STAF_RFP_Questions_Amend0002.pdf

Column1 Column32 Column4 Column5 Gloria Column6

Question # Reference Questions/ Comments Answer Incorporated in the PWS

1 Section L, Factor I

Technical Experience

• Can you provide incumbent contract info? Yes. The current contract number and contractor is:

W900KK-17-C-0020. Dawson-ISC Group, LLC.

2 Section L, Factor I

Technical Experience

• We are currently in process of obtaining a TS facility clearance and are anticipating an interim TS facility clearance within the next 2-4 weeks. Will we be considered acceptable for Phase I with an interim TS facility clearance? We respectfully ask that you consider having firms currently going through the TS clearance process to ensure adequate opportunities for firms with capabilities to support this requirement.

An industry day was conducted. This was a topic of discussion. It was made clear at that time that a TS

Facility Clearance would be required for this effort. The current solicitation again repeats this requirement.

3 Section L, Factor II

Past Performance

• Can we provide commercial past performance examples in addition to government past performance? Yes. L.4.1.1 is updated

4 Section M • Section M states -*In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance (see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.” Can you confirm that firms that do not have any past performance will be rated ACCEPTABLE for this volume II?

That is correct. incorporated language in

Section M.1.2

5 Section L4.1.1 Page

84, Paragraph a) and b)

Can the government please confirm that the offeror may use one reference to meet the requirement of Section L4.1.1, paragraph a) and another reference to meet the requirement of Section L4.1.1, paragraph b)? In other words, both requirements of a) and b) do not need to be provided in a single reference.

That is correct.

6 Attachment 3 Will the government allow for the Prime offeror’s use of a parent or affiliated company past performance reference (Attachment 3 workbook) where it demonstrates the resources of the parent or affiliated company will be leveraged for contract performance (i.e., meaningful involvement)? The inclusion of affiliate past performance is made more compelling by virtue of the policy considerations in FASA (Federal Acquisition Streamlining Act, P.l. 105-

355) of reducing barriers to small business participation.

Yes, so long as the parent company or affiliate is performing 10% or more of the work as defined for major subcontractors.

L.2.15 is added to the solicitation

7 Attachment 3, TE

Reference #1 through

#4

If the offeror does not have a CPARs to submit for a reference, can the government please provide an example of what would be considered “patently” and/or “verifiable” documentation to support any response of “Yes” in the workbook as required?

Examples of verifiable documents would be a copy of the contract with this requirement (with POC information), a copy of the subcontractor proposal/contract with the prime that has the requirement (with POC information), signed contract surveillance reports, other documents that can show the link between the requirements of this solicitation and performance on that effort.

L.4.1.6 has been updated

8 Section I - Contract

Clauses PAGE # 45

FAR 52.244-2 –

Subcontracts (Oct

2010) (IF

Per FAR 52.244-2 – Subcontracts (Oct 2010), are our proposed subcontractors deemed approved if the KO approves our proposal? yes, if the offeror is selected as the awardee for this effort, those subcontractors will be listed in the clause.

Additions or changes in subcontractors will require approval from the contracting officer to subcontract.

9 Attachment 2, Tab 2, TE Reference #1

Can the government please confirm only one (1) reference is required for the submission of Attachment 2 – Technical Experience Reference

Workbook?

The required information has been amended updated Attach 2; updated

L.4.0; and M.4.0

10 Attachment 2, Tab 2, TE Reference #1

Is verifiable documentation of the Prime offeror’s Top-Secret Facility Security Clearance required along with the submission of Attachment 2 –

Technical Experience Reference Workbook?

no. see amended solicitation and Question 11 updated Attach 2; updated

L.4.0; and M.4.0

11 Section J – List of

Attachments PAGE#

Given the inclusion of SCA clauses within the RFP and reference to the Service Contract Act, will the government be releasing the wage determinations associated with this procurement?

Yes Update Section J.

