Question and Answer List from Draft Solicitation W5J9CQ-24-R-0002_GRIDS IV (Final)_9JAN24.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 51 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W5J9CQ-24-R-0002
About this file
This solicitation seeks proposals for a multiple award indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity contract to provide Geospatial, Research, Integration, Development and Support (GRIDS) services to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The Army Geospatial Center requires contractor assistance with coordinating and integrating geospatial information requirements and standards across the Army, developing geospatial enterprise-enabled systems, and providing direct geospatial support to the Warfighter. Offerors must submit proposals by the closing date to be considered for an IDIQ contract award as well as the initial task order, which is a continuation of existing efforts to provide GEOINT Systems Engineering and Integration support. Questions submitted by industry in response to the draft solicitation will be answered and posted to SAM.gov by January 10, 2024.
View the file
Other files
Show all 16
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
Q&As Draft Solicitation 5JAN24
| Question / Comment | Issue/Concern | Section of Document for Reference | Page No. | Answer to Question | |
| 1 | We request the technical documents submitted under the current GEOINT Systems Engineering and Integration, Intelligence Applications & Mission Command User Enterprise (IAMCUE) GeoINT Support Task Order be provided with the final solicitation. | The Initial Task Order appears to be a continuation of existing efforts. In order to provide a fair and open competition, technical information about this Initial Task Order should be available to all bidders. | 1.4 | 2 | "Additional technical data is considered controlled unclassified information and not currently available for distribution. As such, no additional technical data will be provided. All tasking requirements are clearly stated in the Initial Task Order PWS." |
| 2 | Is the referenced Quality Assurance Program Plan the same as a Quality Control Plan? | DPWS references a "Quality Assurance Program Plan". | 1.6.1 | 2 | No. Please refer to the Quality Assurance Program Plan CDRL and DID. |
| 3 | Will the Government's QASP be provided with the final RFP? | The Government's Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) is not included in the draft solicitation and is needed for to prepare the Quality Assurance Program Plan. | 1.6.2 | 3 | Yes, added QASP attachment to the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 4 | Will the government clarify the type of contract? | Section 1.6.6 states "Type of Contract: This task order will be Cost Plus Fixed Fee term Level of Effort". However Part 5. Specific Tasks lists tasks (5.1 - 5.9) as either CPFF or FFP. | 1.6.6 | 3 | Yes. The Initial Task Order type of contract was updated in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 5 | Please confirm 2 GIS Developer Senior Key Personnel are required. | Key personnel requirements are identical for two GIS Developer Senior. | 1.10.2.3, 1.10.2.4 | 10 | Yes, confirmed. |
| 6 | Please confirm 2 Test Engineer Journeyman 2 personnel are required. | Key personnel requirements are identical for two Test Engineer Journeyman 2. | 1.10.2.6, 1.10.2.9 | 11 | Yes, confirmed. |
| 7 | Should Offerors treat the stated "Purchases will not exceed $120,000.00" as an not-to-exceed plug number for bidding purposes? | The solicitation Attachment XX Initial Task Order states "Purchases will not exceed $120,000.00 and will be stipulated as needed within the contract period of performance." | 4.1.5.2 | 17 | Yes. The $120,000 per year is the NTE amount for the Initial Task Order ODC/Material was updated in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 8 | Will the government correct this CDRL reference? | The Contractor Acquired Property (CAP) Report section states "Provide monthly report for all Contractor Acquired Property acquired via Other Direct Cost (ODC) charging (CDRL A023)." The CDRL referenced, CDRL A023, is the Quality Assurance Program Plan. We believe the correct reference is CDRL A028, Contractor Acquired Property. | 5.1.6 | 19 | Yes, the CAP CDRL reference corrected to A028 in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 9 | Will the government include CDRL A002 in the referenced list? | The Event Demonstrations and Presentations Section CDRL references are: CDRL A019; A003, this list should include A002. | 5.1.7 | 19 | Yes, CDRL A002 was added to Initial Task Order PWS 5.1.7. in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 10 | Would the government correct the section numbers following 5.1.10.1? | After the subsection 5.1.10.1 the PWS section numbers are incorrect. | 5.1.10 | 20 | PWS numbering corrected in solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 11 | Will the government add an appropriate CDRL reference? | This section is missing a CDRL reference. | 5.6.1 | 25 | Added CDRL in solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 12 | Will the government add an appropriate CDRL reference? | This section is missing a CDRL reference. | 5.6.2.1 | 26 | Requirement is covered under CDRL for 5.6.2. No change required. |
| 13 | Will the government include CDRL A019 in the list for this section? | CDRL reference A003 included but this section should also include CDRL A019. | 5.8.3 | 27 | Yes, reference to CDRL A019 added in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 14 | Will the government add an appropriate CDRL reference? | This section is missing a CDRL reference. | 5.8.1 | 27 | Yes, CDRL added in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 15 | Will the government remove the CDRL reference A011 from this section? | Will the government remove the CDRL reference A011 from this section? | 5.8.5 | 28 | No, CDRL A011 will not be removed. |
