Government_Response_to_12_April_2017_site_visit.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 30 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W56KGU-17-R-0010
About this file
Government response from 12 April 2017 Site visit
View the file
Other files
Show all 23
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Question and Answers
| Section / Page | Reference | Question | Answer |
| RFP Section L, Page 1, 1. Introduction |
and RFP Section L, Page 2
Section L (Attachment 0006) Proposal Submission "1. The offeror’s proposal shall be submitted in hard copy, with accompanying digital copies, as set forth below."
and
| "Offerors are required to submit their proposals electronically via AMRDEC Safe Access File Exchange (SAFE)." | Can the Government confirm that proposal submission will be done electronically via AMRDEC SAFE and that hard copy with accompanying digital copies are not needed for submission? | Confirmed, Yes all proposals will be submitted electronically. |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 2, para 1.5.1 | PWS 1.5.1 Quality Control: | |
| includes: The Quality Control Plan (QCP) shall be delivered with the Contractors proposal if it is an evaluation factor, three copies of a comprehensive written QCP shall be submitted to the Contracting Officer and Contracting Officer Representative within five (5) working days when changes are made thereafter. After acceptance of the quality control plan the Contractor shall receive the contracting officer’s acceptance in writing of any proposed changes to his or her QC system | In Section M of DRAFT_W56KGU_17_R_0010, it indicates Sub-factor 4 is the bidder's Quality Control Plan. If this proposal response is an electronic submission, how will three copies be delivered to the Contracting Officer and COR? |
Also suggest rewording the change condition to indicate a requirement for informing the KO and COR in writing of any proposed changes to the QCP for approval and implementation. 1. Section M has been revised removing QCP and replacing it with QASP.
2. The PWS still requires the successful offeror to provide a QCP to the Contracting Officer and COR. A QCP will not need to be provided as it is not part of the evaluation factor. Only The successful offeror will be provided the information needed to complete the requirement of notification.
3. The change condition will remain unchanged. The onus is on the successful offeror to notify KO and/or COR of any changes to the QCP.
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 2, para 1.5.2 | PWS 1.5.2 Quality Assurance: | |
| requests a QASP be submitted so the government can evaluate contractor performance. | Attachment 0007, Section M does not address a QASP requirement. Is it the government's intent to have the QASP included in the comprehensive QCP requirement stated in PWS 1.5.1? | 1. Section M has been revised removing QCP and replacing it with QASP. |
2. The Government intends to evaluate the QASP and not the QCP, only the successful offeror will be required to submit a QCP.
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page3, para 1.5.4 | PWS 1.5.4 Place(s) of Performance: | |||
| indicates work locations include: Aberdeen Proving Grounds (APG), Maryland, Fort Belvoir, Virginia, Fort Benning, Georgia and the Joint Base McGuire Dix Lakehurst (JBMDL) in New Jersey | Will the Government revise the LOE document accordingly to indicate LCAT and density by location so we may more accurately provide location-based pricing and rationale, vs basing at APG or Ft Belvoir and traveling to other locations listed locations? | |||
| Related to this, will the revised LOE specify which LCATs and density will be based at CP&I locations at Ft Belvoir vs APG? | No, the Government has provided a plug number for travel of $100,000.00. It is up to the offeror to provide onsite & offsite rates for the LCAT. | |||
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page3, para 1.5.4 Security Requirements (mis-numbered duplicate para #) | PWS 1.5.4.3.1 "For contractors requiring Common Access Card (CAC):" regarding access to CAC cards | Will the government approve CAC requests for staff having NACIs completed or are approved Interim-Secret clearances the actual minimum required to obtain a CAC and C4ISR campus badge? | The Government requires the staff being onsite only to have a NACI completed prior to being issued a CAC or Campus Badge. An Interim-Secret Clearance will not suffice. | |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 5, para 1.5.4.8 Information Assurance / Information Technology (IA/IT) training | ||||
| (mis-numbered based on previous question) | PWS 1.5.4.8 (IA/IT) training | Will the Government require IA Awareness training certificates be uploaded to ATCTS? | Yes, the IA Awareness training will need to be uploaded. A hardcopy should be available if the Government request a copy. | |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 5, para 1.5.4.9 Information Assurance / Information Technology certification: | PWS 1.5.4.9 IA/IT certifications- baseline certifications are stipulated in DoD 8570.0-M and must be completed upon award | DoD 8570.0-M stipulates various levels of certification requirements based on government needs. Will IAT Level 1 suffice for this contract effort or will other certification levels be required? | Yes, IAT Level 1 will be sufficient. If the Government requires any additional level above. The successful offeror will be made aware of such. | |
| RFP Page 14, (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 6, PWS 1.5.7 |
and (Attachment 0003) LOE, and (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 7 PWS 1.5.7 and 1.5.7.1-1.5.7.8 identifies Key Personnel qualifications Attachment 0006 Section L identifies requirements for Key Personnel resumes
