Final_Questions_to__W81XWH18Q0243_Amend_0002.docx

The combine synopsis solicitation is the only controlling, binding document; the responses to the questions are for guidance and clarification purposes only. The Government will only be bound by the terms and conditions of the solicitation and not to the responses to the questions. No more questions will be accepted by the Government after the release of this Amendment 0002.

Follow up questions to W81XWH18Q0243

Question 50.

Follow up to Answer 10: We understand that no key personnel resume's are required for the RFQ, however, please clarify whether key personnel resumes will be required for call orders released under this BPA?

Answer: If there is a call order requirement, the instructions will identify the required documentation for that specific requirement.

Question 51.

Follow up to Answer 15: The government has provided clarification on 40 hour work week. But in order to help the industry prepare pricing compliant with the pricing sheet, please also provide how many hours a month would consist of a month of performance? Can we assume 160 hours for a month?

Answer: The offeror needs to use the 40 hour work week and the number of weeks in a month (4 weeks).

Question 52.

Follow up to Answer 22: The answer states "[...] see the definition that contains unknown ". However, in section 3.2 Past Performance Ratings - "Unknown" is not defined. Please provide clarification whether an "unknown" past performance will be considered "Acceptable".

Answer: The Acceptable rating states: Acceptable – Based on the offeror’s performance record, the Government has a reasonable expectation that the offeror will successfully perform the required effort or the offeror’s performance record is unknown. Which the definition for Acceptable includes unknown.

Question 53.

Follow up to Answer 22: The answer states "[...] see the definition that contains unknown ". The definition for "Acceptable" on page 14 of Combined Synopsis Amendment 001 states "[...] or the offeror's performance record is unknown” which implies that an "unknown" past performance would be considered acceptable. Please confirm

Answer: See the response.

Question 54.

Follow up to Answer 23: The revised option (b) states "The Government may determine that an offer is unacceptable if the option prices are significantly unbalanced." Can you please clarify what "unbalanced" means? Does it mean that the rates provided by the vendor are unbalanced for Weeks and Months for each labor category in each option period?

Answer: Yes

Question 55.

Follow up to Answer 23: The revised option (b) states: "The Government will evaluate offers for award purposes by evaluating the weekly and monthly rates for each Option Period with the basic requirement." For LPTA evaluation, please clarify whether the government will calculate and rank (across all option years) the total of ONLY weekly rates, or ONLY monthly rates, or a total of weekly and monthly rates to determine the lowest price proposed from a vendor with an acceptable technical approach and past performance.

Answer: The evaluation criteria is Lowest Price Technically Acceptable 52.212-2 defines the evaluation criteria. The revised language for evaluating price removed the word total.

Question 56.

Follow up to Answer 24: The answer points back to answer 13 which in-turn points back to "Instructions to offers" - This states "The Offeror shall submit no more than (3) references for Government and/or commercial contracts for the prime Offeror [...]". Can you please clarify the minimum number of references needed for the prime offeror? Will an offeror be considered acceptable if they provide only 1 reference for past performance volume?

Answer: The Government is stating no more than 3 the references cannot be greater but can be less than.

Question 57.

Follow up to Answer 43: Please clarify whether the page limit for the Technical and Past Performance (Volume 1) is 15 pages or 30 pages?

Answer: The page limit for Volume 1 is 15 pages.

Question 58.

New Question: Is there any flexibility in the new requirement that the prime must provide 3 past performance examples?

Answer: See question 56 above.