| 16 | Will the government add an appropriate CDRL reference? | This section is missing a CDRL reference. | 5.8.12 | 30 | Yes, added. Yes, CDRL added in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 17 | Will the government add an appropriate CDRL reference? | This section is missing a CDRL reference. | 5.5.1 | 24-25 | Yes, CDRL added in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 18 | Will the government add an appropriate CDRL reference? | This section is missing a CDRL reference. | 5.8.4 | 28-29 | Yes, CDRL added in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. |
| 19 | Does this mean if the MATOC is awarded for $500M that each awardee will share in the ceiling amount, and not be awarded an IDIQ with a ceiling of $500M? | Solicitation section states that "The MATOC will have a total shared capacity among all awardees in the MATOC pool." | A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY, 3rd paragraph | 2 | Yes, each contact will reflect a ceiling of $499M which will be shared among all MATOC holders. To clarify, this means that each IDIQ awardee will receive an award with a face value of $499M. When TOs are awarded the value of each TO will be reduced from the available ceiling for ordering purposes for all competitors. |
| 20 | We recommend the Government align GRIDS IV fee structure to GRIDS III. | Fee structure severely restricts competition and will constrain the contractors ability to provide necessary “special skills” dictated, for example, by the key personnel requirements of the Initial Task Order (ITO). | B. CONTRACT MAXIMUM RATES (b) | 2 | The fee structure is determined based on DoD-wide best practice and GRIDS III historical data and lessons learned. Fee does not impact the ability to provide "special skills" personnel since labor cost is reimbursable. Fee and labor rate are different elements. |
| 21 | The Government is setting fee caps below the FAR limits, while at the same time capping direct labor rates (ref Page 7) on work that the Government has noted requires special skills (ref PWS 1. General "The Grids IV contract is designed to provide services through a Multiple Award Task Order Contract (MATOC) necessary to acquire special skills." The below-threshold fee caps and the labor rate caps present increased risks to the contractor and could prevent us from being able to hire the best staff for the job at the TO level. Will the USG reconsider the limitations on fixed fee percentages? The FARS allows up to 10% fee for other cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts, and 15% for experimental, developmental, or research work. | The solicitation states: "The Contractor agrees that the maximum pass-through rate that shall be charged against any labor CLIN under this contract shall not exceed 8% where the total subcontract cost does not exceed 50% of the total cost of the contract/task order; and shall not exceed 6% where the total subcontract cost exceeds 50% of the total cost of the contract/task order." |
Background: FAR Subpart 15.404-4 (i) states:
The contracting officer shall not negotiate a price or fee that exceeds the following statutory limitations, imposed by 10 U.S.C. 2306(d) and 41 U.S.C. 3905): (A) For experimental, developmental, or research work performed under a cost-plus-fixed-fee contract, the fee shall not exceed 15 percent of the contract’s estimated cost, excluding fee. (B) For architect-engineer services for public works or utilities, the contract price or the estimated cost and fee for production and delivery of designs, plans, drawings, and specifications shall not exceed 6 percent of the estimated cost of construction of the public work or utility, excluding fees. (C) For other cost-plus-fixed-fee contracts, the fee shall not exceed 10 percent of the contract’s estimated cost, excluding fee.
| B. CONTRACT MAXIMUM RATES (c ) | 3 | The fee structure is determined based on DoD-wide best practice and GRIDS III historical data and lessons learned. Fee does not impact the ability to hire the best staff since labor cost is reimbursable. Fee and labor rate are different elements. Ceiling labor rates at the IDIQ level are established based on contractors' proposals and the Government's evaluation for fair and reasonable determination. |
| 22 | Please clarify if the total subcontract cost includes prime contractor burdens or not? |
Monroe, Jeaneen Y CIV USARMY CEAGC (USA): Monroe, Jeaneen Y CIV USARMY CEAGC (USA):
The questions highlighted in red are for the KO.
| RFP states: "The Contractor agrees that the maximum pass-through rate that shall be charged against any labor CLIN under this contract shall not exceed 8% where the total subcontract cost does not exceed 50% of the total cost of the contract/task order; and shall not exceed 6% where the total subcontract cost exceeds 50% of the total cost of the contract/task order." | B. CONTRACT MAXIMUM RATES (c ) | 3 | The Maximum Pass-Through rate language was changed to Maximum Pass-Through Fee/Profit Rates in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. |
| 23 | Please clarify that the maximum CPFF fee rate to be stated in the base (MATOC IDIQ) contract, for the entire duration of the contract, will be 8% for non-experimental, developmental, or research work; and 10% for experimental, developmental, or research work |
| Please clarify if the Government intended to state "8% for non-experimental, non-developmental, or non-research work, " | The solicitation states: "The Contractor agrees that the maximum pass-through rate that shall be charged against any labor CLIN under this contract shall not exceed 8% where the total subcontract cost does not exceed 50% of the total cost of the contract/task order; and shall not exceed 6% where the total subcontract cost exceeds 50% of the total cost of the contract/task order." | B. CONTRACT MAXIMUM RATES, (c) | 3 | The maximum CPFF fee rate is updated to "8% for non-experimental/developmental/research work" in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. |
| 24 | What is the meaning of the statement, "Fee Table – to be used for Initial Task Order and all future Task Orders issued under this IDIQ"? |
Is the fee table to be filled out for each separate TO in the future or is the Government stating the rates for TO 1 will apply to all future TOs?