| Attachment 0003 LOE identifies LCAT densities | Would the Government please confirm that there are total of 9 Key Personnel required for this opportunity? If not, would the Government please provide total Key Personnel for each Key Personnel Labor Category? | There is a total of 8 Key Personnel required as indicated in the PWS 1.5.7.1 - 1.5.7.8. The PWS identifies the Key personnel by labor categories. | ||
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS Page 6, para 1.5.7 Key Personnel: | PWS 1.5.7 identifies Key Personnel including the Deputy Program Manager. | The LOE document provided as Attachment 3 does not list a Deputy Program Manager. Will the Government please revise the LOE accordingly so we may consider how the position is employed and we can deliver more accurate pricing information? | No, the Government will not revise the LCAT to include Deputy Program Manager as the Government has provided the LCAT as Program Manager in the LOE. The Government classifies the Program Manager/ Deputy Program Manager under the same labor category. IAW with the PWS PM/DPM are both listed as key personnel with the same qualifications. | |
| RFP Page 14, and (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 6, PWS 1.5.7 & 1.5.7.1 | Key Personnel: PWS 1.5.7 & 1.5.7.1 states: "Program Manager and Deputy Program Manager…" | The RFP & PWS references "Program Manager and Deputy Program Manager…", however, (Attachment 0003) LOE is missing the LCAT: Deputy Program Manager | ||
| Since LCAT Deputy Program Manager is not included in LOE can the Government confirm that resume for Deputy Program Manager is not needed for submission? | A resume will be required for a DPM, IAW with the PWS PM/DPM are both listed as key personnel with the same qualifications. | |||
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 9, para 1.5.12 Phase In/Phase Out Period and | ||||
| (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 11 and Page 22 | PWS 1.5.12 states: "...the Contractor shall have personnel on board, during the [thirty (30) day] phase in/ phase out periods." |
Attachment 0006 Section L, page 11 NOTE: Estimated phase in costs shall be included separately in the offerors cost proposal;
| and page 22 IMPORTANT NOTES: indicates: Base period includes 60-day phase in. | The PWS and Section L have conflicting transition periods impacting the cost proposal and staff/transition planning. Will the government clarify the correct phase in period required? | Section L and PWS will reflect 30 days for Phase in, if phase is applicable. | |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 13, para 4.1.1 Contractor Acquired Material/Equipment, Services and Supplies: | PWS 4.1.1 indicates the contractor shall acquire Material/Equipment, Services and Supplies that are required to execute the mission of SEAMS and related to the requirements and performance as set forth under this Task Order. | Recommend rewording to incorporate requirements and mission of CP&I Directorate vs SEAMS. |
Will the pricing instructions include plug numbers for acquisition of approved Material/Equipment, Services and Supplies?
Will the government update sections 4.1.2 - 4.2.4 to reflect actual examples of CP&I requirements? 1. The Government has revised the PWS to read CP&I.
2.The Government has provided a plug number for Material.
3. 4.1.2 -4.2.4 are some examples, actual equipment will vary.
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 13, para 4.2.1 Material Purchasing: | PWS 4.2.1 indicates Items that might need to be purchased could include: modems, routers, switches, parts for SATCOM terminals, cables built to specification, software licenses, emergency maintenance, SATCOM bandwidth, specialized test equipment, calibration services, shipping and receiving items, cables, and connectors. | Recommend rewording to include actual examples of CP&I requirements vs the SATCOM parts listed that seem out of character. | 4.2.1 The items listed are examples, actual equipment's/parts will vary. |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 13 and Page 14 para 4.2.2 Facilities and Exercise or Event Support: | PWS 4.2.2 indicates a number of situations where facilities and minor construction modifications may be required. | Given the information provided, will the Government pricing instructions include plug numbers for certain allowable ODC services/facilities sub-contracting and KO approval for such expenses? | The Government will only provide a Plug number for ODC. |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 15, para 5.1.5 | PWS 5.1.5 requires the contractor to maintain a COMSEC account to facilitate handing of key material and equipment | In maintaining a COMSEC account, is the offeror to provide the COMSEC custodian for CP&I, or provide support to a government custodian, i.e., as an Alternate Custodian, supporting daily activities e.g., materiel receipts, inventory, transfer, accounting, destruction, and reports? |
| Will the Government fund the potential travel and training costs for a contractor custodian or alternate custodian? | No, the offeror does not need to provide a COMSEC customdian nor provide support the Government custodian. However, an Offeror should have a COMSEC account in existence, maintained and staffed to support for handling and shipping of COMSEC equipment for the Govt when necessary. The Government will not reimburse for potential travel and training costs. | |||
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 16, para 5.2.2 | PWS 5.2.2 states: "...Designs to include cogeneration technologies, alternative cooling techniques, reduced size and weight, and | |||
| increased fuel efficiency" | The second sentence in the paragraph describes design, but there is no calarity in what is intended. Does it refer to the first sentence, "shall" requirement for engineering support? | Yes, It refers to the first sentence" The contractor shall provide engineering support for the development of environmentally friendly, efficient environmental control systems for fixed and mobile platforms." | ||
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 17, para 5.3.4 | PWS 5.3.4 states: "The contractor shall develop standardized a Software Development Kits (SDK) for smart handheld devices in accordance with the Army Software Transformation to facilitate enterprise software development for both soldier/government software developers." | The requirement is not clear. Does the government want the contractor to develop standardized SDKs or is the contractor to research and investigate commercially available SDKs for standardization? Please clarify. | The contractor shall develop standardized Software Development Kits (SDK) for smart handheld devices in accordance with the Army Software Transformation (i.e, We need our contractors to research commercial SDKs to potential adapt/adopt them. We also need them to develop standardized SDK's when directed.) | |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 19, para 5.6.6 | PWS 5.6.6 states: "The contractor shall ensure new systems and subsystems satisfy the requirements of the Department of Defense Architectural Framework." | The requirements is not clear. Is it intended new systems and subsystems be compliant with requirements specified in available DoDAF products; or is the contractor to deliver DoDAF compliant views with new system requirements? | It is intended that new systems and subsystems be compliant with requirements specified in available DoDAF products | |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 22, para 5.9.1-5.9.2 | PWS 5.9.2 refers to logistics support of the Division's program. | The text does not identify which Division. Are we to presume it refers to the PIT Division? | Don't assume it is PIT Division. It is in support of functions to support of the Division's programs within CP&I. | |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 23, para 5.10 | PWS 5.10 Transportation Support. | Will the Government provide a pricing plug number for ODC transportation services, provision of vehicles, and equipment purchases? | The Government has removed this section | |
| RFP (Attachment 0001) draft PWS, Page 23, para 5.10.2 | PWS 5.10.2 states: "The contractor will be using their own equipment and the government shall take ownership and provide disposition of the vehicles." | The requirement is not clear. Does the government intend for the contractor to acquire equipment and vehicles and then assume ownership and dispose of such equipment or vehicles? Please clarify the requirement of section 5.10.2, including the second sentence indicating: The government will aso have the capability to purchase equipment if needed. | The Government has removed this section | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 5, 3.0 Proposal Files, paragraph 2 | "Offerors are to provide a compliance matrix as a cross reference as to where in their proposal the requirements of each PWS paragraph is addressed." | 1) Would the Government please confirm that the compliance matrix is not counted against any page limitations? | ||
| 2) What Volume should the compliance matrix be provided in? | The compliance matrix is not counted against the page limitation. |
There is no volume preference. It is recommended that it be submitted with the Technical Volume.
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 7 | Key Personnel: identifies requirements for the offeror to provide resume(s) and supporting documentation for Key Personnel. | What supporting document will the government require for each key person resume aside from the letter of intent (LOI)? | The Offeror’s Key Personnel will be evaluated for Labor Category, Qualifications, Experience, Education, and Security Clearance Levels. The Offerors will be evaluated on the completeness of the signed letter of intent of each key personnel. Example of supporting documentation can be documentation supporting ones certifications and licensures | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 7 | Key Personnel: identifies requirements for Key Personnel resumes with redacted PII including name, address, phone number, email, etc.; and the Offereor and proposed employees must submit a signed letter of intent (LOI) | Given the offeror and the proposed employee sign the LOI, does this counter the intent of the government to maintain PII anonymity of the resume since the signature will contain the proposed employees name? Can you provide clarification? | Offeror and proposed employees must submit a signed letter of intent | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 7, 3.0 Proposal Files, Sub-Factor 3: Management Approach, Key Personnel, paragraph 2 | ||||
| and RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 10, 3.0 Proposal Files, submission instructions for the Technical Factor: | "The Resume File shall consist of a Title/Table of Contents page and the required resumes. The Resume file will not be counted against any page limitations." |
and "…submission instructions for the Technical Factor:"
| Table; Under: "File Name(s)" | Will the Government accept the Resume file to be submitted as B01 Offeror Name-Resumes (.doc/.docx/.pdf)? | No, Resumes and letter of Intent should be submitted along with the Technical proposal |
| RFP Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 10, 3.0 Proposal Files, submission instructions for the Technical Factor: | "…submission instructions for the Technical Factor:" | |
| Table | Will the Government clarify what "B01" before the Offeror Name in the File Name(s) stand for? | B01 is a naming convention that the Government uses to document the contract file. |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 10, 3.0 Proposal Files, and (Attachment 0001) draft PWS | Sub-Factor 1 - Technical Capability | |
