Questions and Answers Table - Amendment 0002.pdf

No. Question RFP Page RFP Para Reference (if applicable)

Government Response

Was just reviewing the documents posted on beta.sam.gov for the above referenced opportunity and noticed the Attachment 3 file is not opening . I have verified that I have the most recent adobe reader. Will the document be reposted to the site?

Attachment 3 was reposted to beta.sam.gov. (reference Amendment 0001).

In the “Instructions to Offerors” section, it is stated, “The Offeror shall provide verification that the Offeror has a Defense Security Service (DSS) approved facility clearance, or a statement confirming that the Offeror will be able to obtain a DSS approved facility clearance prior to final proposal revision submission.” Does this mean that DLA will not sponsor the awardee post-award for a clearance?

Volume I, Section 3, Offeror

Representation and Certifications –

Commercial Items

As stated under the Evaluation Section of the RFP, subpart 2 - Basis for Contract Award, final paragraph, "The Government will not sponsor

Offerors for a DSS facility clearance."

Is it possible to clarify if the small business prime must have an active Facility Clearance prior to submitting a response by 04/21/2020 or must they have one in place if selected for the award?

Volume I, Section 3, Offeror

Representation and Certifications –

Commercial Items

As stated under the Evaluation Section of the RFP, subpart 2 - Basis for Contract Award, final paragraph, "At the time of final proposal revision submission, the DLA Distribution Acquisition Operations (J7) KO shall verify that the

Offeror possesses a DSS approved facility clearance. If it cannot be determined that the Offeror possesses a DSS approved facility clearance, the Offeror will not be eligible for award."

FAR 52.222-17 Non-displacement of Qualified Workers is checked on the RFP. Is this contract a recompete or a new requirement? If a recompete, who is the incumbent?

8 FAR 52.212-5

This is a recompete acquisition of current services provided by Unity

Technologies Corporation.

Volume II, Past Performance requires completion of the Questionnaire. If a CPAR is issued on a reference contract, will the CPAR be sufficient in lieu of a Questionnaire completion.

33&34 Attachment 6 A finalized CPAR can be considered in lieu of a PPQ.

With the revocation of EO 13495, Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers, will the government remove FAR clause FAR 52.222-17 as a contractor compliance item?

8 Table under Para. (c)

No. As a matter of law, the current non-displacement regulations technically remain in effect until the Department of Labor formally rescinds them. However, Offerors are reminded that “Service employee”, as used in the clause, means any person engaged in the performance of a service contract other than any person employed in a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacity , as those terms are defined in 29 CFR part 541.

Who should sign Attachment 5, Certification of the Offeror’s Accounting System?

Para. 3 under “Section 3”

A Company Official who can sign on behalf of the Offeror who can attest to the acceptability of the Offeror's accounting system.

It is indicated that Offeror shall clearly identify the proposed staffing to satisfy the Government’s requirements. To confirm, is the government seeking the names of proposed personnel for all positions?

Para. 2 under “Volume III –

Technical Proposal”

The government requires the resumes of all Key Personnel to be included in the contractor's initial proposal. Resumes for Non-Key Personnel will be required NLT two (2) weeks after award of the first Task Order (TO). The contractor shall submit resumes for all proposed non-key personnel for subsequent TOs prior award of TO. Please refer to section 1.4.1 (A) of the PWS (4/3/2020 Revision) for additional requirements.

Our accounting system was last reviewed and determined to be suitable/acceptable by the DCAA in 2014. The system hasn’t changed since.

Will that be acceptable?

Para. 3 under “Basis for Contract Award”

Offerors may use a DCAA review as supporting documentation, but Offerors shall still complete and submit attachment 5 of the RFP.

Evaluation factors reference an Attachment A (Instructions to Offerors) and an Attachment B (Evaluation Factors for Award). Since these attachments cannot be found in the RFP package and the instructions and evaluation factors are already included in the RFP document, we assume that these attachment references are clerical errors.

Para. 1 after “Factor

2” and “Factor 3” These were clerical errors and such references were removed (reference

Amendment 0001 - Attached RFP (3/26/2020 Revision).

Will the government permit us to use a recent and completed copy of the CPARS in lieu of a past performance questionnaire? Asking our customers to fill out a questionnaire with topics that are in line with the CPARS places undue burden on our customers, especially during these challenging times.