What is the purpose of showing a Cost and a Fee rate per hour in Section B? Referencing the "Fee Table – to be used for Initial Task Order and all future Task Orders issued under this IDIQ", Comments:
1. The fee rate would most likely be different each year due to escalation of the costs.
2. Consider the effect of using a different mix of people to perform work, in Year 2 vs Year 1 due to requirements that are specific to future TOs resulting in a changed fee rate.
| 3. Why have different fee rates as the maximum rates for each option year based on TO 1 proposal instead of just using the stipulated maximum 8% and 10% stated in paragraph (c)? | B. CONTRACT MAXIMUM RATES, (d) | 3 | The fee table and associated language has been removed in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |||
| 25 | Would the Government correct the typo in the Fee Table in sub-item (d) where the column label is specified as “Label Hours” and it should be “Labor Hours”? | |||||
| Concern: Typographical Issue in table heading | ||||||
| B.CONTRACT MAXIMUM RATES (d) | 3 | The fee table and associated language has been removed in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | ||||
| 26 | The table Fee Table appearing under (d) paragraph should be under (c) instead. | Table in paragraph (d) appears to be in the wrong place. | B.CONTRACT MAXIMUM RATES (d) | 3 | The fee table and associated language has been removed in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 27 | Since the solicitation indicates Task Orders may be Firm-Fixed Price (FFP), Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF) or contain a combination of both, please delete "Fee paid per hour shall be based on total fee dollars divided by total hours to be provided." |
Is this contract intended to be a CPFF LOE where the USG is buying hours? If not, why is there discussion to hours vice the services being performed?
Can offerors expect TOs will be term, LOE, or Completion types? Solicitation section ( e ) states "Fee paid per hour shall be based on total fee dollars divided by total hours to be provided. Total fee(s) paid to the Contractor shall not exceed the fee amount(s) set forth in this contract/Task Order. In no event shall the Government be required to pay the Contractor any amount in excess of the funds obligated under this contract."
| Comment: We are unclear if this contract intended to be a CPFF LOE where the USG is buying hours. | B. CONTRACT MAXIMUM RATES, (e) | 3 | The fee table and associated language has been removed in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |||
| 28 | Will the government specify unique CLIN #s for each year? For example CLIN 0001 for the base year, CLIN 1001 for options period 1, CLIN 2001 for option period 2. | The solicitation CLINs are specified with an “ordering period” of 5 years. We typically see 1 year ordering periods with a new CLIN # per year. i.e. the first year might be 0001, year 2 1001, year 3, 2001 and so on. Additionally, the Fee Table presented on page 3 under CONTRACT MAXIMUM RATES (d) indicates Labor CLIN examples as 0001, 1001, 2001 and so on. | B. CLINs | 4-6 | All IDIQ CLINs will have an ordering period of five years, plus the six-month option if FAR 52.217-8 is exercised. There will be no other option periods. | |
| 29 | Will the government separate the ODC and Materials into different CLINs? | The solicitation does not differentiate between ODC and Materials with separate CLINs. | B. CLINs | 4-6 | The Government will not breakout Materials and ODC into separate CLINs. ODC and Materials will remain on one CLIN. | |
| 30 | Recommend deleting "Travel" from the CLIN 0003 description. |
| Further will the Government consider consolidating the CLINs to allow for flexibility during execution to avoid having to issue separate modifications to effect any changes or realigns that may occur during program execution? | The solicitation indicates that CLIN 0003 is for ODCs and Materials, while CLIN 0004 is for Travel. However in the description of CLIN 0003 it includes Travel. | B. ITEM NO 0003 GRIDS IV ODCs and MATERIALS MATOC and ITEM NO 0004 GRIS IV TRAVEL MATOC | 5 | The word "travel" was deleted from CLIN 0003 in the solicitation issued 5 Jan 2024. |
| 31 | Please confirm that we are to propose a fixed price amount for CLIN 0005-GRIDS IV MANPOWER REPORTING MATOC FFP as part of the TO 0001 proposal. |
| Will Government consider that CLINs 0005 and 0006 be shown as NSP? | Typically manpower reports are not separately priced (NSP), but section B does not state NSP for CLIN 0005. | B. CLIN 0005 | 6 | Due to contract writing system limitations, the NSP constraint has been added to the CLIN description for the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. The resultant MATOC award will include the NSP constraint in Section B consistent with the CLIN description. |
| 32 | Please clarify what is intended by "For cost reimbursement rates, the lesser of actual direct labor rates or the capped direct labor rates in the basic IDIQ contract shall be the maximum allowable rates for task orders issued during the order period of this contract." | |||
| Is the USG intending to limit the reimbursement of actual costs under a cost type contract? If so, these CLINs are not cost type CLINs per FAR 16 and the risk associated with performance would be more of a fixed price risk. Given the caps on fixed fee percentages this is problematic. If that is not the intent would you please clarify what is meant by this statement? And, will you please explain why the Government, through these rate caps, is placing FFP-like risk on contractors under CPFF task orders, when according to FAR 16.301-2 Application "Uncertainties involved in contract performance do not permit costs to be estimated with sufficient accuracy to use any type of fixed-price contract." | The solicitation states "For cost reimbursement rates, the lesser of actual direct labor rates or the capped direct labor rates in the basic IDIQ contract shall be the maximum allowable rates for task orders issued during the order period of this contract." |
By capping the direct labor rates, it appears the Government is creating a contract type (CPFF NTE) that is not in the FAR.
This has the effect of converting those supposedly cost reimbursable task orders under the IDIQ into a form of Fixed Price task orders (that can only be adjusted downward) and, thus, the 10% fee limit of FAR 15.404(c)(4)(I)(c) should be inapplicable in negotiating future cost reimbursable task orders because they aren’t really cost reimbursable.
| B. Labor Rates | 7 | The IDIQ Ceiling Rates are established based on contractors' proposals and the Government's evaluation for fair and reasonable determination. The ceiling rates are mutually agreed upon rates for the IDIQ. GRIDS III historical data and best practice were taken into consideration. | ||||
| 33 | Will the Government amend the last sentence of section 1.5.4.3 to state Contractor reimbursement will be at the discretion of the COR and/or TO requirements? | |||||
| The last sentence states the Contractor will not be reimbursed when the Government facility is closed. The GRIDS task orders may require contractors to work at contractor sites not Government sites, and at OCONUS sites, not tied to a specific Government facility. Contractor reimbursement should be at the discretion of the COR and/or as specified by TO, and should not always be directly tied to Government facility hours. | ||||||
| C.1.5.4.3 Contractor Support Hours | 10 | Amendment forthcoming to update PWS Para. 1.5.4.3 to state "Contractor reimbursement will be at the discretion of the COR and/or TO requirements." | ||||
| 34 | Will the USG reconsider the wording of this to allow for discretion by task order where telework or performance at a contractor site is authorized/required. | Solicitation states: “For other than firm fixed price contracts, the Contractor will not be reimbursed when the Government facility is closed for the above reasons.” | C.1.5.4.3 | 10 | Amendment forthcoming to update the PWS Para. 1.5.4.3 to state "Contractor reimbursement will be at the discretion of the COR and/or TO requirements." | |
| 35 | Based on the labor category qualifications provided in the solicitation, will the Government consider renaming these Key Positions as "Program Manager and Deputy Program Manager" to avoid any potential confusion? | |||||
| RFP refers to "Contract Manager and Alternate Contract Manager". Industry uses "contracts manager" as the person who has primary responsibility for the administration of the contract and who is the primary point of contact for the Government contracting officer to coordinate contract actions. | C.1.10.1 Key Personnel | 16 | Changed all references of "Contract Manager" to Program Manager Senior in section 1.10 in the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. | |||
| 36 | Please confirm that both the Program/Contract Manager and Alternate Program/Contract Manager are Key Personnel. | The RFP does not explicitly state that the Program/Contract Manager (and alternate) are Key Personnel. As stated, this is implied by the title of the paragraph. | C. 1.10.1 | 16 | The Program Manager is the Key Personnel. The contractor must have an alternate that can immediately take over duties in the event the PM is not able to perform the duties. This is not considered two key personnel positions; only one. No resume is required with the offeror for the alternate PM at this time. Resume would need to be provided and approved by the KO should they need to take on responsibilities in the absence of the initial PM occur. | |
| 37 | Please clarify what is required here: "(including sub-Contractors from previous Task Orders)". What previous task orders? | The RFP states "A current version of the Data Rights Assertion List governing all Prime and sub-Contractors (including sub-Contractors from previous Task Orders) shall be included in the Proposal." | ||||
| C.1.15 Data Rights | 17 | Deleted "(including sub-Contractors from previous Task Orders)"from section 1.15 in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | ||||
| 38 | Would the Government please consider adding: | |||||
| • | DoDI 5000.87, Operation of the Software Acquisition Pathway (October 2, 2020) | |||||
| • | MIL-HDBK-61A(SE) Configuration Management Guidance (7 Feb 2001) | |||||
| • | Office of the Undersecretary Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment (OUSD-A&S) Agile Software Acquisition Guidebook, Best Practices & Lessons Learned from the FY 18 NDAA Section 873 / 874 Agile Pilot Program (February 27, 2020) | |||||
| Concern: Several publications applicable to GRIDS Task Orders should be added to this solicitation. | ||||||
| C. PART 6 APPLICABLE PUBLICATIONS | 27 | This list is not intended to be an exhaustive list and no additional publications will be added at this time. | ||||
| 39 | Would the Government please correct the typographical issue by changing “US Amy Geospatial Center” to “US Army Geospatial Center”? | |||||
| Concern: Inclusion of the Government specified Distribution Statement D on deliverables propagates a typographical error (misspelling the word “Army”) into deliverables under this contract. | ||||||
| C. TECHNICAL EXHIBIT B DELIVERABLES SCHEDULE | 30 | Corrected typo on the solicitation issued on 5 Jan 2024. | ||||
| 40 | Would the Government consider amending the statements as follows: | |||||
| “All Distributions will be pursuant to Distribution Statement D, unless a more appropriate Distribution statement is required in accordance with DoDI 5230.24 DISTRIBUTION STATEMENTS ON DoD TECHNICAL INFORMATION as per Task Order PWS requirements and/or COR direction. Please add the following statement to all Distribution D Deliverables:” | Distribution Statement D on all deliverables conflicts with GRIDS objectives stated in this solicitation itself and understood from GRIDS historical context. For example, section 5.1.7 states “This data will be shared across civilian and military stakeholders from unclassified sources through National System level.” past GRIDS data and deliverables have included open-source standards (Distribution A), data sharing with US Allies (non-US Government), through dissemination limitations compliant with Distribution Statement D. The required Distribution D Statement on all deliverables without exception is problematic. | |||||
| C. TECHNICAL EXHIBIT B DELIVERABLES SCHEDULE | 30 | Updated Solicitation to include the recommended language in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | ||||
| 41 | Will the Government please add “or as required” to the frequency column entry for CDRL A006 Contractor Performance Report. | |||||
| Within the text of the Solicitation CDRL A006 has varied frequencies but the CDRL table states NLT 10th of each month. | ||||||
| C. TECHNICAL EXHIBIT B DELIVERABLES SCHEDULE | 31 | Added "As required" to CDRL Table frequency in solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | ||||
| 42 | Will the government remove the duplicate clause (52.246-3) and replace with 52.246-2? | There are duplicate lines “52.246-3 Inspection Of Supplies Cost-Reimbursement MAY 2001”. It is likely the government meant to use 52.246-2 for one of these two duplicate lines. | E. Inspection and Acceptance | 34 | Corrected in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 43 | Please confirm the dollar amounts in FAR 52.216-24. Do these dollar amounts apply to the MATOC IDIQ contract only, or do they also apply to Task Orders? | The dollar amounts in FAR 52.216-24 appear to be low. | I. Contract Clauses/FAR 52.216-24 | 57 | Clause deleted in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 44 | Please confirm the inclusion of this clause in this Solicitation. | FAR 52.216-24 is prescribed for when a letter contract is contemplated. | I. Contract Clauses/FAR 52.216-24 | 57 | Clause deleted in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 45 | Will the Government clarify what is meant by this note? | The note provided in bold font under FAR 52.217-8 is unclear and seems to alter the language in the clause. The note states "***The rates in effect at the time that an option is exercised pursuant to FAR clause 52.217-8 shall be the rates utilized for the 5th year of the IDIQ, or the duration of the option period of the Task Orders. ***" | I. Contract Clauses/FAR 52.217-8 | 58 | Updated language to "***The rates in effect at the time that an option is exercised pursuant to FAR clause 52.217-8 shall be the rates utilized for the 5th year of the IDIQ, or the last option period of the Task Orders. ***" in the solicitation dated 24 Jan 2024. | |
| 46 | Please confirm or correct the statement "No Cost/Price information shall be submitted in Volumes I, II, III, IV, or IV" |
The solicitation says "No Cost/Price information shall be submitted in Volumes I, II, III, IV, or IV."
| The inclusion of Volume II-Factor 2 Past Performance, Volume III -Factor 3 Small Business Participation, and Volume IV-Factor 4 Cost/Price in the sentence is incorrect since these volumes do contain/require cost data. | L.B.1.a. Volumes | 85 | Statement corrected to remove Volume IV from the listing in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. |
| 47 | Is the prime required to list out the names and Cage codes of all subcontractors and a point of contact for all correspondence related to the IDIQ proposal or the Initial Task Order submission? |
Will the Government consider a requirement for this information to be provided in the cost narrative section of Volume IV - Cost/Price instead of the Cover Pages? Solicitation states "A cover page shall include the volume number, solicitation number, firm name, and address, business size, Cage code, names and Cage codes of all subcontractors and a point of contact for all correspondence related to the proposal (include phone number and email address) "
| Comment: Including all of the subcontractors names, CAGE codes, and required information on the Cover Page will exceed one (1) page. | L.B.1.a. | 85 | The Government will allow two pages for the cover page and will update the language in Section L to reflect such in the forthcoming amendment. |
| 48 | Is the "cover page" referenced on solicitation page 85 separate from the "first page" referenced on solicitation page 99? |
Is the "first page" referenced on solicitation page 99 excluded from the page limit on any page limited volume?
Is the "Title Page" referenced on solicitation page 100 separate from the "cover page" referenced on solicitation page 85?
| Is the "Title Page" referenced on solicitation page 100 excluded from any page limit? | Regarding submission instructions: solicitation page 85 (Proposal Submission Requirements) and solicitation page 99 (FAR 52.215-1 Instructions to Offerors - Competitive Acquisition) - concern the instructions may require conflicting cover page/first page/title page information. | L.B.1.a.; L. Clauses Incorporated by Full Text | 85, 99 - 101 | This language will be updated in the next amendment asking offerors to follow all the requirements for the "first page" and the "title page" IAW FAR 52.215-1 Alt, also shall be included in the "cover page". The page limit for the "cover page" will be increased to two pages. | ||
| 49 | Given the ambiguity of the note, will the Government please quantify "abuse". Will the Government also define "extra content"? | Solicitation note states "Offerors are strongly discouraged from abusing the use of tables, charts, etc. to incorporate extra content. Such abuse will be evaluated at the sole discretion of the Government and could impact the overall page count." | L.B.1.d. | 86 | The Government revised the language in, Section L to read as follows: "Pages that exceed the required page limitations will not be evaluated. Additional pages over the maximum allowed will be removed or not read and will not be evaluated by the Government." Change made in solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 50 | Please confirm that there is no page limit for Volume II Past Performance. Please define the contents of the "Cover Page" for the Volume II Past Performance projects. | Volume II Past Performance includes a cover page (1 page) for each of a maximum of 5 projects. It is unclear if the cover page includes some or all of: Contract Descriptions, Performance, Subcontracts, Submissions, and Small Business Past Performance. It is understood that CPARS do not have a page limitation. | L.B.1.d | 86 | A cover page is required for each cover page and the cover page shall contain all the information required under this volume: Sections 1-3. There is a 1 page limit for Volume II "Cover Page". Section 4 CPARS do not count against the page limit. Language changed to reflect such in solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 51 | Please confirm that the Small Business Participation Commitment Document is the Small Business Participation Proposal. | Volume III Small Business Participation Proposal is limited to 10 pages, and includes the Small Business Participation Commitment Document (SBPCD), the Small Business Subcontracting Plan, | L.B.1.d | 86 | The Government has revised the language to read as follows: "VOLUME III - Factor 3 Small Business Participation." in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 52 | Please confirm that the "Cover Page" is the referenced "Cover Letter". |
| Should the term "Cover Letter" be replaced with "Cover Page"? | Solicitation in Section L.B.1.a states "Each volume shall include the following: a cover page,…", and in Section L.B.1.d "The following Volumes of material shall be submitted:…Cover Letter" | L.B.1.d | 85 | The Government has revised the table title, Cover Letter has been revised to Cover Page in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | ||
| 53 | Solicitation Section L.B.1.e.3.ii - VOLUME II, Factor 2 - Past Performance includes Sections 1 through 7; what information is to be included on the Cover Page for each project? What is the page allocation, if any, for this information? | Solicitation states in Section L.B.1.d: “Factor 2 Past Performance - Cover page for each project shall not exceed one page." | ||||
| L.B.1.d, L.B.1.e.3.ii. | 86, 89 | The Government has updated Volume II Past Performance and it now includes Sections 1 through 4. Section 4 CPARS does not count against the page limit. Change made in solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | ||||
| 54 | Please confirm the version of Microsoft Excel that the Government requires the offerors to use in their submission. | Solicitation states : "viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007”. Microsoft Excel 2007 has limitations with respect to later versions of Excel. | L.B.1.e.2. | 87 | The Government has revised the language to state, "Microsoft Excel Version 2013, compatible with formulas accessible." in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 55 | We believe the reference is to PWS 1.10.1, please confirm. | Solicitation states "The ability to staff Key personnel, reference Performance Work Statement (PWS) 1.10.10, for IDIQ management with appropriate qualifications, required and recommended skills and experience." | L.B.1.e.i.(2) g) | 88 | The Government changed the PWS paragraph number to 1.10.1 in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 56 | Will the Government allow for Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQ) in the case that a CPARS does not exist for a project? | Solicitation states: "“The offeror shall provide a completed contractor performance evaluation, whether interim, annual, or final, found in the Contractor Performance Assessment Reporting System (CPARS), https://www.cpars.gov/. If a completed contractor performance evaluation does not exist in CPARS, the offeror shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing that no relevant past or present information exists. Any past performance surveys other that CPARS are unacceptable submissions by the offeror to evidence the quality of its past performance and will not be considered or evaluated.” | L.B.1.e. ii Volume II, Factor 2 - Past Performance | 88 | The Government added PPQ in addition to CPARS in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. The PPQ shall be received prior to Solicitation closing date and time to be considered. | |
| 57 | Please confirm that letters of commitment from subcontractors do not count against page limits. | Solicitation states "letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered". | L.B.1.e.ii. | 89 | The Government revised the solicitation language: "Letters of commitment shall not count against page limits" in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 58 | Please confirm that the "Data" consists of the information contained in Vol II. | |||||
| Solicitation states "Data concerning the offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed major subcontractor, in alphabetical order. | L.B.1.e.ii. | 89 | The Government has revised that sentence to read as follows: "Past Performance information concerning the offeror shall be provided first, followed by each proposed subcontractor, in alphabetical order" in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |||
| 59 | Please confirm that the "written consent of its major subcontractors" is not included in the page count. | Volume II, Factor 2 - Past Performance section of the Solicitation states "The Offeror shall also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractors past performance information to the Offeror." | L.B.1.e.ii. | 89 | Written consent of its major subcontractors" is not included in the page limit. | |
| 60 | Will the government change the definition of recent to "awarded or performed within seven (7) years from the issue date of this solicitation"? | Solicitation states “Recent is defined as awarded or performed within three (3) years from the issue date of this Solicitation.” | L.B.1.e.ii. | 89 | No change. Award or performance must be within three (3) years to be considered recent. | |
| 61 | Please provide a template for the letters of commitment and written consent to be included in past performance. If there is no template, please provide any requirements that must be included as part of the letters of commitment and written consent. Please clarify the difference between the letter of commitment and the written consent. | Solicitation states "The Offeror shall also submit the written consent of its major subcontractors to allow the disclosure of its subcontractor’s past performance information to the Offeror. In addition, letters of commitment shall be included for all major subcontractors for their past performance to be considered." | L.B.1.e.ii. | 89 | The Government included a template for "Letter of Commitment for Subcontractor and External Parties" for subcontracting in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. No template for "Written Consent" will be provided. "Written consent" is the consent of the Offeror's subcontractor to allow the disclosure of the subcontractor's past performance information to the Offeror and would be provided in writing using a format in accordance with the subcontractor's normal business practices. | |
| 62 | Will the Government define "major subcontractors" and the thresholds required to meet the definition | The solicitation refers to "major subcontractors" in several areas | L.B.1.e.ii., para 6 | 89 | The Government removed the word "major" in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 63 | We interpret these instructions to provide all "sections" (i.e. Contract Description through Small Business Participation Past Performance) for each of the 5 projects. Please confirm. | Solicitation states "This volume shall be organized into the following sections for each project"; followed by Section 1 - Contract Descriptions, Section 2 - Performance, Section 3 - Subcontracts, Section 5 - CPARS, Submissions, Small Business Participation Past Performance. | L.B.1.e.ii. | 89 - 91 | The Government renumbered the volume requirement language to include Sections 1 through 4, and past performance is required for each of the five projects in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 64 | Please confirm there is no subsection (6). | Volume II subsections misnumbered: (5) Submission then (7) Small Business Participation Past Performance, no subsection (6). | L.B.1.e.ii. | 90 - 91 | The Government renumbered the volume requirement language to include Sections 1 through 4 in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 65 | Please confirm there is no section 4. | Solicitation explicitly mentions “Section 1”, “Section 2”, “Section 3”, and “Section 5” | L.B.1.e.ii | 90-91 | The Government renumbered the volume requirement language to include Sections 1 through 4in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 66 | Please confirm the requirements stated in "(3) Section 3 - Subcontracts" are applicable only to "New corporate entities". Please define "new corporate entities". | Solicitation states "(3) Section 3 – Subcontracts. New corporate entities may submit data on prior contracts involving its offices and employees. However, in addition to the other requirements in this section, the offeror shall discuss in detail the role performed by such persons in the prior contracts cited. Information should be included in the files described in the sections above. Letters of Commitment shall be included in the proposal for these employees in order to be considered." | L.B.1.e.ii.(3) | 90 | The Government has revised Section 3, and Section 3 is now titled Subfactor 1.c-Initial Task Order Technical Proposal in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 67 | We are unclear as to the direction of the statement under "(5) Submissions". Please clarify. | Solicitation states "(5) Submissions. All Offerors are discouraged from providing points of contact with another contractors’ facility, i.e., in case an offeror (or one of his/her team members) is in a subcontract with another contractor who has submitted a proposal on the same requirement. Offerors shall provide and submit the prime contract number and all Governmental agency POCs in lieu of subcontract numbers or prime contract POCs in situations as described above." | L.B.1.e.ii.(5) | 90 | The Government has revised the content under the previous Section (5), Submissions is now provided as Note 1in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 68 | Does the information on pages 91 - 93 requested constitute the Small Business Participation Commitment Document? If not, please provide a template or requirements. | Solicitation states "complete a Small Business Participation Commitment Document". | L.B.1.e.iii Volume III, Factor 3 - Small Business Participation | 91 | The Government does not intend to provide a Small Business Participation Commitment Document. The information is as required is in Section L, Volume III, Factor 3 (a) - (f). | |
| 69 | Please provide, prior to the final RFP, the referenced attachment. | The Solicitation states "the Government will provide all the Excel worksheets necessary for this submittal, in Attachment xx". | ||||
| L.B.1.e.iv Volume IV, Factor 4 - Cost/Price | 93 | The Government has provided the following attachments: attachment 3, IDIQ Ceiling Rates and Attachment 8 Task Order Cost Proposal Spreadsheet in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | ||||
| 70 | Please provide, prior to the final RFP, the referenced attachment, the labor categories and descriptions. | Solicitation section Subfactor 4.a states “The offeror shall propose both Government and Contractor site labor rates against all labor categories and descriptions specified in Attachment xx”. | L.B.1.e.iv(3) Subfactor 4.a | 94 | The Government has provided the following attachments: Attachment 3, IDIQ Ceiling Rates and Attachment 8 Task Order Cost Proposal Spreadsheet in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 71 | Please clarify what is considered "continuation sheets". Will the Government be providing a draft Task Order so that we can complete the Section B for the Task Order? | The solicitation indicates at the end of paragraph (2) "the Offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF 33 and continuation sheets." But at bottom of paragraph (3) it says "Section B: Offerors do not complete or submit Section B for the IDIQ. All IDIQ awards will be made at the same maximum value." | L.B.1.e.iv.(3) Subfactor 4.a | 94 | The Government will remove the following language "Also, the Offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF 33 and continuation sheets." in the forthcoming amendment. An Attachment for the Task Order Section B CLINs was provided with the final solicitation. | |
| 72 | Can the offeror propose labor categories, descriptions, and rates in addition to the labor categories identified by the government? | Solicitation section Subfactor 4.a states “The offeror shall propose both Government and Contractor site labor rates against all labor categories and descriptions specified in Attachment xx”. | L.B.1.e.iv.(3) Subfactor 4.a | 94 | Yes, Offerors are allowed to propose additional labor categories in addition to those specified in Attachment 2, Labor Categories. Clarifying language will be included in the forthcoming amendment. | |
| 73 | We recommend the screenshot be in support of the proposed rate (i.e. the most current data at the time of proposal submission). | Solicitation states: "For each current employee named in the cost proposal spreadsheet, Offeror and cost reimbursement subcontractors shall provide a screenshot that captures pertinent information from the employer's payroll system, incurred within the last three months preceding release of this solicitation." |
| Concern regarding what if the person's salary has changed since the 3 months preceding release of the solicitation. | L.B.1.e.iv - Direct Labor Rates | 95 | The requested salary data shall be the most current data, but not older than, three months prior to release of the solicitation. No change required. | |||
| 74 | We recommend using rates that are correct and current at the time of proposal submission. | Payroll verification shall consist of a form containing the named personnel, proposed labor category, direct labor rate, certification status (per labor category as required), description of current position, and a signed certification by an authorized representative of the company that the information contained in the form is correct and current within the last three months preceding release of this solicitation. | L.B.1.e.iv - Direct Labor Rates | 95-96 | The requested data shall be the most current data, and shall be within the last three months preceding release of the solicitation. | |
| 75 | Would the DCMA-approved direct labor rate FPRR and a mapping to those rates be sufficient for this request? | The solicitation outlines the basis for each direct labor rate, however for TBD personnel it states "For any position for which no candidate has been identified by name, Offeror and cost reimbursement subcontractors shall provide payroll data for a comparable position and an analysis of how the proposed position is comparable to the position corresponding to the payroll data supplied." | L.B.1.e.iv - Direct Labor Rates | 95-96 | No. The offerors shall submit data required by the solicitation. | |
| 76 | Please provide, prior to the final RFP, the minimum escalation rates per the table. | The solicitation states "The below table reflects minimum escalation rates." | ||||
| L.B.1.e.iv - Escalation | 96 | The Government revised the language of the table to provide minimum escalation rates of 2.8% for each year in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | ||||
| 77 | If the clause applies to the solicitation, it needs to be incorporated in full text and include the applicable attachment called for in paragraph (b) of the clause. | DFARS clause 252.237-7024 is incorporate by reference. | L.B.1.e.v. - CLAUSES INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE | 98 | The Government will make a final determination on this question prior to the forthcoming amendment. | |
| 78 | There seems to be something wrong with the syntax of this sentence. Please review. | Solicitation states: "The offerors proposal must clearly demonstrate rough past performance the offerors and subcontractor’s ability to perform the contract requirements …" | M.4.3 | 107 | The Government revised the word rough, to the word through in the sentence in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 79 | Will the government correct the Factor 4 Cost/Price section? | The initial task order contains a combination of CPFF and FFP CLINS, therefore the statement “The initial task order will be awarded as a cost-plus fixed fee (CPFF) task order.” | M.4.5 Factor 4 Cost/Price | 109 | The Government revised the Solicitation language to the following: "hybrid FFP, CPFF, and CR task order "in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | |
| 80 | Please confirm that all references to "Performance Work Statement" or "PWS" in the solicitation are referring to the PWS in Section C of the solicitation, unless specifically identified as the "Initial Task Order PWS". | Numerous references to Performance Work Statement. | multiple | multiple | The Government added a note in the Executive Summary in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024 to read as follows: Note: Performance Work Statement (PWS) in the solicitation are referring to the PWS in Section C of the |
solicitation, unless specifically identified as the "Initial Task Order PWS”.
| 81 | Request AGC consider releasing/issuing the Final Request for Proposals in January 2024. This allows industry to devote maximum time and resources to deliver the best proposal possible for the Government. | N/A | ||||
| 82 | In the RFP, page 87, Paragraph 2, it states that Microsoft Office Excel files shall be viewable in Microsoft Excel 2007. Please clarify if 2007 is correct or should it be a more recent version of MS Excel? | paragraph 2 | 87 | The Government updated the narrative in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024 with the following version: "Microsoft Excel Version 2013". | ||
| 83 | In Volume II, Past Performance, page 88, first paragraph, it states: “If a completed contractor performance evaluation does not exist in CPARS, the offeror shall notify the Contracting Officer in writing that no relevant past or present information exists. Any past performance surveys other that CPARS are unacceptable submissions by the offeror to evidence the quality of its past performance and will not be considered or evaluated. On page 90, Paragraph (4) Section 5, the RFP states that a CPARS must be submitted with all Past Performance contracts. | |||||
| a. | If we don’t not have a CPARs (e.g. as a subcontractor), how are we expected to notify the Contracting Officer in writing? Will a statement “that no relevant past or present information exists” in our past performance volume suffice? | |||||
| b. | In the case of not having a CPARs, how will that past performance contract be evaluated for quality? Will it have a negative impact on our evaluation? | multiple | The Government revised the sentence in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024 to read: "If a completed contractor performance evaluation does not exist in CPARS, the offeror may provide a completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Attachment 12". Please refer to the Performance Confidence Assessment rating paragraph in Section M. There will be no negative impact, the offeror will receive a Performance Confidence rating of Neutral. | |||
| 84 | On Page 2 of the solicitation, the Government states there will be a Small Business Reserve resulting from this solicitation. Will FAR 52.291-31 apply to the final solicitation? How does the Small Business Reserve impact the solicitation requirements for a small business? | 2 | The Government has added FAR 52.219-31 to the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. There is no impact to small businesses. Offerors that participate in any procurement under this part are required to meet the definition of “small business concern” at 2.101 and the definition of “concern” at 19.001. | |||
| 85 | Based on the stated Small Business Reserve mentioned on page 2, does the Government plan to award MATOC contracts to a certain number of small businesses? | 2 | The Government plans to award MATOC contracts to small businesses, but the number of awards is not identified at this time. | |||
| 86 | In reference to Section L.B.1.e.ii VOLUME II, Factor 2 – Past Performance. Will the Government consider allowing other performance assessment information other than CPARs? There are many contractual arrangements that do not result in CPARs. For example, we have subcontracts, research contracts, and non-DoD contracts that provide relevant past performance but do not have associated CPARs. | L.B.1.e.ii VOLUME II, Factor 2 – Past Performance | The Government revised the sentence in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024 to read: "If a completed contractor performance evaluation does not exist in CPARS, the offeror may provide a completed Past Performance Questionnaire (PPQ) Attachment 12". | |||
| 87 | PWS Section 1.10.2.1 states that the key Program Manager is at a Government site. Where is this site located? | PWS Section 1.10.2.1 | Alexandria, VA is the primary Government location. | |||
| 88 | What location should be used for pricing key personnel? | The location used for pricing key personnel is Alexandria, VA | ||||
| 89 | Recognizing that the Sample Task Order does not cover the entire scope of the IDIQ, and businesses may have strengths in other areas of the IDIQ PWS, will the Government consider adjusting the evaluation approach to allow contractors with strengths outside of the Sample Task Order PWS to compete for IDIQ contracts? | Multiple evaluation criteria are established for the IDIQ awards and the Initial Task Order award. Offerors with strengths outside of the Initial Task Order can still complete and be considered for the IDIQ awards. | ||||
| 90 | The Solicitation states "Offerors proposals shall consist of four (5) separate volumes." Please update to the correct number of volumes. | a. Volumes. | 85 | Corrected in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. | ||
| 91 | The Solicitation states "No Cost/Price information shall be submitted in Volumes I, II, III, IV, or IV." Volume IV: Cost/Pricing will have pricing data | a. Volumes. | 85 | Corrected in the solicitation dated 5 Jan 2024. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .