W52P1J-18-R-0032_2nd_Round_QA.pdf

Item #

RFP/Attachment

Reference

Question/Comment USG Response

1 Section A:4

If our company wishes to use subcontractors in phase 3, then do we need to reference all intended subcontractors for the

EAGLE BOA submission? Please clarify whether a team proposed in phase 3 can be 100% different than proposed in phase 2.

IAW Section C.2, in Step Two, Offerors are required to demonstrate the technical capability to perform all three functional areas (Maintenace, Supply and

Transportation); the Technical capability may be achieved with or with out subcontractors.

As explained in Section C.3, when submitting a proposal in response to a Task Order RFP at

Step Three, Offerors are not required to propose the same subcontractors it used to establish technical capability in Step Two (the

BOA process); however, Offerors will need to assess the Task Order evaluation criteria in

Step Three to determine whether it should propose the use of subcontractors.

L.5.2.2(b)(3)

L.5.2.2(b)(4)

Should the L.5.2.2(b)(3,4) Supply and Transportation functional areas be written as if they were supporting / utilizing (respectively) the equipment detailed in Exhibit A, to support an ‘average’ sized SSA/TMP scope, or alternatively an

‘undefined’ size and scope of SSA/TMP operation that is meant to scale to every potential EAGLE Task Order Contract?

Offerors should utilize Exhibit A as a baseline for their proposal to deliver the services consistent with a Supply Support Activity (SSA) and a Transportation Motor Pool (TMP) as stated in the PWS paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3.

3 L.5.2.2(b)(4)

Can the government provide a basis for the scope of personal property delivery in L.5.2.2.2(b)(4)? Should this Personal

Property Delivery movement be anticipated to be back and forth between two specific sites, from anywhere worldwide to/from a specific site, or simultaneously between all possible shipping points in the world in every combination?

The Government's basis for the scope of personal property operations in L.5.2.2.2(b)(4) is stated in the PWS paragraph 2.3. Drayage

(the transport of goods), is not identified as a worldwide requirement in this BOA RFP.

Attachment 0003

L.5.2.4(c)(12)

Attachment_0003_-_Experience_Matrix_01312018

11. Example(s) of tasks performed under the provided effort:

(Be consise – limited to 2,700 characters)

L.5.2.4(c)(12) Line 11: The offeror shall enter examples of the tasks performed under the effort listed at line 3. Examples should identify tasks relevant to the BOA PWS in order to assist the Government in determining the relevance of the cited effort (see definition at L.5.2.4(b)(2)). The offeror may copy/paste directly from the contract documentation;

however, note that this field is limited to 2,600 characters.

Will the Government please confirm the character limit in the attachment_0003_-_Experience_Matrix_01312018 box 11 is

2,700 verses 2,600 as stated in L.5.2.4(c)(12)?

The character limit in the

Attachment_0003_Experience_Matrix_01312

018 box 11 is 2,600 as stated in L.5.2.4(c)(12).

The Government will update attachment_0003_Experience_Matrix_013120

18 box 11.

5 L.2.5(a)

Depicting organization diagrams generally are in graphic form which does not allow searchable text. Will the Government consider excluding this requirement for diagrams or is it the

Government intention for the Offeror to insert in Power Point format which does allow text to be searchable, which are not as pleasing as those in a graphic software (and take up more space)? Would add the PowerPoint graphics are not as pleasing as those generating in graphics software (and take up more space).

The Government does not intend on reconsidering the requirement for Section

L.2.5.(a).