35 Para. (4) See response to question number 5 above.

RFP SP3300-20-R-0001

Amendment 0002 - Questions and Answers Table

The USG states that The Offeror shall provide resumes for all key personnel.

For the purposes of this solicitation, the labor categories considered key personnel are identified in PWS paragraph 1.4.1. Para 1.4.1.a states: The Contractor shall submit resumes for all proposed non-key personnel who will perform on a pending task order as part of their proposal submission in response to the Government Request for Proposal (RFP) for the task order.

Para 1.4.2 states Additionally, the Contractor shall provide Letters of Intent (LOI) for all proposed personnel who are not current employees of the company in the proposal. Will the Government please confirm that there is only one resume required for the Senior Project Manager and that no others are required for this submission.

RFP Page 36 PWS

Sect 1.2.5 PWS 1.4.1.a 1.4.2

See response to question number 8 above.

Are any positions covered under the Service Contract Act (FAR 52.222-41). If yes, please provide the applicable Occupation code from the Area Wage Determination.

The positions under this contract have been determined to be professional employees. The Service Contract Act of 1965, now codified at 41 U.S.C.

chapter 67 , Service Contract Labor Standards, does not cover bona fide executive, administrative, or professional employees.

Please advise the labor categories that need security clearance. Please advise the level of clearance needed.

All positions require Secret clearances. Please refer to section 1.4.1 (A) of the PWS (4/3/2020 Revision).

Will the USG extend the due date of the submission to allow responses to Questions and allow industries adjustment to COVID 19 requirements. The way of doing business has significantly changed in the proposal and response effort an extension will allow time to properly adjust. Recommend 5/15/2020.

3 Para 11 Based on the extenuating circumstances, the due date for proposals has been extended to the date located on the SF30.

The USG Requires an Acceptable Accounting System and a DSS Facility Clearance. Due to the criticality of the program based on processes and quality will the government find desirable offerors (prime and Sub/teammate) with ISO certification as part of Best Value evaluation?

33 Section 3 This information can be captured under Volume II - Past Performance

Proposal, Tab 5.

Does the USG require all personnel to be on site for the execution of the contract or will the USG leave it to the offeror to identify positions that are located at the contractor site? This has proven to increase efficiency and reduce overall costs.

PWS 2 & 14 1.2.3, 3.1

Per section 1.2.3 of the PWS, all personnel (contractor resources) shall be required to be onsite New Cumberland. Refer to section 1.4 of the PWS for list of resources requirements (Key and Non-Key personnel).

Does the USG provide administrative material to produce products/deliverables while working on site such as reproduction, paper, Ink, etc.? If not are these costs reimbursable?

PWS 14 Section C-3 All IT equipment (GFE) and administrative material necessary to execute tasking is provided at no cost to the contractor.

"Affiliate and sister company experience and past performance will be considered provided a commitment letter documenting the meaningful relationship is included with the Past Performance submission." Can you please define "meaningful relationship" and what information the commitment letter should contain?

Vol II Past

Performance

Meaningful relationship in this context is defined as two organizations legally connected in some manner. The commitment letter shall certify that the parties commit to joint performance.

20 Can you provide incumbent contract info? See response provided to question number 4 above.

We currently have an interim secret clearance awaiting final approval for out TS facility clearance. Can you confirm that we are eligible to compete for this award?

Volume I, Section 3, Offeror

Representation and Certifications –

Commercial Items

As stated under the Evaluation Section of the RFP, subpart 2 - Basis for Contract Award, final paragraph, "At the time of final proposal revision submission, the DLA Distribution Acquisition Operations (J7) KO shall verify that the Offeror possesses a DSS approved facility clearance.

Will there be an immediate and active task order issued against the IDIQ upon award?

The Government anticipates executing a task order simultaneously with the award of the basic contract.

Can the key personnel (Senior PM) have the flexibility to telework at contractor site based on the task order issued?

No. All personnel (Key and Non-Key) are required to be onsite New Cumberland for all Task Orders. Refer to section 1.2.3 of the PWS

(4/3/2020 Revision) for specific information.

24 Do you want price proposal to be submitted on EXCEL? 38 Yes. Please refer to Volume IV - Price Proposal under the Instructions to

Offerors Section of the RFP (Proposal Preparation Requirements subsection) for specific price proposal submission requirements.

Can we submit commercial past performance examples to support this past performance volume?

33 Yes.

Will DLA consider extending the due date for questions a minimum of 1 week and extending the date for solicitation proposals a minimum of 3 weeks due to the ongoing COVID-19 Pandemic?

29-30 1 and 2 See answer to question number 15 above.

RFP SP3300-20-R-0001

The table in paragraph 7 provides the government’s estimate of labor categories and productive labor hours. “These estimates are based on an annual productive factor of 1920 hours (or FTE of 2080 hours).” Also, this paragraph states “This is for guidance purposes only, and does not prohibit the Contractor from proposing different labor categories or number of productive hours.” As this procurement is an IDIQ, Task Order contract, allowing firms to propose differing productive hours for an FTE is not conducive to a fair price comparison between competitors. All bidders should use the same productive hour equivalents determined by the government. Any changes to that can be addressed at the Task Order level. It is requested that the government specify 1920 hours as the productive hours for an FTE.

Section 1.2, paragraph 7

This is part of the Offeror's technical solution. The annual productive hours proposed will be used to establish the FFP task orders.

Given a lot of Government personnel are not available during the current crisis, would we be able to provide you CPARS in place of past performance?

Vol 2 – Past Performance

See response to question number 5 above.

Is it the Government’s intent that the contractor submits resumes and letters of intent (if applicable) for just key personnel (Senior Project Manager)?

PWS pg. 5 1 See response to question number 8 above.

Does the Government have a contingency plan for the contract transition if COVID-19 continues through the contract transition period?

PWS pg. 2 1.2.2 The Government is monitoring the COVID-19 situation closely. If COVID-

19 affects the transition of this contract, a modification will be issued, if necessary.

Would the Government please clarify the expectation for a surge or increased staffing? Can the government please clarify this requirement? If a surge or increase in staffing is anticipated, how is that captured into the hours estimates?

If an increased staffing level for surge is required, how is that included in the pricing and can the government clarify the percentage of surge staffing anticipated? If the government cannot clarify the requirement at this time would the Government consider providing a surge CLIN with estimated hours and LCATs based on past surge requirements?

PWS pg. 9 1.4.3

In the event of a surge requirement or increase in the level of effort requiring additional personnel, the government would submit a Request for

Proposal to the contractor. Staffing level increases during surge or emerging tasking would be addressed, at the Conract Officer's discretion, by a new Task Order, or modification to an existing Task Order.

Given the limited deliverables on this contract, are vendors allowed to adjust the hours based on the firm-fixed price to align with the level of effort defined on the SOW deliverables?

PWS pg. 23 5.2 Section A The CDRLs are not a separately priced line items. These costs should be included in the FFP, to perform all the requirements of the PWS.

Given that the Government has requested a CPFF-like pricing submittal (fringe, G&A, profit, etc. factors), how would the Government like the subcontractors to submit their pricing information (CPFF subcontractors typically submit a separate rate card to the Government)?

This is not a CPFF like contract. Task Orders will be issued on a Firm-Fixed- Price basis. Per the instructions to Offerors, Volume IV: Price Proposal , Subcontracts (regardless of dollar value) shall be adequately documented.

Subcontractor Price breakdowns may be submitted in separate emails. Subcontractors shall follow the same pricing format.

Due to the recent changes to the COVID-19 prevention and response efforts and subsequent precautions taken to safeguard our employees and the general public, we respectfully request a 30-day extension to the proposal due date to allow firms adequate time to prepare their proposals while reacting to the multitude of challenges caused by the COVID-19 epidemic.

N/A N/A See the response to question number 15 above.

Vol II – Past Performance Proposal - Due to the continuous updates on the Government’s COVID-19 response efforts and the current requirement to telework, we are striving to reduce the burden on our Government clients by not asking them to complete a Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQs) for this proposal. Our Contracting Representatives have been reluctant to complete – and have even discouraged from completing - PPQ forms if formal CPARS performance evaluations have been completed. Due to these extenuating circumstances, will Government please allow offerors to submit posted project CPARS in our proposals in lieu of Past Performance Questionnaires?

VOLUME II – PAST

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL (4)

See the response to question number 5 above.

Vol II – Past Performance Proposal – are we limited to only five (5) past performance projects or would more projects be considered in the evaluation of the offerors’ proposals?

VOLUME II – PAST

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL

There is no limit to past performance submissions.

“The offeror shall clearly identify the proposed staffing to satisfy the Government’s request”. Is this a requirement for the names of proposed staff for the Non-Key Personnel positions?

Vol III – Technical Proposal: Section L

See response to question number 8 above.

For clarification purposes, although the Government recommends a total of five

(5) contracts, there is no limit on relevant contract. Is that correct?

VOLUME II – PAST

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL, para. 2

Correct.

RFP SP3300-20-R-0001

Can the Govt. please clarify how the Govt. will evaluate references in the aggregate? For example, Team A has (5) contract references which are all relevant in terms of scope, magnitude, and complexity. Team B provides (5) contract references, only of which (3) are relevant in scope, (1) is relevant on complexity, and (1) is relevant on magnitude. Without further clarification, it appears that Team B’s past performance relevant, on the aggregate, while Team A’s past performance is also relevant. The references will be evaluated in the aggregate in order to allow Offerors who may not have the entire scope, magnitude, and complexity of the requirement under one individual contract to still be considered relevant if experience with the full scope, magnitude, and complexity of the requirement can be demonstrated within the allotted number of references as described above.

VOLUME II – PAST

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL, para. 2

As stated in the RFP, the references will be evaluated in aggregate. The relevancy ratings assigned will be in accordance with the DoD Source

Selection Guide. The Government cannot provide feedback on a theoretical question of evaluation ratings/relevancy.

Although the Government recommends a total of five (5) contracts encompassing the prime Offeror and/or any major subcontractors? Does this prevent the offeror from submitting contracts from subcontractors other than “major” subcontractors?

VOLUME II – PAST

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL, para. 2

Per Evaluation Factor 1: Performance Confidence Assessment, subcontractors not meeting the definition of a “major subcontractor” will not be evaluated.

How will the Govt. evaluate whether a subcontractor is a “major” subcontractor, as defined by the RFP without obtaining proprietary TAs?

VOLUME II – PAST

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL, para. 2

A major subcontractor is defined as those providing twenty percent (20%) of total dollar threshold AND/OR twenty-five percent (25%) of total man-hour effort.

Is it the Government’s intent under the current RFP language to only allow a maximum of (2) “major” subcontractor’s contracts for past performance?

VOLUME II – PAST

PERFORMANCE

PROPOSAL, para. 2

The Government is not limiting the number of major subcontractors;

however, Offerors need to comply with FAR 52.219-14 Limitations on

Subcontracting (DEVIATION 2020-O0008) (MAR 2020).

Can the PMP requirement for the Senior PM be waived in lieu of demonstrable training, experience or performance? (e.g. DAWIA Level III Certification)

Attachment 1 PWS

PWS Para 1.4.1.D No. PMP certification is required.

Please clarify the requirements for submitting LOIs. PWS page 5 requires “Upon contract award…provide LOIs for all proposed personnel”. This gives a clear advantage to the incumbent and creates an unfair advantage. Please verify that bidders are not required to submit LOIs for non-key personnel in the proposal.

Att. 1 PWS Page 5 PWS Para 1.4.2.A Correct. Based on the PWS (revision dated 4/3/2020), offerors are not required to submit LOIs for non-key personnel in the proposal. This will be handled at the task order level.

RFP page 45 requires “resumes” for Key Personnel. This seems to indicate there are more than one key personnel. Please verify the only resume and LOI required in this RFP are for the Senior Project Manager as defined in PWS 1.4.1.D.

RFP Page 45 Evaluation Factor 2

Sub (b)(4) PWS was revised to add Project Managers as Key Peronnel. See response to question number 8 above for additional information.

Section 1.2.3 of the PWS states: “The primary place of performance for Contractor resources shall be at the DLA Distribution Headquarters facility located in New Cumberland, PA”, but does not specify the place of performance for Non-Key Personnel. Please confirm that all non-key personnel under this contract will be located at the DLA Distribution Headquarters facility located in New Cumberland, PA.

Pg. 2 of 30 Section 1.2.3 of the

PWS

See response to question number 17 above.

Are Contractors able to hire current staff on the contract or does the contract have to acquire replacements for the positions?

Offerors are required to provide personnel based on the requirements in the PWS. It is up to the offeror as part of their technical solution.

RFP SP3300-20-R-0001