Attachment_7_-_Q As_for_EPA_SF_330_Digital_Form.pdf

ATTACHMENT 7

Questions and Answers Design and Engineering Services (DES) SF 330 Digital Form

The EPA would like to thank the remedial contracting community for the questions and comments related to the Microsoft Access SF 330 Digital Form that will be required for submitting offers under the

DES Suite. Answers to all questions are provided below or summarized in the Resolved Issues section.

Duplicate questions were sometimes combined into one question and answer.

RESOLVED ISSUES

Recurring error in file ("One or more values are prohibited by the validation rule [MainID]=1 set for 'tbl_Main'. Enter a value that the expression for this field can accept.") was corrected

Part 2, Sections 9 and 10 – vendors may now type into the dropdown boxes to create their own disciplines and experiences, if necessary

Part 1, Section G, Box 29 – expanded space for project titles

Part 1, Section H – fixed text boxes that were printing code instead of text formatting

Part 2, Box 5b – enabled textbox to grow if needed

Enabled the Enter key to add a new line in text boxes where extended details are likely. If necessary, Ctrl+Enter will also add a new line.

Blank space has been reduced where possible and text boxes have been expanded to balance usable space and readability

Ensured that all text boxes default to Times New Roman sized 12

ANSWERS:

Q.1: Concern that different printers format the margins of a print-preview differently.

A: Our testing did not show this to be an issue as the margins remained consistent across numerous computers and printers.

Q.2: Can the order of entries be altered in Part 1 Section C, E or F?

A: No, information must be entered into the form in the order you wish it to be displayed.

The resumes and projects will now display in the entered order in the summary tables at the top of Sections E & F.

Q.3: It appears that we can modify fonts and colors in the brief description box, but not in any other box of Section E. Is this correct?

A: Font styling has been enabled in text boxes where extended details and descriptions are most likely.

Q.4: The text formatting function does not appear to be available for all text boxes. Could this be expanded to include all entries?

A: Font styling has been enabled in text boxes where extended details and descriptions are most likely.

Q.5: Is it possible to activate formatting in all the free-entry fields?

A: Font styling has been enabled in text boxes where extended details and descriptions are most likely.

Q.6: Will a specific font and font size be provided? Will this font/ font size match the font/font size of the textboxes?

A: Times New Roman sized 12 is required and is set as the default for all text boxes. Vendors must maintain this font & font size throughout the form.

Q.7: When cutting a pasting in descriptions, the form takes the font of what was cut – would be nice if the Times New Roman 12 pt automatically populated when you paste into a field. It was noted that you can easily change the font within Access to Times New Roman, but we found no option to change the font/point size.

A: All text should paste in as Times New Roman sized 12 into text boxes where font formatting is disabled. For text boxes where formatting is allowed, the vendor will be responsible for ensuring that copy/pasted text is submitted in the required Times New Roman size 12.

To change font/size/style click the "Home" tab at the top of the screen. Text Formatting will be enabled when a user has their cursor within a textbox where font formatting is allowed.

Q.8: It appears that project summaries, parts of resumes, and Section H allows minimum formatting.

Can you change these parts to allow for more formatting (i.e., tables, figures etc.)?

A: We have reviewed these aspects of the Form and included formatting where we deem appropriate. Please review the latest version of the SF 330 Form.

Q.9: Is there a way to embed tables in the response to Section H, or are tables considered graphics and are therefore treated as Attachments? Would it be possible to use column-formatting to increase the ability to organize information, especially if tables are not permitted?

A: The form is text-only, all tables and figures must be added as attachments.

Q.10: In Part 2 Sections 9 and 10, are extra textboxes allowed to be added for either of these sections?

Can two functions codes/disciplines be combined into a single row of the table? Can two profile codes/ experiences be combined into a single row of the table?

A: No additional text boxes can be added. However, the form now allows for vendor-entry of disciplines and experiences, enabling a vendor to combine as needed.

Q.11: Will you create an import function that allows us to transfer information from one regional submittal to another as well as information to/from our large business partner?

A: No import function will be provided.

Q.12: Every time you open and close the file, the date on the file changes, even if no edits have been made. Can it be set such that the date only changes when edits have been saved?

A: The date modified will update whenever the form is opened, there is no change that can be made to avoid this.