12 Section L PAGE # 79 of the RFP

Once offerors have qualified for Phase II of the procurement, approximately how much time will they have to prepare for the next round of submittals

(i.e., Volumes III, IV and V)?

The estimate is approximately 2.5 weeks. The PCO notification as described in L.1.2, paragraph 4 - Phase

II, will delineate the appropriate dates.

13 SECTION M.4.1.1

PG# 101 Line A

Will the Government accept the past performance reference from our subcontractor to satisfy the requirement of part (a): 40 Full-Time Equivalent contractor personnel required to have and maintain a security clearance?

Yes if they are major subcontractor who be performing

10% or more of the work as defined in L.2.15 added L.2.15

14 SECTION (A, B, C…):

Section .4.0, Page 84

Attachment 2, Technical Experience

Reference #1

The requirement to confirm the offeror has a current Top Secret Facility Clearance is understood. However, requiring offerors to submit Attachment 2 to confirm the Top Secret clearance is a confusing methodology, essentially requiring offerors to submit up to five (5) past performance references, versus the four (4) that are cited in Section L.4.1.

Actually, an offeror’s security clearance could have lapsed or been revoked since completion of a referenced contract, so a completed Attachment 2 may provide information that no longer accurately describes an offeror’s current facility clearance.

It is recommended that the requirement to submit a completed Attachment 2 be replaced by a requirement to substantiate the offeror’s Top Secret facility clearance by providing appropriate documentation from either the Defense Security Service (DSS) or other cognizant Government office.

As a follow-up to my question, our only project experience that required a TS clearance was in the 2012-13 time frame, as a subcontractor. But, our

TS clearance is current and very much active.

Will I be eligible to submit a proposal for this opportunity?

See answer to Question 9 and see solicitation requirements for submission of past performance information.

15 L.4.0 Volume I - Factor

1 - Technical

Experience

L.4.0.1 The Offeror shall provide Technical References which demonstrate current possession of an Active Facility Security Clearance (FCL) for the

Prime as stated and required by the contract DD254 at the time of the proposal. submission . SA IDIQ PWS Reference: 1.9, Security.

Would the government consider allowing Prime Contractors to submit a proposal without having current possession of an Active Facility Security

Clearance if the contractor is in the final stages of securing the FCL and only requires the issuance of a DD254 to finalize the FCL?

See answer to question 2.

16 Section

L.4.1.1(a),Page 84

STAF IDIQ is a single Task Order (TO) for multiple Organizations. Other IDIQs support an overall PEO with multiple Organizations and divide their

TOs into specific Organization requirements such as PEO STRI SETA, while the total number of FTE requirements for the PEO STRI SETA IDIQ significantly exceeds the 40 man-years, an individual TO does not. Are we permitted to demonstrate L.4.1.1(a) using two (2) TOs to demonstrate equivalent size and the multiple security level requirements as a single PP reference?

Each Past Performance submission counts as one submission (i.e. one TO, BPA call, C type contract).

You can submit both TOs (counting as two PP submissions) but you must clearly identify how they together show they meet the requirement.

17 L.4.1.1c, Page 84 To demonstrate 3 months within the last 3 years can we use subsequent Task Orders because the dates associated with the Option years’ cross the 3 month threshold but the same work continued through the end of the contact. Are we permitted to use multiple Option Year Task Orders to demonstrate 12 months?

a multiple option TO can be used as one PP submission so long as one option was active and 3 months of performance were within the last three years of the issuance of this RFP.

L.4.1.1 is updated

18 Attachment 1, PWS

IDIQ, Section 1.3, Place of Performance references TDY to OCONUS locations. To whom does the potential for OCONUS travel apply? Will any OCONUS travel require processing through the CRC at Ft. Bliss? Are there any additional security regulations we need to meet for this requirement?

TDY CONUS and OCONUS will be defined in the TO

PWSs. At this time no travel will require processing through CRC at Ft. Bliss. At this time there are no additional Security regulations/requirements for travel.