| For Sub-Factor 1 - Technical Capability, an Offeror must address all Paragraphs in 5.1 through 5.19 of the PWS. If all Sub-Factors are to be included in Volume I - Technical, would the Government consider increasing the page Limit for Volume I? | No, 50 page limit is purely technical and resumes and letter of intent are not part of the page count. | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 10, 3.0 Proposal Files, submission instructions for the Technical Factor: | "…submission instructions for the Technical Factor:" | |
| Table; Under: "File Name(s)" | Can the Government confirm that Sub-Factors 1 - 4 can be submitted as one single file as Volume I - Technical? | No, the Sub-Factors should be submitted individually as instructed in Section L. |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 10, 3.0 Proposal Files, submission instructions for the Technical Factor: | "…submission instructions for the Technical Factor:" | |
| Table; Under: Page Limit, "…resume & Letter of Intent not included in page count" | Would the Government please confirm that Letters of Intent are required? | |
| If so, please confirm that they are to be submitted as part of the Resume file. | Yes, Letter of Intent are required and Resumes and letter of Intent should be submitted along with the Technical proposal | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 1, and Page 11 | Volume III - Cost/Price and Volume II - Cost/Price | |
| Page 1 of the Attachment 0006 (Section L) states Volume III is Cost/Price, however page 11 references Volume II Cost/Price. | Will the Government please clarify the Cost/Price Volume number? | The Cost/Price Volume is Volume II. |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 1 | Number of Volumes for submission |
On page 1 of Attachment 0006 (Section L) it states, "The offeror’s proposal shall consist of five (5) volumes."; however just below this statement it shows only 3 Volumes for submission;
"Volume I – Technical Volume II – Past Performance Volume III – Cost/Price" Will the Government please clarify the number of Volumes for submission? The Government has revised this section Volume I – Technical Volume II – Cost/Price Volume III –Past Performance
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 01 of 23 | "The offeror’s proposal shall consist of five (5) volumes. Volume I – Technical, Volume II – Past Performance, Volume III – Cost/Price." | The Government states there are 5 volumes, but only list 3 volumes. Please clarify the names of volumes and number of volumes? | The Government has revised this section to read 3 volumes | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 8 | Key Personnel: states, "The Offeror and proposed employees must submit a signed letter of intent for all key personnel stating that the person whose resume is submitted is aware of the submittal and understands that this is a full-time position in support of the requirement. The Offeror and its proposed personnel shall sign the letter of intent." | Would the Government please confirm that "The Offeror" can be the Prime or a subcontractor? | The Offeror is the vendor who is submitting the proposal. | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 11 | CLIN Structure | |||
| On page 11 of Attachment 0006 (Section L) is states, "Cost Reimbursement CLIN (no G&A, no fee of any sort).", however it is standard to charge the associated indirect costs on any Travel/Material/ODC's. | Will the Government please consider removing the note in parenthesis that states no G&A. | The Government has revised section L to read "exclusive of any indirect rates" | ||
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 18 | 3. Pricing Methology; section (g) | Will the Government consider removing section 3.(g) that states, "g. Offeror and its subcontractor(s) shall provide a direct mapping of proposed direct labor categories and other supporting rate information to the corresponding ITES-2 labor categories on the base contract.". This does not apply. | The Government has removed this section | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 18 | 3. Pricing Methology; section (h) | Will the Government consider removing section 3.(g) that states, "h. The contractor shall propose in accordance with clause H-11 of the Basic Contract.". This does not apply. | The Government has removed this section | |
| RFP Page 11, and RFP (Attachment 0001) PWS, Page 4 | RFP and PWS numbering currently reads 1.5.4 followed by 1.5.5, 1.5.4, 1.5.4.1 - 1.5.4.13. | |||
| Currently there are two 1.5.4 listed in the RFP and PWS. | Can the Government please correct the numbering of the RFP and PWS under Section 1.5.4 and 1.5.5? | The Government have revised this section. | ||
| RFP Page 22, and (Attachment 0001) PWS, Page 17 | RFP and PWS 5.4.1 | |||
| Currently there are two 5.4.1 listed in the RFP & PWS. | Can the Government please correct the numbering of the RFP and PWS under Section 5.4? | The Government have revised this section | ||
| RFP Page 17, and (Attachment 0001) PWS, Page 28 | RFP and PWS 5.17 and 5.18 | |||
| Currently 5.17 and 5.18 are listed twice in the RFP & PWS. | Can the Government please correct the numbering of the RFP and PWS under Section "5.17 DELIVERABLES AND DELIVERY SCHEDULE:" and "2.18 CONTRACTOR MANPOWER REPORTING (CMR):"? | The Government have revised this section. | ||