Q:13: What is the purpose of the boxes at the top of Part 1, Sections E & F?

A: The table lists the resumes/projects you have entered within the form. It is for vendor reference only and will not appear on the printing version of the form. This table cannot be used to navigate between entries, please use the arrows found below the table for this purpose.

Q.14: Concern about auto-correction modifying vendor-entered content.

A: The auto-correct feature has not been enabled in the Form itself and should not change any copy and pasted text. However, auto-correct may be enabled on your SF-330 depending on the local settings of your computer. It is your responsibility to ensure that all content is presented as intended.

Q.15: It appears that entries in Section C, once saved, cannot be deleted. Please add the capability to delete individual rows in Section C.

A: As you enter information into the provided row, a new row will appear below, up to 15 times. Note that once a new row has been edited it cannot be deleted from the print-version of the form. A new row that has not been edited will not display in the print version. Please use caution when entering new records to avoid a blank row appearing in the print version.

Q.16: If we submit a document in advance of the CLIN due date, can we access and update/amend the submitted document prior to the due date?

A: You will not be able to access your SF 330 to make edits after submission. SF 330s will be uploaded via FedConnect, so you would need to upload a revised SF 330 prior to the due date in the event that corrections are needed. To minimize the need for this, please ensure that SF

330s are correct prior to upload and submission.

Q.17: Do you want us to include DUNS and CAGE codes? In the case of a JV, do you want the JV DUNS

# and the ones for the JV partners? Would they all go in the Section B.5 cell? Other Federal agencies require these numbers on SF330s. Will you alter the form to have new cells that request this information?

A: DUNS numbers are already requested in Part II of the SF 330, so they are not required in

Section B.5. Part IIs should be submitted for all office locations of the relevant teaming arrangement, to include the prime, subcontractors and any JV partners.

Q.18: Does EPA expect to see 5 projects in each resume? Or can we save space by including only 4?

A: Offerors may submit up to 5 relevant project examples within each key personnel resume, but may also choose to include fewer than 5.

Q.19: Will the content of the attachments be evaluated and scored during the proposal review process?

A: Yes, the content of the attachments will be evaluated and scored along with the other content submitted with the SF 330 Form. Please remember that there is a 10-page limit for attachments. Although attachments will be evaluated, the content will not be searchable using keyword searches. Therefore, text should be provided primarily in the SF 330 text boxes and the attachments function should be for photos, tables, figures, etc. with text as-needed to describe the attachments.

Q.20: Section H evaluation criteria does not match the draft synopsis, need to make consistent.

A: The evaluation factors are now consistent in the SF 330 Form.

Q.21: If between the prime and our teaming partners we have more than 15 offices that will be supporting a specific region contract, how do we denote that? Are we allowed to have more Part IIs then the offices noted in Part I, Section C?

A: Yes, you can include as many Part IIs as needed. Part 1, Section C is intended for the 15 team members that comprise the main teaming arrangement for the CLIN, which should include the prime, subcontractors, and/or JV partners.

Q.22: Part I, Section E, Resumes—Often city/state are asked for in different text boxes, how would you want to address if a project occurs in more than one city/state?

A: If the example project you are providing is a large contract (e.g. a RAC contract), please use the federal office where the contract was administered. For more discrete project examples, if the project did NOT include any site work, please use the office location where work was conducted. If the project included significant site work, please provide the location of the site.

Q.23: Part I, Section H, Factor 1—Can a field be added to this section for the team introduction?

A: A field has been added to Section H for an introduction, or any other content that an offeror would like to address in Section H prior to the content of the evaluation factors.

Q.24: Part I, Section H, Factor 5—Can you provide the estimated capacity requirement for each CLIN so contractors can calculate the capacity requirements and demonstrate their ability to accomplish the work?

A: The estimated capacity requirement has been provided for each CLIN in the Draft Request for SF 330s.

Q.25: Are Part IIs required for any of the offices for Part I.c? Because Part I.c is limited to 15 entries, can we provide additional Part IIs if the offices will support the specific regional contract?

A: Yes, additional Part IIs can be provided. Part IIs are intended to list all the offices that will support a CLIN. Part I, Section C is limited to the 15 team members that will comprise the main teaming arrangement for the CLIN.