IDIQ, TO 0001 and T0002

PWSs updated in section

1.3

19 W900KK20R0004_ST

AF_Amed_0001_Conf ormed, Section

L.4.3.5, Page 89

Section L.4.3.5 references employee names and signed letter of intent for key personnel, which support the rates proposed and clearly identify the prospective pertinent conditions of employment. Is this a requirement? Does an offeror have to name key personnel (Program Manager and Deputy) and include a signed letter of intent within the proposal, specifically, Volume IV – Factor 4 – Cost/Price?

yes it is. Yes, a signed letter of intent which delineates the aforementioned information is required for the cost price volume L.4.3.5. also, L.4.2.1.1 is updated to require key personnel resumes (only) be submitted with the program management structure. L.4.4.4 also has been updated to include the letters of intent for key personnel.

L.4.2.1.1 updated.

L.4.4.4 is updated.

20 Attachment 1, PWS

IDIQ, Section 1.4

Attachment 1d

Personnel Qualification

Matrix, Pages 7

There is an issue with Attachment 1d Personnel Qualification Matrix and the IDIQ PWS; the issue is how do the 3 levels in the Personnel Qualification

Matrix (intermediate, senior and expert) relate to the 3 Functional Areas identified in Paragraph 1.4? Is there a relation between the 3 levels in the

PWS and the 3 levels in the labor category document?

1.4 High Level Functions (Scope of Work).

• Function 1: Administrative Support

• Function 2: Program Management (PM) Support

• Function 3: Technical Support

In addition, the headings for the major paragraphs 5.1, 5.2, and 5,3 are:

• 5.1. High Level Function 1: Administrative Support

• 5.2. Higher Level Task 2 Program Management.

• 5.3. Higher Level Task 3 Technical Support

If you look at some individual requirements, there are tasks in 5.3 that appear to be less complex than in 5.2.

How does function 1 represent intermediate, function 2 represent senior, and function 3 represents expert? What is the purpose of dividing into 3 categories? If Section 1.4 calls them “functions,” then why are they now categorized as high and higher? Is 5.3 the highest?

1st: The title of "High Level Functions" identified in

PWS 1.4 should match their corresponding detailed descriptions in PWS 5.1/5.2/5.3.

2nd: The labor category tiers (intermediate, senior, expert) do not bear categorical or fixed relation to the

High Level Functions identified in 5.1 - 5.3. The

Government has provided the Labor Categories and their associated tiers as a guide for those qualification and experience criterion found in Labor Categories historically utilized to perform this work in the past.

While the Government is providing as much historical performance data as possible, the Government is not defining a specific labor category an offeror must utilize in support of specified tasks.

The Government looks forward to receiving unique offeror proposals, with unique labor category mixtures, and unique technical approaches designed by each offeror according to the tasks, duties, and responsibilities to which they intend to perform.

A historical level of effort was provided identifying the average number of hours annually by labor category.

TO 0002 PWS titles changed for 5.2 and 5.3

Attachment 12 - STAFS

Historical LOE Annex is added

21 Attachment 1, IDIQ

PWS, Section 1.3

Attachment 9, Task

Order 0002 PWS, Section 5.0, Page 5

The IDIQ PWS, Attachment 1, Paragraph 1.3 page 5 and PWS for Task Order 0002, Paragraph 1.3 page 5, identifies the Primary Performance location as "...FH (Sierra Vista, AZ), Davis Monthan Air Force Base (DMAFB) (Tucson, AZ), Goodfellow Air Force Base (GAFB) (San Angelo, TX),…"

Paragraph 4.2.1 (page 35 IDIQ PWS and page 17 Task Order 0002 PWS) list the facilities being provided in support of the specific organization located at Fort Huachuca. PWS for Task Order 0002 identifies the efforts to be supported by the contractor for each organization. Neither the IDIQ

PWS nor the Task Order 0002 identifies the specific organization that requires tasks to be performed at Goodfellow Air Force Base. Please identify the specific support requirements with a duty station Goodfellow Air Force Base.

