of Section L-2 uses the term Labor Categories. Why do the tables in Section B-1 differ, and does “Skill Level” in the base period table have any relevance?

A: The Section B-1 tables have been amended so they are consistent throughout the solicitation.

2. In Section B-1 in the first two paragraphs on page 8, the terms "normally assigned category of labor" and "function he/she is performing" as related to how fixed labor rates are to be applied is unclear. Labor categories are not variable unless an individual is promoted. Assigned fixed labor rates are assumed to be consistent with the assigned labor category. Functions performed by any individual may be numerous. Please clarify.

A: Work billed to the contract will be based on the work performed, not the employee’s assigned labor category. For example, if the Senior Organic Analytical Chemist was covering or doing work that is usually performed by a non-key personnel chemist, the contractor would have to invoice the Government at the rate of the non-key personnel chemist, not at the Senior Organic Analytical Chemist’s normal rate.

3. Do the Other Direct Cost (ODC) amounts required to be proposed as indicated in sections B-3 and L-2, page 66, include full markup (i.e., G&A)?

A: Yes, G&A is included in the ODC amounts referenced in B-3 and L-2.

4. If contract labor is proposed at the task order level as an ODC, will it apply to the listed ODC maximums as shown in Section B-3?

We do not foresee identifying contract labor as an ODC.

5. In Section L-2, the annual LOE ceilings as shown in the Price proposal Subsection 4.2 (Direct Labor) of 58,480 hours/year represent a 34% decrease from the 88,200 hours/year in the previous QATS RFP; however, the scope of services described in the PWS is essentially unchanged. There appears to be no provision through total hours proposed or through optional LOE quantities to accommodate growth should the demand increase for QA/QC support within the CLP or for buy-in projects from the Regions. Is that an error? If not, will there be accommodations to increase the contract LOE ceilings when increased demand occurs?

A: The labor hours in Section l-2, Subsection 4.2 have been corrected, due to a computational error in the initial estimate, to 64,500 hours/year.

6. The Price Proposal Model Schedule 1 on page 64 of Section L-2 L-14 has columns for rates, proposed hours, and total cost for direct labor but not for teaming subcontractor and contract labor/consultants. Two questions: 1) Are teaming subcontractor and contract labor/consultant hours to be applied to the annual LOE totals indicated in this Section, and 2) if so can the schedules be modified accordingly?

A: Subcontractor hours should be applied to the annual LOE totals. Please see Price Proposal Model Schedule 1, Section D. (Team Subcontractors).

7. Specific Other Direct Costs (ODCs) amounts by contract period are indicated in Sections B-2 and L-2. The first sentence in Section L-2, Subsection 4.7 states, “For evaluation purposes, the Offeror shall propose the following ODCs:

Are these amounts for proposal purposes only, or are they intended to be Period/Term ceilings?

A: They are intended to be Period/Term ceilings. Per Clause B-3, amounts in excess of the following are not allowable as a charge to this contract without the prior written approval of the Contracting Officer.

8. Section 4.0 – Labor Rates and Total Contract Price. Page 62 of the Solicitation states: “This section shall be divided into three subsections (in the electronic .xls file version of this section, each of the following subsections shall be its own spreadsheet tab).” Are the three subsections:

4.1 – Summary Page

4.2 – Direct Labor

4.3 – Administrative Labor In addition, where are the spreadsheet tabs for the eight schedules to be placed?

A: Each Subsection shall have its own tab in the Price Proposal spreadsheet. The reference to “three” was deleted in L-2, Price Proposal, Section 4.

The eight schedules should be separate and have their own respective tabs.

9. Subsection 4.1 – Summary Page. Pages 62 and 63 of the Solicitation identify the components of the Summary Page. The information requested appears to be similar to that to be provided on Schedule 1. Please provide a specific format for the Summary Page so that we may provide the desired information.

A: The Summary Page and Schedule 1 are the same document; however please submit it as Tab 4.1. Use the format in Schedule 1 for the Summary Page (Tab 4.1).

Schedules 2-8 have been amended to Schedules 1-7, as to not duplicate the Summary Page.

10. Schedules 2 thru 8: Individual Contract Year. Page 65 of the Solicitation requires the development of schedules for each contract year. However, Section B of the Solicitation (pages 6 and 7) shows the use of fixed hourly rates for each of the contract periods. Thus, it appears that the information on Schedules 2 and 3 would be identical as would Schedules 4 through 6 and Schedules 7 and 8. Is our interpretation correct?

A: That is correct. As shown in the answer to Question 9, the individual contract years are now labeled Schedules 1-7.