Q.26: Will the evaluators be performing key word searches? If yes, what are those key words, will they be case-sensitive, and how will the words be entered into the search request (i.e., RI/FS vs.

Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study vs. remedial investigation/feasibility study)?

A: After contract award, the SF 330 database will allow for keyword searches of technical disciplines and capabilities. Keyword searches will be performed primarily at the task order level and will not impact the technical evaluation of the SF 330s for contract award.

Q.27: Guidance requested on the use of abbreviations - states, registrations, degrees, EPA, regions

(numeric vs. roman numeral)

A: Guidance on abbreviations and keywords will be provided when the final Request for SF

330s is issued.

Q.28: Request for the technical words that may be searched

A: After contract award, the SF 330 database will allow for keyword searches of technical disciplines and capabilities. Keyword searches will be performed primarily at the task order level and will not impact the technical evaluation of the SF 330s for contract award. Guidance on abbreviations and keywords will be provided when the final Request for SF 330s is issued.

Q.29: After we upload a test draft SF 330, please confirm if we will have the opportunity to speak to an EPA representative on how the document appeared in the database and in the printout.

A: You will receive confirmation that your test SF 330 has been received. If requested, for the test upload only in response to the Draft Request for SF 330s, EPA can provide confirmation as to the appearance of the document and how many pages are generated for the SF 330 printout.

Q.30: Section H lacks a section where firms may provide a corporate overview as well as place to introduce teaming partners. Such a data field is worthwhile, particularly because it appears that EPA will be printing the data provided so that the attachments may be viewed. Without this data field, we believe that the Offeror will not have any portion of the SF330 to provide summary information of the

Offeror’s qualifications.

A: A field has been added to Section H for an introduction, or any other content that an offeror would like to address in Section H prior to the content of the evaluation factors.

Q.31: We are disappointed that the database lack any capabilities to provide tabular data and would have preferred to load a database after contract award.

A: The EPA considered this but will not be modifying the Form to allow for tabular data.

Q.32: Do attachments have to be 12 point font as well, particularly for charts/diagrams/etc?

A: All text boxes within the SF 330 Form shall be Times New Roman 12-point font. The text included in attachments are exempt from this requirement; however, EPA requests that the font be readable.

Q.33: Section H, can you provide a field for us to provide an introduction and conclusion? Section H is the only place in the SF330 to introduce the Team and explain the rationale for why this team was created, the specific roles and responsibilities of the team members, prior working experience, Mentor-

Protégé relationships, etc. that address potential performance risk factors.

A: A field has been added to Section H for an introduction, or any other content that an offeror would like to address in Section H prior to the content of the evaluation factors.

Q.34: We request that you increase the page limitations by an additional 15 pages for the SF 330 Part I

(driven by Sections E and F) to account for the page overflows expected to be caused by the output from the database.

A: EPA has considered the amount of information necessary to evaluate each CLIN, tested the input of that information into the SF 330 Form, and determined that 55 pages is sufficient. Our testing included variances in the formatting of different printers and the output of the database. Please also reference the answer to Question 45.

Q.35: Contractors need to have receipt confirmation by the next day (similar to express delivery services like Federal Express and UPS) to be able to respond if there is a delivery failure. We strongly recommend that EPA provide immediate electronic receipt notification when SF 330 files have been uploaded on FedConnect to give contractors assurance that their submittal has been delivered and provide adequate time to rectify any problems in the event that delivery failed.

A: Contractors will receive confirmation within one (1) business day that their SF 330 has been received. EPA will only confirm that the SF 330 was received and can be opened.

Q.36: Will SF 330s be evaluated through a database searching methodology only? Because EPA is proposing to use a new and unfamiliar process that will rely completely on electronic information to receive information and perform SF330 evaluations, we request that EPA describe in detail specifically what procedures they will use to evaluate the submitted information. To provide all of the information critical to EPA evaluations in a format that they know will be reviewed, Contractors need to know exactly how EPA will access, see, print, and review their information.

A: Part I and Part II of the SF 330 and all attachments will be evaluated by the AEEB as part of the SF 330 technical evaluation process. The AEEB will not be relying on database searching methodology. Key word search functionality refers to the task order award process.