The primary place of performance for the task orders and IDIQ requirements is Ft. Huachuca, AZ. All other locations have been deleted.

The PWSs for the IDIQ, TO 0001 and TO 0002.

Specifically paragraphs 1.3 have been amended.

PRSs for IDIQ, TO 0001 and TO 0002 have been amended.

22 W900KK20R0004_ST

AF_Amed_0001_Conf ormed

Will the Government provide office space and IT for the Program Manager and Deputy? No - the Government does not intend to provide local space and incidental equipment to the Contractor for either the PM or DPM.

TO 0001 PWS, Section 4 has been updated.

23 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.2.4, 5.2.5, 5.2.10-

5.2.12

The paragraphs identified below are the same set of requirements for the organization identified. The requirement appears to be multi-discipline based on the type of tasks to be accomplished (acquisition strategy, systems specifications, cost estimates, life cycle planning, systems engineering planes, etc.) – acquisition management (project coordinator), engineering, acquisition logistics and financial management activities are required since the opening sentence states “The contractor shall provide analytical support…” (sub paragraph c of each referenced paragraph). There is no indication of how many projects are being executed and/or the numbers of Integrated Project Teams requiring support. Industry could bid 1 man-year per organization or could bid multiple years of project coordinators, engineers, acquisition logisticians, etc. There is insufficient information to determine required quantity and labor category for these requirements.

Paragraphs:

• 5.2.4. CIO G-6 Acquisition Program Management Support

• 5.2.5. DOT Acquisition Program Management Support

• 5.2.10. DDIST Acquisition Program Management Support

• 5.2.11. 111th Acquisition Program Management Support

• 5.2.12. HT-JCOE Acquisition Program Management Support

1. These PWS sections are clarified.

• 5.2.4. CIO G-6 Acquisition Program Management

Support

• 5.2.5. DOT Acquisition Program Management

Support

• 5.2.10. DDIST Acquisition Program Management

Support

• 5.2.11. 111th Acquisition Program Management

Support

• 5.2.12. HT-JCOE Acquisition Program Management

Support

2. A historical LOE Attachment has been added to

Section J. However, the Government is looking for innovative approaches and solutions to providing the support services required.

TO 0002 PWS Sections

5.2.4, 5.2.5, 5.2.10, 5.2.11, and 5.2.12 have been updated. Historical

LOE attachment has been added to Section J.

24 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.2.6

2-13th Aviation Regiment Acquisition Program Management Support states this is an Optional Line Item. What does an Optional Line Item mean in a

Performance Work Statement? Is this a valid requirement or not this is a requirement TO 0002 PWS 5.2.6 has been updated.

25 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.1.2

CIO G6 Information Technology (IT) Administrative Assistance – this effort is considered a High Level Function 1: Administrative Support tasked based on the PWS. The tasks to be performed are technical not administrative. To meet the requirements, the individual needs to have an understanding of network architectures, Information Assurance/Risk Management Framework and serves as a subject matter technical expert on business and support quality assurance and quality control (QC) oversight of USAICoE business and operational processes. The tasks being performed are required (administrative) to meet IA certification requirements but the efforts are technical. Does the Functional or Task Area limit the labor category Industry proposes? There is no specific certification requirement for this position identified. Is Security+ certification a requirement?

1. The Government believes this requirement is appropriately categorized in the Administrative section of this PWS. However, the Government does recognize a higher degree technical expertise associated with the performance of administrative functions in support of a highly technical customer such as the CIO-G6.

2. No, offerors should build their technical approaches in the manner believed will most effectively address and satisfy the requirements.