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 20 and (Attachment 0007) Section M, Page 5 | North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) 541712 is referenced on FBO and 541715 is referenced in Section L & M. | Can the Government please clarify the NAICS Code for this opportunity? | The classification code prior to 2017 was 541712, but as of 2017, 541712 has been replaced with 541715. Please visit https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/ for further information. | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 20 | Volume III - Past Performance | Can the Government please clarify the Page limit for each Contract Reference for the Prime Offeror? | ||
| Will the Government provide number of Contract References that a Prime Offeror are allowed to submit? | This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. This volume shall not exceed 25 pages in addition to the five pages for each major subcontractor (30 page Maximum), excluding Past Performance Questionnaire Forms. Offerors shall submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past three years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the effort (as compared to NAICS code 541715 or 541712) required by the RFP. | |||
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 20 | Volume III - Past Performance states: "This volume shall not exceed 25 pages plus five pages for each major subcontractor, excluding Past Performance Questionnaire Forms." | Can the Government please clarify how many contract reference can be submitted for a Major Subcontractor? | ||
| Can the Government confirm that these do not count toward the Volume III Page limit of 25 Pages? | This volume shall contain past performance information regarding similar contracts. This volume shall not exceed 25 pages in addition to the five pages for each major subcontractor (30 page Maximum), excluding Past Performance Questionnaire Forms. Offerors shall submit all Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime offeror and each major subcontractor in performance or awarded during the past three years, from the issue date of this RFP, which are relevant to the efforts required by this solicitation. Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the effort (as compared to NAICS code 541715 or 541712) required by the RFP. | |||
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 20 | Volume III - Past Performance | Can the Government please clarify if the written Consent letter and Commitment Letter for a Major Subcontractor is excluded from the 5 Page limitation? | No, this volume shall not exceed 25 pages in addition to the five pages for each major subcontractor (30 page Maximum). | |
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 4, Proposal Submission, a), second bullet and Page 22 Important Notes | 2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION, a) second bullet states: "Total value of the proposal for twelve (12) month base period, Three (3) twelve (12) month Option periods (48 month performance Period)." | |||
| and IMPORTANT NOTES: "Periods of performance: Base Period: 01 October 2017 - 30 September 2019", Volume III - Past Performance, does not add up to 12 Months. | Can the Government please calrify the Period of performance dates for the Base Period and all of the Option Periods? |
The correct dates would be:
a. Base period: 01 October 2017 - 30 September 2018 (Base period includes 60-day phase-in)
b. Option Period 1: 01 October 2018 - 30 September 2019
c. Option Period 2: 01 October 2019 - 30 September 2020
d. Option Period 3: 01 October 2020 - 30 September 2021 The Government has revised this section to read
a. Base period: 01 October 2017 - 30 September 2018 (Base period includes 30-day phase-in)
b. Option Period 1: 01 October 2018 - 30 September 2019
c. Option Period 2: 01 October 2019 - 30 September 2020
d. Option Period 3: 01 October 2020 - 30 September 2021
| RFP (Attachment 0006) Section L, Page 22 of 23 | IMPORTANT NOTES: | |||
| "1. For proposal evaluation purposes only, Offerors shall assume that award will be made 01 October 2017. For proposal evaluation purposes only, assume the following periods of performance: a. Base Period: 01 October 2017 – 30 September 2019 (Base period includes 60-day phase-in). Estimated dates: Actual period of performance will depend on final award date. The base period will be Twelve months (12) months from the date of award. The option periods will consist of three (3) options periods for twelve (12) months each." | Please confirm whether the base period is 12 months or 24 months? Please confirm the start and end dates of the base year? | Base period will be for 12 months | ||
| RFP (Attachment 0007) Section M, Page 05 of 07 | Past Performance Factor: "The Government will evaluate the offeror’s record of past and current performance to ascertain the probability of successfully performing the required efforts of the PWS. a. Evaluation of past performance shall be in accordance with this plan utilizing the forms and questionnaires set forth in Appendix D." | Can the Government please provide Appendix D? | Yes, the government will provide appendix D with the final RFP. | |
| RFP (Attachment 0007) Section M, Page 5 | 4. Past Performance Factor., b. "...Major subcontractors are defined as members of an offeror’s overall team who are expected to perform ten (49) percent or more of the proposed effort." | Can the Government please clarify the correct percentage to be considered as a Major Subcontract? | The Government has revised to read "who are expected to perform fifty (50) percent" | |
| RFP Section L, Subsection 2 , page 1 | Proposal Submission Requirements | The Government states, "Indicate your intention to provide a Proposal via email to Contract Officer Nina M. Bushnell at nina.m.bushnell.civ@mail.mil and Contracting Specialist Pierre R. Beljour at pierre.r.beljour.civ@mail.mil no later than 0800 hrs on DD-MMM-YYYY. |
Please confirm receipt of this posting and its attachments. If a proposal will not be submitted, it is requested that a “No Bid Response” be accompanied by an explanation no later than 0800hrs on DD-MMM-YYYY".