Q.37: Concern about attachments not being searchable: How will information in attachments such as maps of office locations, diagrams, flowcharts, schematics, summary tables, organization charts, etc. be accessible to evaluators using the Access tool interface? How will the information in attachments be evaluated? How will attachments be viewed by EPA during the evaluation process? If information in attachments will not be used in the initial evaluation for award and later evaluations for task orders, then attachments providing information such as maps of office locations, decision diagrams, flowcharts, communication schematics, summary tables, and organization charts are essentially useless. Please clarify exactly How information in attachments will be accessed and used in the evaluation process.

A: ALL attachments will be evaluated as part of the SF 330 technical evaluation process. The key word search functionality refers to the task order award process.

After contract award, the SF 330 database will allow for keyword searches of technical disciplines and capabilities. Even though attachments will always be accessible in the SF 330 database, and will be referenced by task order AEEBs to review technical capabilities, please be aware that the text provided within attachments will not be retrieved in the initial search results for technical disciplines or capabilities in the SF 330 database. Therefore, it is preferable to include text-heavy content in the text boxes of the SF 330 Form itself.

Once an attachment is opened in an offeror’s SF 330, the search features within Windows, Microsoft Word, and Adobe Acrobat can be conducted. However, the task order AEEB may conduct initial searches for technical disciplines or capabilities in the SF 330 database, and this type of search will not retrieve text in the attachments.

Q.38: "“…attachments should supplement their text within the form, not take the place of text descriptions within the digital form itself.” In terms of the evaluation process, what does this mean? As a practical matter, some information in Attachments, such as office location maps and process diagrams, cannot be easily provided in text. Many attachments are specifically designed to literally “take the place of text” by their nature, not duplicate what is already in the “text descriptions.” We request that EPA address how visual information like office maps to show geographic coverage should be presented so that we can be confident that it will be evaluated.

A: ALL attachments will be evaluated as part of the technical evaluation of the SF 330s.

However, EPA prefers that attachments be limited to graphics, photos, diagrams, charts, etc.

vs. text-heavy attachments.

Q.39: Can the submittal database be modified to provide an automated receipt at submission?

A: SF 330s will be uploaded through FedConnect, not through a database that can provide an automated receipt. However, EPA will provide confirmation of receipt to offerors within one

(1) business day. EPA will only confirm that the SF 330 was received and can be opened.

Q.40: What is the procedure if an offeror uploads their submittal, but is not sent a confirmation?

A: EPA will provide confirmation of receipt to offerors within one (1) business day. EPA will only confirm that the SF 330 was received and can be opened. If confirmation is not received within one (1) business day, the offeror can assume that the SF 330 was not received by the

EPA and should resubmit. It is advised to upload SF 330s in advance of the due date to account for any technical difficulties and to receive EPA’s confirmation of receipt in advance of the due date.

Q.41: It is requested that the government allow for an additional method of submittal, perhaps CDs, so that the offeror can ensure receipt on the due date.

A: The only method that the EPA is accepting is the electronic database, FedConnect. EPA advises that offerors submit their SF 330(s) in advance of the SF 330 due date so that offerors can be provided the one (1) business day confirmation of receipt prior to the SF 330 due date.

Q.42: We are concerned that the number of proposals that will be submitted during a brief time frame may overwhelm the capacity of the database. Because of this concern, it is requested that the government allow for an additional method of submittal, perhaps CDs, so that the offeror can ensure receipt by the due date.

A: EPA encourages the submission of test SF 330 uploads in response to this Draft Request for

SF 330s in order to test the capacity of the system. A confirmation of receipt will be provided to offerors within one (1) business day. EPA will only confirm that the SF 330 was received and can be opened.

Q.43: Can attachments have font smaller than Times New Roman 12 point?

All text boxes within the SF 330 Form shall be Times New Roman 12-point font. The text included in attachments are exempt from this requirement; however, EPA requests that the font be readable.

Q.44: Request to increase page limit to 75

EPA has considered the amount of information necessary to evaluate each CLIN, tested the input of that information into the SF 330 Form, and determined that 55 pages is sufficient.

Please also reference the answer to Question 45.

Q.45: Because large business offerors must address six evaluation factors in Section H, while small businesses need only address five factors, fairness dictates that Factor 6 (Experience with small business subcontracting) responses not count within the 55-page limit for the SF 330 and the 10-page limit for attachments. Please consider allowing an additional 2 pages within Section H and an additional page within the attachments for responses to Factor 6.

For large businesses only, an additional 2 pages will be allowed for the Section H, Factor 6 response for a total of 57 pages. An additional page of attachments will also be allowed for large businesses only to respond to Section H, Factor 6, for a total of 11 pages of attachments.

Q.46: Because team subconsultants cannot (as is customary in SF 330 preparation) provide a completed Part II form to be included in the prime’s SF 330 submittal, each prime offeror must complete and electronically sign the Part II forms for all their team subs. Please verify that EPA intends for each prime offeror to act as “Authorized Representative” (per SF 330 requirements) for all of their proposed team subconsultants."

A: Yes, this is the intent at this time.

Q.47: Part II's require signature from Prime and Subs, but are electronically submitted. Request to submit Part II's as separate PDFs.

A: Part IIs should be submitted with Part I as part of the SF 330. Please see Question 38.

Q.48: “... offerors are reminded that the attachments should supplement their text within the form, not take the place of text descriptions within the digital form itself. Content located within attachments will not be searchable within the Access SF-330 database. All question responses must be answered within the relative text box on the form itself.” These instructions seem to indicate that responses to selection criteria that are in the form of attachments may not be evaluated with the same weight that will be given to responses that are within the Access form. Is this interpretation accurate? How will database searches be used in the selection process? Can't database searches be supplemented by searches of the attachments that are easily implemented using the search features within Windows, Microsoft Word, and Adobe Acrobat?

A: ALL attachments will be evaluated as part of the SF 330 technical evaluation process. The key word search functionality refers to the task order award process.

After contract award, the SF 330 database will allow for keyword searches of technical disciplines and capabilities. Even though attachments will always be accessible in the SF 330 database, and will be referenced by task order AEEBs to review technical capabilities, please be aware that the text provided within attachments will not be retrieved in the initial search results for technical disciplines or capabilities in the SF 330 database. Therefore, it is preferable to include text-heavy content in the text boxes of the SF 330 Form itself.

Once an attachment is opened in an offeror’s SF 330, the search features within Windows, Microsoft Word, and Adobe Acrobat can be conducted. However, the task order AEEB may conduct initial searches for technical disciplines or capabilities in the SF 330 database, and this type of search will not retrieve text in the attachments.

Q.49: Please consider allowing offerors to use the automated e-mail receipt generated by FedConnect as evidence of time of delivery. Please also detail procedures EPA will follow if technical difficulties prevent offerors from uploading their submissions or prevent EPA from downloading or reading the uploaded submissions.

A: Automated email receipts are not generated by FedConnect according to EPA test uploads.

Vendors will be able to check their Sent messages to show that SF 330 uploads were sent by the due date. EPA will also provide confirmation of receipt within one (1) business day. EPA will only confirm that the SF 330 was received and can be opened. It is the offeror’s responsibility to deliver the SF 330 to the proper place (through FedConnect) by the proper time.

Q.50: Request for web address in instructions

A: SF 330s will be uploaded electronically via FedConnect at www.fedconnect.net, not through any other web address.

Q.51: Since experience working with all 15 proposed team members may not be reflected in the 5 past project examples, how will past experience working with team members factor into EPA’s evaluation of each project?

A: Offerors should select the 5 past project examples for Section F that best demonstrate the team’s experience as a whole to meet the technical requirements of the SOW. EPA may also choose to reference other information provided in the offeror’s SF 330 when evaluating past projects and working with team members, such as other information presented within Section

E or H.

Q.52: Will EPA consider enabling bidders to submit additional project descriptions to address experience working with each team member since the number of proposed team members may be significantly greater than the five project descriptions?

A: Offerors are limited to highlighting 5 past project examples. However, a field has been provided in Section H to introduce the team or address any other information that an offeror feels is relevant before addressing the evaluation factors in Section H.

http://www.fedconnect.net/

Q.53 Will contracts be allowed as Sect F projects for the DES suite?

A: Yes, contracts may be listed as part of the 5 past project examples in Section F. In Section E, offerors may also present up to 5 relevant projects for each key personnel and large businesses may present 5 projects that highlight small business utilization for Factor 6 in

Section H. All project examples should showcase the firm’s ability to meet the technical requirements of the SOW.