3. No - Security + is not a rqmt for task 5.1.226 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.1.3

CIO G6 Supply Support: There are duplicative sub-paragraphs – 5.1.3 c and 5.1.3 j. Please confirm the duties identified in sub-paragraph b, c, e and f are correct for this position (the sub-paragraphs are somewhat technical and inconsistent with a supply specialist). Is this position responsible to develop Standard Operating Procedures? This is considered “Administrative” which is consistent with performing inventory, disposing of equipment.

the duplicative paragraph j. was deleted. TO 0002 PWS 5.1.3.j has been deleted

27 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.1.6

Directorate of Training (DOT) MI Library and Military Intelligence Service Historic Learning Center (MISHLC) states the contractor will provide support

7 days a week “The Contractor shall support the MI Library and MISHLC seven days a week.” No hours of operations are provided for these resource centers. Do we assume a normal work day or is extended operations required?.

the hours have been provided. TO 0002 PWS, 5.1.6, paragraph 1 has been added.

28 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.1.9

Directorate of Doctrine & Intelligence Systems Training (DDIST) Admin Support states “The contractor shall support a wide range of tasks in the form of technical input to lifecycle acquisition, acquisition strategy for training products, process in support of Training Development for Army Modernization

Training (IAW with AR 350-1 and TR 350-70) and coordination. Additionally, the contractor shall provide services which include, but are not limited to, as follows:” The requirements that follow are administrative – travel, files, ordering supplies, etc. The opening paragraph equates to a Project

Coordinator while the specific tasks equate to an administrative assistant. Do the requirements for this position require lifecycle acquisition support functions or are the requirements purely administrative (travel, files, ordering supplies, emergence list, etc.)?

this PWS section is clarified. TO 0002 PWS, 5.1.9, paragraph 3 is amended.

29 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.1.14

Is IT LEVEL III required for HT-JCOE J-2 Administrative Support? There are no cyber security duties identified The qualification criterion in the PWS are accurate.

30 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.2.8

DDIST Resource Management Program Analysis: Does this position require IT LEVEL III certification? There are no Cyber Security responsibilities identified. There is a requirement that the individual must have Military Intelligence career experience, but the requirements are financial/budget management and analysis in nature. Is the MI career experience correct?

The qualification criterion in the PWS are accurate.

31 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.2.13

Acquisition Program Management Office, Directorate of Resource Management Financial Management Analyst Support. How many financial plans, cost estimates, etc. are performed in a year? How many funding lines are managed? There is insufficient information to estimate the quantity of the effort.

This information is clarified. TO 0002 PWS, 5.2.13, paragraph 2 is amended.

32 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.3.1

CIO G6 Technical writer/editor support. Is this position really performing Information Assurance functions that require Security + Certification and IT

Level III certification? Is this position considered a Cyber security workforce position?

The qualification criterion in the PWS are accurate.

33 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.2.3 and 5.3.3

Do all the PKI positions require nomination and specific training? Paragraph 5.2.3 specifically states the nomination and training while 5.3.3 does not include the requirement?

This information is clarified. TO 0002 PWS, 5.3.3, paragraph 2 is added.

34 Attachment 9, TO

0002 PWS, Section

5.3.7

DOT Teaching, Learning and Technology Div (TLTD) Writing Program Coordinator and DOT Teaching, Learning and Technology Div (TLTD) Writing

Program Tutor states “This task requires flexible hours based on student availability. Hours can vary between 0500 and 2000 daily and on weekends, not to exceed 80-hour bi-weekly.” There is no quantity of student that requires support to determine how many coordinators or tutors are required. This limitation implies no overtime but depending on the classification of the employee, overtime is based on exceeding 40 hours in a 7 day period not 80 hours over 14 days.

information is clarified TO 0002 PWS. 5.3.7 paragraph 2 is amended.

35 Can the government please confirm that resumes for Key Personnel are NOT required as part of the RFP response for Phase 1 or Phase 2 see answer to question 19.

36 Section I

L.4.1.1

L.4.2.1.3

The Services Contract Act FAR clauses are included as being applicable as well as a requirement to show which positions are exempt or non-exempt as well as in Past Performance how we manage this type of requirement however no Wage Determinations were included.

see answer to question 11.

37 L.4.3.5 Given that DBA is calculated based on location as well as payroll dollars, it is difficult to calculate accurately this cost as location, duration and dates cannot be determined at this time and will be driven by awarded Task Orders. Would the Government consider allowing pricing of DBA as Cost

Reimbursable CLIN?

TDY travel will be required. Travel costs are supported under a Cost No Fee Basis. In the event Travel which requires DBA shall be brought to the attention of the

COR and contracting officer and shall be proposed and negotiated at that time.

38 39 of106 Please clarify the applicability of FAR 52.230-3 DISCLOSURE AND CONSISTENCY OF COST ACCOUNTING PRACTICES (DEVIATION 2018-

O0015) (MAY 2018) for this 8(a) set aside procurement.

Would the government consider removing it from the RFP as we believe it is not applicable.

this has been deleted.

39 Volume IV There is no reference or requirement to complete the CLIN pricing in Section B.

Please confirm that this is not required. If it IS required, where in the proposal shall it be placed? In Volume IV Cost/Price or in Volume V

Administrative / General information?

L.4.3, Volume IV -- Factor 4 - Cost/Price, paragraph 1 has been updated.

L.4.3 updated. Attachment

6 is updated.

40 Section I

L.4.1.1

L.4.2.1.3

The Services Contract Act FAR clauses are included as being applicable as well as a requirement to show which positions are exempt or non-exempt as well as in Past Performance how we manage this type of requirement however no Wage Determinations were included.

See answer to question 11. section J updated

41 Section I

L.4.1

The solicitation does not state whether companies can or cannot use past performance of a parent or affiliate companies. Will the government clarify that it will credit the past performance of a parent or affiliate of the offeror so long as the offeror demonstrates in its proposal that the resources (e.g.

workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) of the affiliate will meaningfully affect the performance of work under this contract?

For reference, GAO has held that an agency “may attribute the experience or past performance of a parent or affiliated company to an offeror where the firm’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliate will affect the performance of the offeror,” and that “[t]he relevant consideration is whether the resources of the parent or affiliated company–its workforce, management, facilities, or other resources–will be provided or relied upon for contract performance such that the parent or affiliate will have meaningful involvement in contract performance.” See, e.g., IAP World Services, Inc.;

EMCOR Government Services, Inc., B-407917.2 et al. (July 10, 2013).

See answer to question 6. L.2.15 is added to the solicitation

42 Section M.4.1.2 The solicitation states in M.4.1.2

In the case of an offeror without a record of relevant past performance or for whom information on past performance is not available or so sparse that no meaningful past performance rating can be reasonably assigned, the offeror may not be evaluated favorably or unfavorably on past performance

(see FAR 15.305 (a)(2)(iv)). Therefore, the offeror shall be determined to have unknown (or “neutral”) past performance. In the context of acceptability/unacceptability, a neutral rating shall be considered “acceptable.”

Please confirm that an offeror that does not submit meaningful past performance will receive a Neutral Rating and be approved to participate in Phase

2.

see answer to question 4. incorporated language in

Section M.1.2

43 Section M.1 The solicitation states in M.1

Those Offerors achieving an Acceptable rating in Phase I for both Factors 1 & 2, will then be notified and asked to submit proposals for the Factor 3 -

Program Management and Factor 4 - Cost/Price which will be evaluated utilizing Best Value Subjective Trade-Off.

Once an Offeror gets an acceptable rating for Phase 1, will the quality of an offeror’s response in Factor 1 or Factor 2 influence the Best Value

Subjective Trade-Off evaluation?

No, Phase II will be a stand alone evaluation using best value trade off process for selecting the offeror that represents the best value to the Government.

44 SECTION L.1.0 Does the Government have an anticipated start for Phase II? See answer to Question 12.

45 SECTION L.2.10 Will offerors have an opportunity in Phase II to ask additional questions? Yes, please see solicitation L.2.10

46 Section L3.1 (Amend

0001)

PAGE # AND LINE #:

Page 83, 1st paragraph

Line 5, second paragraph Line 3

Can header/footer information (i.e., page numbers, disclosure statement, etc.) be provided in 10 point Arial or Times New Roman font? Please follow the instructions in the referenced solicitation paragraph.

47 Section L3.1 (Amend

0001), Page 83, 2nd paragraph Line 1

Are the Table of Contents, Cross-Reference Matrix, attachments, CWBS, Letters of Commitment, and teaming agreements required to be page numbered (X of Y)? As stated in the solicitation, these are not included in the page limitations and to assist the government in easily determining page limits are adhered to, can these elements be page numbered separately?

Yes, these elements can be page numbered separately.

48 Attachment 3 (Amend

0001), Tab 1

Based upon item 2. noted in the Workbook instructions, if the Offeror can meet the requirements listed in Questions a), b), and c) with two (2) references are they required to submit a third reference?

information is clarified L.4.1.1 paragraph 1 is updated.

49 Attachment 6 Can the government please provide the historical workload by Task Order for the positions identified in Attachment 6 Cost/Price Workbook? No. see part 2 to question 23 Attachment 12 - STAFS

Historical LOE Annex is added

50 L2.3, L2.7, L4.4.4

(Amend 0001), 81, 92

Can the government please confirm the Program Manager and Deputy Program Manager (key personnel) are the only Letters of Commitment required and they should be submitted in Volume V, Administrative/General Information?

That is correct. See answer to question 19 L.4.2.1.1 is updated

L.4.3.5 is updated

L.4.4.4 is updated

51 L4.3.5 (Amend 0001), If the proposed key personnel are not current employees of the Offeror, a Letter of Intent (as described in L4.3.5, page 89) is to be provided in Volume

IV Cost/Price. Please confirm.

See answer to question 19 L.4.2.1.1 is updated

L.4.3.5 is updated

L.4.4.4 is updated

52 Section L2.3 (Amend

0001), 81

Is the required “control copy” of all electronic documents in Adobe PDF to be submitted by Volume? For example, a complete control copy in PDF of

Volume II contains the cover page, table of contents, Attachment 3 Past Performance Reference Workbook along with the verifiable documentation? If this is incorrect, please provide further guidance.

That is correct. they should be submitted by Volume and contain "Control Copy" in the title as stated in L.2.3

(Amend 0002) updated L.2.3

53 Attachment 6, Tab 3, Tab 4

Within Attachment 6, the Phase-In periods show two (2) months (i.e., 60 days), as opposed to the one (1) month (i.e., 30 days) referenced in IDIQ

PWS (Section 2.3.5, page 26). Will the government adjust Attachment 6 to reflect this as one (1) month?

Attachment 6 has been revised to reflect the Phase-In period to be one(1) month.

See revised Attachment 6

54 Section L4.4 (Amend

0001), Page 91

In the conformed solicitation document, Section L.4.4 is labeled as “L.4.4 VOLUME IV – Administrative / General Information”. As a courtesy notification to the government, this section heading is labeled incorrectly.

Thank you. The solicitation is corrected to reflect

Volume V updated L.4.4 title to

Volume V

55 Section B (Amend

0001), Page 3

Can the government please confirm that offerors do not need to fill out Section B of the conformed solicitation since the CLIN structure does not align with that of the two Task Orders?

See answer to Question 39 L.4.3 updated. Attachment

6 is updated.

56 Attachment 6 Can contractors maintain separate fully burdened labor rates on the IDIQ for the prime and each of its subcontractors by labor category or is only one fully burdened labor rate allowed per labor category for each contract period?

There can be a fixed fully burdened rate for the prime and the subcontractor(s)

See revised Attachment 6

57 Section M4.1.1

(Amend 0001), Page

101, Line 1 of a), b), and c)

In the conformed solicitation document, under Section M.4.1.1, a), b), and c) (first line of each paragraph) they reference “Technical Reference”. Can the government please confirm that a), b), and c) should reference “Past Performance Reference” versus “Technical Reference”?

the reference has been corrected updated M.4.1.1