Does the Government require a bid/no-bid decision from prospective contractors? No. The Government has removed this language
RFP Section M, Subsection C, Subfactor 2, page 3 Basis for Award - Evaluation Approach The Government states that “the proposal will be evaluated on how well the offeror can adequately demonstrate the offeror’s experience and expertise in supporting; CERDEC CP&I Directorate & its supporting customers…”
Will the Government please provide a list of these supporting customers?
The Government has revised this section.
| Section L. (ii) VOLUME II – Cost/Price (page 11) | VOLUME II. Cost/Price | The instructions state that Material, Travel, and ODCs will be on a Cost Reimbursement CLIN (no G&A, no fee of any sort). However, under Instructions for Cost Elements (iv. Travel), it states “Travel and applicable indirect costs will be paid on a Cost Reimbursement basis and are not subject to fixed fee or any sort of fee.” | |
| Are indirect costs (G&A, Material Handling) allowable on top of Material, Travel, ODCs? | The Government has revised to read "exclusives of any indirect rates" |
| Section L. 3.Pricing Methodology (page 18) | VOLUME II. Cost/Price | Section (g) under Pricing Methodology states that the offeror shall provide a direct mapping of proposed labor categories to the corresponding ITES-2 labor categories of the base contract. What are the ITES-2 labor categories of the base contract? Does this need to be updated/revised to reflect this RFP? | The Government has removed this section |
| Section L. 3.Pricing Methodology (page 18) | VOLUME II. Cost/Price | Section (h) under Pricing Methodology states that the contractor shall propose in accordance with clause H-11 of the Basic Contract. What is the Basic Contract? Does this need to be updated/revised to reflect this RFP? | The Government has removed this section |
| Solicitation. Section C. PWS Section 1.5.7 Key Personnel, page 14 | Performance Work Statement | PWS Section 1.5.7 states “Qualifications for all key personnel are listed below (1.5.7.1 – 1.5.7.8).” No other labor qualifications are provided. Will labor qualifications for all categories be provided? | No, The Government will not Identify all categories other than the Key Personnel. |
| Solicitation. Section C. PWS Section 1.5.7 Key Personnel – 1.5.7.1 Program Manager and Deputy Program Manager, page 14 | Performance Work Statement | In the PWS, the Government lists a Deputy Program Manager in the Key Personnel requirement; however, there is no corresponding labor category in the LOE. Is it up to the bidding entity to assign a relevant labor category, or does the Government require the DPM to be mapped to a specific LCAT? | The Government provided Program Manager in the LOE as a LCAT. The Government classifies the Program Manager/ Deputy Program Manager under the same labor category. IAW with the PWS PM/DPM are both listed as key personnel with the same qualifications. |
| Solicitation. Section C. PWS Section 1.5.4 Place(s) of Performance (page 11) and Attachment_0003_LOE | Performance Work Statement and Attachment_0003_LOE | LOE table does not indicate location but para 1.5.4 lists multiple locations of work to be performed. Will LOE be updated to include locations or will all work be done from APG with travel to other locations? | It is up to the offeror to provide onsite & offsite rates for the LCAT. However, assume work will be done from APG with Travel to other location unless other wise express. |
| Solicitation. Section C. PWS Section 1.5.4 Place(s) of Performance, page 11 | Performance Work Statement | Paragraph 1.5.4 lists various locations for the place of performance. Is it intended for all these places to reside in government facilities and no contractor facilities? If so, then recommend removing wording in other paragraphs indicating contractor facility locations. For example, paragraph 5.15.4 “The contractor shall provide the necessary … facilities to operate “ Otherwise, recommend updating 1.5.4 to indicate contractor and government facilities in those locations. | No, 1.5.4 is the Government list of various locations where the successful offeror maybe required to travel. |
5.15.4 is a part of 5.15.
| Section L, Key Personnel, page 7: | Sub-Factor 3: Management Approach | The Government wants resumes redacted of all PII, such as Name, Address, Phone Number, however, in the next paragraph, the Offeror and Proposed Key Personnel employees must submit a signed letter of intent… Will the Government exclude Letters of Intent to protect the PII of the proposed Key Employees? | Offeror and proposed employees must submit a signed letter of intent | |
| Section L, Subsection 3 Proposal Files (pgs 5-11) | Subsection 3: Proposal Files | It appears that the Government would like separate files for each of the relevant subfactors and also a Technical Proposal at the Volume Level. Is the intent to provide one collated volume and then to break out each of the subfactors as well, or to include in the file “B01 Offeror Name – Tehnical Proposal (.doc/.docx/.pdf)” only the supporting material/front matter? | Yes, an offeror must breakout volumes as instructed in Section L. The offeror may also provided a collated version. | |
| Section 1.5.12 PHASE IN /PHASE OUT PERIOD; | ||||
| Page 16 of 60 | DRAFT_W56KGU_17_R_0010.pdf | Current Language: To minimize any decreases in productivity and to prevent possible negative impacts on additional services, the Contractor shall have personnel on board, during the [thirty (30) day] phase in/ phase out periods. During the phase in period, the Contractor shall become familiar with performance requirements in order to commence full performance of services on the contract start date. | ||
| Question: To avoid disruption of ongoing critical programs that CP&I has underway, and to minimize any decreases in productivity and to prevent possible negative impacts on mission accomplishments, would the government require the Contractor to have key personnel on board at the time of award, so as to allow time for CAC, campus badge and other onboarding activities in a timely manner; and a phased approach for hiring the other non-key staff listed within the 30 days? | No, The sucessful offeror will need to have Key Personnel on-board IAW with PWS paragraph 1.5.12 |
| Section 1.5.13 Transition/Risk Mitigation Plan, | ||
| Page 16 of 60 | DRAFT_W56KGU_17_R_0010.pdf | Current Language: Contractor shall provide a transition risk mitigation plan outlining their proposed approach for transitioning from the current incumbent contractor. |
| Question: In the transition/risk mitigation plan; in outlining the proposed approach for transitioning from the incumbent contractor, should contractors be addressing the scenario of how the contractor plans to support all the divisions of CP&ID immediately after award, even in the case where the the incumbent contractor staff are not available to transition? | The Government expects that all offeror will use their best business judgement when drafting their risk mitigation plan. |
| Section 2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS, | |||
| page 3 of 23 | Attachment_0006_(SECTION_L)_PROPOSAL_SUBMISSION.pdf | Current Language: Personal Identifiable Information (PII), such as Name, Address, Phone Number, e-mail address, etc. SHALL NOT be included in the Technical Proposal submission, other than the letter of Intent. | Offeror and proposed employees must submit a signed letter of intent |
| Question: Although the language says to remove PII, in-order for the the letter of intent to be legitimate, should it include the candidate name, candidate signature, name of current employer, proposed labor category, and date of availability to start work? | |||
| Section 2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS |
Sub-Factor 1 - Technical Capability,
| page 6 of 23 | Attachment_0006_(SECTION_L)_PROPOSAL_SUBMISSION.pdf | Current Language: If more than 49% of the total cost of the work is being performed by a subcontractor, the technical proposal should state what work is being performed and describe the subcontractor’s approach to successfully accomplish the task, as well as the value added by the Prime Contractor. Information provided here shall correlate to the Offeror’s cost/price proposal. | |
| The Government has revised to read "who are expected to perform fifty (50) percent" | |||
| Question: Since this contract is a SB set-aside, we respectfully request that the government set a requirement that the prime SB perform atleast a minimum of 51% of the work (to prevent the SB prime from being just a pass-through) | |||
| Section 2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS |
Sub-Factor 2 – Technical Expertise,
| Page 6 of 23 | Attachment_0006_(SECTION_L)_PROPOSAL_SUBMISSION.pdf | Current Language: “Entity” shall be prime contractor and may include the corporate experience of any subcontractors that will perform major or critical aspects of the requirement. | The Government has revised this section. |
| Question: Would the government please clarify how you define "major or critical aspects of the requirement". In other words, should a major subcontractor be performing more than 30% of the proposed work inorder for their past performance to be considered as part of the proposal. | |||
| Section 2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS |
Sub-Factor 2 – Technical Expertise, Page 7 of 23 Attachment_0006_(SECTION_L)_PROPOSAL_SUBMISSION.pdf For the technical experience requirement (Subfactor 2) in the draft Section L instructions, i.e. “12 months of experience within the past 36 months which demonstrates knowledge in Science and Technology Functional Capability Areas and Critical Technology Element and Interoperability Evaluations. The venue for accomplishing these evaluations is managing CERDEC CP&I programs. This includes evaluating C4ISR technologies in a tactical environment to access and evaluate system performance in an operationally realistic field environment:”
• Suggest replacing “access and evaluate” with “assess and evaluate”
• Suggest emphasizing those C4ISR technologies that CERDEC CP&ID directly supports, with re-wording, e.g. “ Experience shall include at least 12 months of experience within the past 36 months which demonstrates knowledge in Science and Technology Functional Capability Areas and Critical Technology Element and Interoperability Evaluations. The venue for accomplishing these evaluations is managing CERDEC CP&I programs. This includes evaluating C4ISR technologies; especially those supported by CERDEC CP&ID including Mission Command, Energy Informed Operations, and Position, Navigation and Timing; in a tactical environment to assess and evaluate system performance in an operationally realistic field environment.”
| The Government has revised this section. |
| Section 2. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS |
Sub-Factor 3: Management Approach,
| Page 8 of 23 | Attachment_0006_(SECTION_L)_PROPOSAL_SUBMISSION.pdf | Current Language (2nd para under "Management Plan): "The Offeror shall provide information on the proposed joint ventures Subcontractors, strategic alliances, or other business arrangements that will be used to fulfill the requirements of the PWS. The Offeror shall identify teams, indicating each team member's size based upon the North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code of the work that the team member may be performing." | The Government has revised this section |
| Question: To ensure commitment of the subcontractors to the CP&I program and clearly confirming each subcontractor’s intent to support the Offeror and the program, and to provide adequate visibility into program management controls and feedback mechanisms per Section L requirements, should the proposal include the signed copies of the teaming agreements? |
| Section 1. Introduction: Volume II Past Performance, page 1 of 23 | Attachment_0006_(SECTION_L)_PROPOSAL_SUBMISSION.pdf | Current Language: The offeror’s proposal shall consist of five (5) volumes. | The Government has revised this to read "proposal shall consist of three (3) volumes" | |
| Question: the page only lists 3 volumes | ||||
| Section 1. Introduction: Volume II Past Performance, page 11 of 23 | Attachment_0006_(SECTION_L)_PROPOSAL_SUBMISSION.pdf | Question: a) Page l1 of 23 just jumps to Volume II- Cost Price (this should be Volume III - Cost price). | ||
| B) Also, the past performance volume should be moved up from page 20 and renamed Volume II. | The Government has revised this section |
Volume I – Technical Volume II – Cost/Price Volume III –Past Performance Section 1 Volume II Past Performance, page 11 of 23 Attachment_0006_(SECTION_L)_PROPOSAL_SUBMISSION.pdf Questions:
1) Should atleast one of the past performance of the prime contractor be for performance for CERDEC CP&ID?
| 2) Should the other past performance examples be for services R&D efforts, to make them relevant to the proposal requirements?. | The Government expects that all offeror will use their best business judgement when providing their past performance. Past Performance shall be recent and revelant to the requirement being proposed against. | ||
| 4. Past Performance Factor., page 20 of 23 | Attachment_0006_(SECTION_L)_PROPOSAL_SUBMISSION.pdf | There are multiple NAICS code listed in the various documents and FBO including 541712 and 541715. (1000 employees) | |
| This appears to be less appropriate than the NAICS Code for which the work is being currently performed: NAICS 541330: “Engineering Services”, $15M. We respectfully request the government to standardize the NAICS code to the current established 541330, which is in-line with the current scope of work. | The Government has choosen the appropriate NAICS classification code. The suggested NAICS code would indiciate the scope work would fall under 5413 Architectural, Engineering, and Related Services. CERDEC CP&I is a Research and Development organization and therefore, 5417 Scientific Research and Development Services is best suited for the scope of work. Please visit https://www.census.gov/eos/www/naics/ for further information. | ||
| Attachment 0006, Section L, Page 11 & 16 | VOLUME II – Cost/Price. | The statement : “This is a CPFF and Cost Reimbursement contract for Research & Development services. All labor services will be awarded on a CPFF CLIN. Material, Travel, and ODCs will be on a Cost Reimbursement CLIN (no G&A, no fee of any sort). Offerors shall propose on all CLINs as follows.” - contradicts statements on page 16 that allow G&A to be applied to those three cost elements. “Material and applicable indirect costs will be paid on a Cost reimbursable basis and are not subject to fixed fee or any sort of fee.” |
“Travel and applicable indirect costs will be paid on a Cost reimbursable basis and are not subject to fixed fee or any sort of fee.”
“The Offeror shall apply any applicable indirect costs to the ODCs as it deems suitable. Other Direct Costs and are not subject to fee or any sort of fee.” We respectfully request the government : THAT G&A BE ALLOWED ON ALL INDIRECT COSTS The Government has revised to read "exclusive of any indirect rates"
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .