The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.
Sheet1
| Question # | RFP Section Reference | Question | Response |
| 1 | General | In order to ensure a common baseline and level playing field for the procurement, can the RFP provide (1) that the WSMR MSS contractor has historically been required to pay wages above the Department of Labor (DOL) Area Wage Determination (AWD) to retain highly qualified Service Contract Act (SCA) employees in this geographic location; (2) incorporate baseline wage information as an exhibit to the RFP; and (3) that any deviation from the average rates that are provided as an exhibit to the RFP must be clearly identified, explained and justified. Will the Agency revise the RFP to incorporate this information? | Offerors should refer to the CBA for wage information. |
It is the responsibility of each Offeror to create its own strategy to address these issues such as retention
| 2 | Question: Can the government provide the average overtime percentage per position that is in the jobhours provided? This will prevent unrealistic assumptions being used by offerors. | The Government will not dictate overtime hours. It is up to the offeror and their unique business practices to determine how much overtime is needed to support the requirement. |
| 3 | Question 40 in the Government Q&A response issued on 12-Feb-2018 relates to normalizing fringe cost in the proposal to prohibit fringe costs being assumed to be included in the ODC plug numbers. The response indicates that this will be addressed in the final RFP, but it is unclear how this has been addressed. Please clarify what is included in the Government provided ODCs and whether fringe benefits should be assumed to be included. | Fringe Benefits are not inlcuded in ODCs. Fringe is part of labor costs. |
| 4 | Reference RFP Sections and Attachments. Question: Please confirm Exhibits C, D, E, I, O and U have been excluded from the RFP. Question: Please confirm that Section H - Special Contract Requirements has been deleted in its entirety from the RFP (note - this Section H was provided in earlier draft RFP versions) | Yes, Exhibits C, D, E, I, O, and U have been exlcuded from the RFP. Section H has been removed. |
| 5 | In order to ensure a common baseline and level playing field for the procurement, can the RFP provide (1) that the WSMR MSS contractor has historically been required to pay wages above the Department of Labor (DOL) Area Wage Determination (AWD) to retain highly qualified Service Contract Act (SCA) employees in this geographic location; (2) incorporate baseline wage information as an exhibit to the RFP; and (3) that any deviation from the average rates that are provided as an exhibit to the RFP must be clearly identified, explained and justified. Question: Will the Government revise the RFP to incorporate this information? | The Government has provided current Collective Bargaining Agreement to Offerors. CBA employees should be proposed using wages as stated on the CBA shown as Exhibit AC of the solicitation. |
| 6 | The requirement to provide access to the Government to any website used during it's presentation for a minimum of 30 days after the offeror's presentation has been removed. | |
| Will the Government consider reinstating that requirement so that the Government may fully evaluate the offeror's proposed solution for mission success, and ensure the proposed solution is not a facade? | The Government will not reinstate this requirement. The Offeror shall fully demonstrate their Project Cost Management System during the time allotted. | | | |
| 7 | Page 7 to 25 of 89; Section B | In the Final RFP, the Government added CLINs 0010, 0011, 1010, 1011, 2010, 2011, 3010, 3011, 4010, and 4011 for Delivery of CAP - EQP, ST, & STE and Delivery of CAP Material. Since ODC's have been provided as a plug number, it is not clear what items have been included in ODC's and what items are still remaining to be purchased under the new CAP CLINs. Please provide an explanation of what items are expected to be included in the CAP CLINs and which have been priced in the ODC CLINs so that we can appropriately estimate this scope. | ODC Costs are based on Government estimates of incidental material and services for which there not a labor hour specified in the contract. Whereas CAP is Contractor Acquired Property that has yet to be identified or purchased on behalf of the Government. |
| 8 | Page 7 of 89;Section B | The Cost Pricing Matrix shows the Phase In CLIN as 10, where Section B has it as 13. Can we amend the cost/price matrix to reflect CLIN 13 instead of 10? | Attachment 1 has been updated. |
| 9 | Section B | The following three CLINs hae been added for the base and options years: CAP - EQP, ST, & STE; CAP - Material; and CDRLs. These CLINs do not appear on the "CLIN PRICING" tab and "SUMMARY" tab of the Cost Pricing Matrix. Please provide guidance on how to address these costs in the Cost Pricing Matrix. | Attachment 1 has been updated. |
| 10 | Section B | CLINs 0012, 1012, 2012, 3012, and 4012 for Contract Data Requirements List (CDRLs) have been addded to Section B. Is this CLIN for the labor associated with the handling of the CDRLs? If so, is this labor already included in the labor and hours provided in Exhibit T? | Yes, they are included in Exhibit T. |
| 11 | Pg. 34, Clause 52.217-9 states "The total duration of this contract, including the exercise of any options under this clause, shall not exceed 60 Months." However, with a 3-month transition, 9-month base, and 4 x 1 year options, the potential POP appears to equal 66 months. | Question: Will the Government please verify the total POP as 60 or 66 months? | Total POP is 60 months |
| 12 | Section J, List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments | The Past Performance Contact List (Attachment 2) appears in the list in Section J, but there are no instructions included in Section L or elsewhere in the DRFP. | |
| Will the Government provide instructions? | The Government has included Attachment 2 in Section L, Vol III, Tab G | | | |
| 13 | Section J, List of Documents, Exhibits and Other Attachments, Attachment 4 | Attachment 4 shows a Past Performance Questionnaire, but there is no mention of Past Performance Questionnaires nor any instructions in Section L of the DRFP. Will the Government please confirm that it is not the intent for Offerors to submit Past Performance Questionnaires, and remove this from the list of attachments in Section J. | The Government provided instructions in Section L Volume III, Past Performance. |
| 14 | Exhibit T, Section L | Section L Org Str asks Offerors to discuss their "approach to … Lead to Worker Ratio”, while Exhibit T directs Offerors to ‘indicate, by non-exempt labor category, the lead to worker structure’. | |
| Please clarify if the Government is seeking for Offerors to explain how they plan to determine an effective Lead to Worker ratio (i.e. an approach) or to provide our anticipated Lead to Worker ratios by organization. If the latter, where should this information be presented – in the Org Structure, in the Cost Volume or both? | The Government requires Offerors to provide their proposed "Lead to Worker" ratio approach. There is no intent to provide Government or proposed contractor organizational structures or historic mission workload as they do not pertain to the requirements of the proposal. | | | |
| 15 | Section L and Attachment 5 Resume Format | Attachment 5 Resume Format is provided in Times New Roman font. Section L of the Draft Solicitation states that Arial, 12-point font shall be used. Please clarify which font should be used. | All documents submitted in response to this solicitation shall be in readable arial, 12-point font. See solicitation page 69. |
| 16 | Section L & M, SF 1 - Quality Control and Continuous Process Improvement | In DRFP 4 and 5, the Government removed previous references to PWS Section C.1.4 Quality Control Program from Sections L and M, with respect to Subfactor 1c Quality Control and Continuous Process Improvement. Will the Government please clarify or state which requirements are related to the Instructions to Offerors (Sec L) and Evaluation Factors (Sec M) regarding Quality Control and Continuous Process Improvement? | Offerors should refer to page 82 of the solicitation, Factor 1, a. (iii) for requirements regarding Quality Control and Continuous Process Improvement. |
| 17 | Section L, Vol II-Mission Capability, TAB F1: Subfactor 1-Program Management, b. Organizational Structure | The Government added the requirement that offerors are to provide "lead to worker ratio for both CBA and Wage Determination positions." | |
| Will the Government please clarify what role they mean by the term "lead?" Is this intended to refer to Union Leads, exempt-employee leads, or something else? | A Lead person is responsible for leading and directing the work of other employees within his area and for approving and signing for the work of others while continuing to perform the duties of his regular job. Lead assignments are offered by the Company, and may be accepted or rejected by the employee’s choice. Please refer to the Collective Bargaining Agreement page 25. | | |
| 18 | Section L, Vol II-Mission Capability, TAB F1: Subfactor 1-Program Management, b. Organizational Structure | The Government states in Section L that offerors must provide "lead to worker ratio for both CBA and Wage Determination positions." However, Section M does not provide equivalent evaluation criteria that defines how offerors will be evaluated on any "lead to worker ratio" prescribed. |
| Will the Government please clarify in Section M the evaluation criteria that the Government will use to rate offerors on strengths or weaknesses for the ratios identified? | The Government will evaluate Offerors Lead to Worker ratio as part of the overall Organizational Structure under Subfactor 1, Program Management. Section M has been revised to reflect the same. | | | | |
| 19 | Section L, p. 78 e. Compliance (2) | DRFP #5 states that, "The Basis of Estimate (BOE) shall clearly demonstrate a crosswalk to the technical proposal and small business proposal." Can the Government provide a format of what it is seeking in the crosswalk to the technical proposal, or is the requirement meant to be interpreted as a written crosswalk in the Cost Volume? | No specific formatting will be provided. The crosswalk links the cost and technical proposals to demonstrate an understanding of the work to be performed and the standards that are to be met. | This is ending in a comma. If there is nothing further, recommend change to a period. |
| 20 | Section L, p. 78. e. Compliance (2) | Will the Government please clarify it's statement that, "This submission requirement also applies to all proposed subcontractors"? Is the Government asking for each subcontractor to submit a BOE to the Prime or directly to the PCO? Or is the Government's intent simply that the BOE covers all LCATS/hours whether they are assigned to the Prime or to a subcontractor? | Yes, the intent is that the BOE covers all LCATS/hours whether they are assigned to the Prime or to a subcontractor | |
| 21 | Section L, p. 79. g. Specific Instructions by CLIN Types | The CLIN types listed in this paragraph do not correspond to the CLIN numbers listed in DRFP#5. For example, CLIN 10 is not FFP, while CLIN 13 is, but is not listed. Would the Government please correct the Section L CLIN instructions in the final release? | The Government has revised Section L to correlate with Section B. | |
| 22 | Section L, Vol III - Past Performance, TAB C: Summary Page, p. 74 | Will the Government please clarify that there is no page limitation for TAB C: Summary Page? | There is no page count limit for Section L, Vol III - Past Performance, TAB C: Summary Page. | |
| 23 | Section L. Vol II-Mission Capability, TAB F2: Subfactor 2-Cost Management Oral Demonstration, a. General Instructions p.73 | The Government states, "Offerors may be represented by no more than six (6) people." | | |
| Will the Government please clarify what is meant by "represented". For example, "Offerors may be represented by no more than six (6) people with a speaking role during the Oral Presentations, but may have other members of the company in the presentation room as observers (with no speaking parts)." | No more than six (6) people per Offeror can be present for the Oral Presentation. | | |
| 24 | Section L, C. Proposal Preparation Instructions, C. page 69 | The Government states, "Documents shall be easily readable Arial, 12-point font size shall be used." |
| Will the Government please allow offerors to use a smaller font size, such as Arial 10-point font? | All documents submitted in response to this solicitation shall be in readable arial, 12-point font. See solicitation page 69. | | |
| 25 | Section L, C. Proposal Preparation Instructions, F. p. 70 | In DRFP #3 the Government states, "Fold-outs will be counted as the appropriate number of pages based on an 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper." In DRFP #4 and #5, this statement was removed. |
| Will the Government please allow offerors to use Fold-outs in their proposals (11x17 sheet of paper), where the number of pages will be based on an 8 1/2 x 11 sheet of paper. | The Government will allow fold outs and will add the following language to Section L, C Proposal Preparation Instructions, "Fold-outs will be counted as the appropriate number of pages based on an 8 ½ X 11” sheet of paper. Use at least 1 inch margins on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch side margins." | | |
| 26 | Section L, Volume I, TAB A. p. 70 | The Government has asked offerors to provide contact information for a POC at the Offeror's financial institution that can assist with validating the Offeror's solvency. |
| Will a signed letter from the corporate DCMA/DCAA representative satisfy this requirement? | Yes, The Government concurs that a signed letter from the DCMA/DCAA representative will satisfy this requirement.Language added to Section L, Volume V, c to read, "A signed letter from the corporate DCMA/DCAA representative will satisfy this requirement. | | |
| 27 | Section L, p. 79, para (6) | This requirement states that, "Offerors shall not deviate from the baseline staffing in Exhibit T except as instructed on the exhibit to account for lead workers and straight overtime." |
| To ensure a level playing field for all bidders, we recommend that Exhibit T provide a specific number of overtime hours that all bidders must use in their proposal. | The Government will not provide historical data. The work is defined in the PWS. The offeror shall use their unique business practices, work schedules, and CBA compliance/negotiations to determine how much overtime is needed to support the requirment. | | |
| 28 | Section L, Volume V Cost, both Sections f.(6) and I. b), page 79 of 89 | In Section L, Volume V: Cost, both Sections f.(6) and i. b), page 79 of 89, read: “Offerors shall not deviate from the baseline staffing in Exhibit T except as instructed on the exhibit to account for lead workers and straight overtime”. |
| Question: Can the government please define “straight overtime” noted in Section L, Sections f.(6) and i. b). Per the CBA it should be priced at one and one-half times the salary. | The term “straight overtime” is intended to help define regular overtime as described in the CBA. Per the solicitation section L. Volume V, g.3.ii.c states that “CBA: CBA employees should be proposed using wages as stated on the CBA shown as Exhibit AC of the solicitation. Offerors who propose less than the CBA rates shall propose a strategy for recruiting and retaining personnel paying rates lower than those in the CBA.” All instructions found in the CBA shall be followed to propose labor. | | | |
| 29 | Page 70 of 89; Section L.III.2.C(f) | What Counts As A Page? A page size shall be 8½ X 11. Are 11x17 pages permitted and, if so, will they count as 2 pages? | If printed the size would be 8 1/2 x 11. 11 x 17 are not permitted. |
| 30 | Page 73 of 89; L Volume III | Attachment_4,_PAST_PERFORMANCE_QUESTIONNAIRE_FORM.docx was provided as part of the Final RFP documents, however no reference is made in Section L regarding its inclusion. Please provide instructions regarding submittal requirements (email, fax, mail, upload, etc.) and other information necessary for its submittal. | The Government provided instructions in Section L Volume III, Past Performance, page 74 or 88. |
| 31 | Page 71 of 89; Section L | Organizational Conflict of Interest (OCI) Mitigation Plan. Can the Government confirm that the deadline for the Offeror to ask questions or seek clarifications as discussed in the instructions for TAB F (RFP page 71 of 89) is 12:00 PM (Central Standard Time), 12 April 2018, or the proposal due date? | The deadline for the Offeror to ask questions or seek clarifications was 12:00 PM, Central Standard Time, on 12 April 2018. |
| 32 | Page 78 of 89; Section L | Volume V: Cost, paragraph e(3). The first sentence states: Proposals shall be sufficiently detailed to demonstrate realism and reasonableness for the cost reimbursable line items and shall provide BOE for cost and pricing build-up that is easily traceable and free of errors. Plug numbers for ODCs have been provided by the Goverment in Section B of the RFP. Is it acceptable to provide BOEs for only the ODCs associated with Transition/Phase-in, other equipment, and material? | Offerors shoud reference section L, Vol V, g, for instructions on what is required to be provided in support of all costs by CLIN type. |
| 33 | Page 78 of 89; Section L | Volume V: Cost, paragraph f(3). The last sentence states: The basis of estimate for all labor shall be clearly outlined in the cost narrative and shall match the proposal epreadsheet.The government provided the required labor by position, organization, and labor hours in Exhibit T. Please clarify the need to provide a BOE for all labor. Is it sufficient to provide BOEs addressing the lead positions including lead to worker ratio and overtime? | Offerors shoud reference section L, Vol V, g, for instructions on what is required to be provided in support of all costs by CLIN type. |
| 34 | Page 73 of 89; Section L F2.c | Contract Cost Management. Section L requires that the the offeror discuss the capabilities identified in PWS 1.6.2. This section of the PWS only address nomenclature. Please clarify that the intent is to address PWS 1.6 | The Government updated Section L to reflect PWS 1.6 not PWS 1.6.2 |
| 35 | Section L | The Total Compensation Plan is referenced in both Volume II and Volume IV. Is it the Government's intent that the TCP be included in both places? | Yes, it is the Government's intent for the Total Compensation Plan to be included in both Volume II and Volume V. |
| 36 | Section L Volume III Past Performance/L.C.3.Volume II, Tab C and G | The instructions for TAB C of the RFP states "The summary shall also include a cross-reference matrix depicting the Offeror and each subcontractor, teaming partner, and /or JV partner with reference to the past performance projects cited for each team member and the associated tasks from the PWS represented by each project." Tab G states that the "The Offeror shall provide documentation outlining the Offeror’s past performance with contracts, as a prime or subcontractor." | |
| Question: Is the Offeror required to attach to Volume III a copy of the PWS or other official contract documentation from each cited contract used to demonstrate Past Performance in the cross-reference matrix? | No the Offeror is not required to submit the PWS for previous contracts. The Offeror shall provide information describing their role as the prime or subcontractor in specific task of the PWS in relevant contracts. | | | |
| 37 | Section L Volume V Cost/L.C.3. Volume V, Paragraph f (6) and Exhibit T | The RFP states that "Offerors shall not deviate from the baseline staffing in Exhibit T except as instructed on the exhibit to account for lead workers and straight overtime." The instructions at the top of Exhibit T state that "NOTE: Offerors are required to specify, by labor category, regular and overtime hours for both non-exempt and exempt positions. Offerors are instructed to pay close attention to the process laid out in the CBA when developing an overtime strategy for covered employees. Pay particular attention to the requirements specified by FAR Clause 52.237-10, Identification of Uncompensated Compensation. Further, Offerors are also required to propose, for each non-exempt labor category, the lead to worker structure and to price those lead hours according to the terms of the CBA. As indicated in the solicitation, offerors shall not deviate from the hours provided below by labor category. For example, the total hours proposed, inclusive of overtime and lead positions, for Carpenter A under the ATEC CLIN cannot exceed 4,040 for Base period and 5,390 per option period." | |
Question: Please define the term "straight overtime" used in the solicitation for all offerors - does this term apply only to Exempt employees that may be paid for additional hours of work in lieu of uncompensated overtime? Question: Offerors are required to bid overtime hours for CBA employees paying close attention to the process layed out in the CBA. Is the government going to provide detailed range scheduling information or historical data to the offerors for the accurate calculation of irregular and overtime hour premiums for work outside of normal shifts per the CBA? If not, how will the Government assess cost realism and will each offeror's approach to overtime usage be reviewed by Government technical representatives to determine realism and potential impact to on-going operations and scheduling of Government - Contractor teams on joint tasks throughout the range? Question: Will the Government consider normalizing overtime and premium hours, especially considering the current CBA provisions and absence of workload data, to ensure a level playing field and prevent outlandish and unsubstatiated claims by each offeror? The currently stated instructions in the RFP have resulted in lengthy unresolved protests and delays in several similar ATEC cost plus test support contracts.
Question 1: Straight overtime is the same as overtime. It indicates overtime that is "normal type" and is not uncompensated.
Question 2: Section L, g, states "Contractors are advised the Government technical and cost price experts will collaborate on the evaluation to ensure what is proposed in the technical volume matches the cost volume as part of any required analysis for cost realism"
Question 3: Overtime and premium hours are agreed to as part of the CBA. The number of hours have been provided and it is up to each offeror to propose its unique plan to accomplish the mission.
38 Section L Volume V Cost/L.C.3 Volume V, Paragraph g (3) ii, Labor Rates C)CBA The RFP instructions state that "CBA employees should be proposed using wages as stated on the CBA shown as Exhibit AC of the solicitation. Offerors who propose less than the CBA rates shall propose a strategy for recruiting and retaining personnel paying rates lower than those in the CBA." Question: According the DOL regulations Offerors are required to honor CBA wages and benefits for the first year of stated contract perfomance and within the period of the existing CBA. After that period, the CBA could be possibly renegotiated for the remainder of the future MSS contract. How will the Government assess cost realism and potential technical performance of each offeror if lower wages and benefits are subject to negotiation and agreement by both the Offeror and the Union going forward? Question: Since recruiting and retention are evaluated in both volumes and cost data is not permitted in the Mission Capability Volume, how will the Government fairly evaluate the overall approach to lower CBA rates for feasibility, risks, and realism since it is all simply specualtion of the potential unpredictable result of future negotiations? Question: Will the Government consider normalizing rates (by using only CBA rates as shown in Exhibit AC of the soliciation for the entire period without escalation to prevent wide variations in proposed price and possible protests over cost realism? Question 1: The fact that all offeors are instructed in Section L Volume V Cost/L.C.3 Volume V, Paragraph g (3) ii, Labor Rates C)CBA, to use the CBA rates. This puts all offerors on a level playing field in order for the Governemnt to evaluate each offeror fairly. Additionally there is no guarantee that any offeror will successfully negotiate different rates in the future years, for his reason the CBA rates shall be used to evaluate wages as stated in the solicitation.
Question 2: Due to the unpredictablilty of future negotiations the Govenment has opted for the purposes of this proposal to instruct offerors to use the already established CBA rates so that all offerros are evaluated equally. Section L, g, states "Contractors are advised the Government technical and cost price experts will collaborate on the evaluation to ensure what is proposed in the technical volume matches the cost volume as part of any required analysis for cost realism"
Question 3: Section L, Vol V, f, 3 states "Per FAR 52.222-43, Fair Labor Standards Act and Service Contract Labor Standards -- Price Adjustment, Offerors shall not escalate SCLS labor wages in its proposal. Offerors shall follow the required CBA wage escalations in its proposal paying special attention to the effective dates in the agreement. Offerors are reminded that FAR 52.222-43(e) states that adjustments, shall not otherwise include any amount for general and administrative (G&A) costs, overhead, or profit. Therefore proposals shall ensure that any escalations are not applied to G&A, Overhead, or profit for FLSA covered employees. The basis of estimate for all labor shall be clearly outlined in the cost proposal narrative and shall match the proposal spreadsheet" The Governemnt will not normalize CBA rates.
39 Sectin L Volume V Cost/L.C.3.Volume V, Paragraph g (3) ii. Labor Rates a) exempt At industry day, a number of vendor questions arose that were related to workload, number of personnel supporting different facilities/worksites, etcetera. The recurring response can be paraphrased as: We will normalize both labor and materials. This proposal is about your management approach. We assume you will hire essentially all of the existing workforce, with the exception of key personnel. (To wit, at industry day, Question 38 read: "If labor is normalized …….)
Instructions under the current solicitation state: Volume V: Cost (Factor 4), g. Specific Instructions by CLIN Types, ii. Labor Rates, a) Exempt: Provide the basis of estimate for direct labor rates of all exempt employees and any escalation utilized in the development of pay rates. Provide sources used in the development of exempt employees such as Department of Labor (DOL) Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) including the associated BLS codes applied, local salary surveys or other related data.
| Question: If labor will be normalized, and the assumption is that non-incumbent offerors will hire almost all of the existing workforce, how will you normalize offers that may use widely different sources for the basis of estimate? | Labor rates will not be "normalized" instructions are provided in the solicitaion L, Volume V: Cost (Factor 4), g. Specific Instructions by CLIN Types, ii. Labor Rates, a), provides clear instructions on how to propse exempt labor rates. | | | |
| 40 | Section L/Exhibit AG | Section L, Volume II, Tab F4 states to Exclude subsection C.1.3.8.2. In the previous version of the PWS this section was "Separation Procedures". In the current version of the PWS, it refers to "Knowledge Transfer". Please clarify which section is be excluded from Volume II. | The Government has revised section to exclude PWS Section C.1.3.8 Incumbent Phase-Out. |
| 41 | Section L, Tab H | Section L for Volume III, Tab H states, “For Large Businesses, include SF 294 and SF 295 (or Individual Subcontracting and Summary Subcontracting Reports in eSRS) information for Government contracts with these reporting requirements for the last five years.” Large businesses, with a significant number of contracts, may have hundreds of SF295s or ISRs over the last 5 years. Is it the Government’s intent for Offerors to provide this magnitude of information, or can offerors limit their ISRs to those contracts cited within the Past Performance Volume? | It is up to the Offeror on what documents they will provide. The Government intent is for the Offeror to not submit hundreds of SF295s, however the Offeror shall ensure that they provide enough detailed information in accordance with Section L, Volume III , Tab H. |
| 42 | Section L, C Proposal Preperation Instructions 2( c) | Instructions state that "Documents shall be easily readable Arial, 12-point font size shall be used." Question: Would the Goernment please consider Arial, 10-point font size for graphics and tables? | Documents shall be easily readable Arial, 12-point font size shall be used. |
| 43 | RFP, Section L, f. General Instructions (4). | The instructions can be interpreted that the offeror incorporate Schedule B into Attachment 1, Cost Price Workbook. Does the Government wish to receive Schedule B as part of an Excel spreadsheet linked to other tabs in Attachment 1, or does the Government wish to receive Schedule B in a Word document? | The Offeror shall incorporate Schedule B as a Word or PDF document. |
| 44 | RFP, Section L.III, Proposal Preparation Instructions, C.2.f | The Government specifies that each page shall be 8.5X11 and that graphics must fit within this page size and respective margins. In order to maximize graphic readability in the written content and provide transferability to Oral Presentation Slides. | |
| Will the Government please allow Offerors to utilize a page size of 11x8.5 (landscape) while adhering to the margin requirements set forth? | A page size shall be 8 ½ X 11. Letter size and spacing requirements for illustrations and tables can be at the discretion of the Offeror but must be easily readable. Margins shall be at least 1 inch on the top and bottom and 3/4 inch on the side. | | | |
| 45 | RFP, Section L, Volume 1, page 70 | The instructions on page 70 require Schedule B to be presented in whole dollars only although all ODC CLINs have plug numbers that include cents. Does the Government intend for offerors to round dollars in Attachment 1 at the CLIN total level to match the whole dollars presented in Schedule B, or does the Government wish for offerors to retain the decimals they provided for ODC plugs? | The Government intends for Offerors to present whole dollars. ODC Plugs has been rounded to the nearest dollars. |
| 46 | Section L, C. Proposal Preparation Instructions, C. p. 69 | The Government states, "Documents shall be easily readable Arial, 12-point font size shall be used." | |
| Will the Government please allow offerors to use a smaller font size, such as Arial 10-point font? | Documents shall be easily readable Arial, 12-point font size shall be used. | | | |
| 47 | RFP, Section L, (6), p. 78 | In this section the Government states that "Offerors shall not deviate from Exhibit T except as instructed on the Exhibit to account for lead workers and straight overtime. Would the Government please provide its definition of "straight overtime"? Is the Government suggesting that overtime hours identified in Exhibit T be priced at "straight pay" which would mean that the ceiling hours in the Exhibit for each LCAT, both regular and overtime, would all be priced at the straight pay rate? | Straight overtime is the same as overtime. It indicates overtime that is "normal type" and is not uncompensated. The hours identified in Exhibit T are not broken down by straight time or overtime hours but are identified as total hours, it is up to the Offerors and their unique business practices to determine how much of the total hours is overtime. |
| 48 | RFP, Section L, c. CBA, p. 80 | The Government states that "CBA employees should be proposed using wages as stated on the CBA shown as Exhibit AC of the solicitation". Does the Government wish for offerors to bid the appropriate CBA rates as shown in Appendix D of the CBA, or does the Government expect offerors to also factor in all potential premiums (e.g., shift differentials, hazardous duty, etc.) into the base pay proposed for each LCAT? | The Offeror should refer to Exhibit AC CBA. The Government expects Offerors to propose in accordance with the CBA which includes shift differentials, hazardous duty, etc. |
| 49 | RFP, Section L, Vol II-Mission Capability, TAB F1: Subfactor 1-Program Management, b. Organizational Structure | The Government states in Section L that offerors must provide "lead to worker ratio for both CBA and Wage Determination positions." However, Section M does not provide equivalent evaluation criteria that defines how offerors will be evaluated on any "lead to worker ratio" prescribed. | |
| Will the Government please clarify in Section M the evaluation criteria that the Government will use to rate offerors on strengths or weaknesses for the ratios identified? | The Government has revised Section M to how lead to worker ratio will be evaluated. | | | |
| 50 | RFP, Section L & M, SF 1 - Quality Control and Continuous Process Improvement | In prior drafts, the Government removed references to PWS Section C.1.4 Quality Control Program from Sections L and M, with respect to Subfactor 1c Quality Control and Continuous Process Improvement. Will the Government please clarify or state which requirements are related to the Instructions to Offerors (Sec L) and Evaluation Factors (Sec M) regarding Quality Control and Continuous Process Improvement? | Please direct your attention to Section M, Page 82 of 89 (iii) Quality Control and Continuous Process Improvement. The Offeror will be evaluated from the list provided in this section. |
| 51 | RFP, Section L - Volume II Mission Capability, TAB F3 p.73 | The Government states in Volume II - Mission Capability (Factor 1) that the Mission Capability Volume shall not contain any pricing data (p.71). However, in Volume II - Mission Capability TAB F3, the Government states "Offerors will submit a total compensation plan setting fort salaries and fringe benefits proposed for the professional employees who will work under the contract." | |
| Is it the Government's intent that offerors are to include pricing data in the form of salary information as part of the compensation plan in Volume II? | No, it is not the Government's intent for the Offeror to provide pricing data in Volume II, Mission Capability. | | | |
| 52 | Pg. 72, Section L-III.C.3 Volume II Tab F2: Subfactor 2 – Cost Management, a. General Instructions dated 30-Mar-2018 states “Presentations will begin on the 7th of May 2018” | Will the Government please indicate how soon before May 7th it will provide offerors with their specific demonstration date? | Offerors will be notified on or about 30 April 2018. |
| 53 | Pg. 73, Section L-III.C.3 Volume II Tab F2: Subfactor 2 – Cost Management, a. General Instructions dated 30-Mar-2018 states “A single computer, projector, internet connectivity, and screen are provided for demonstration use.” | Will the Government please confirm offerors are authorized to bring additional equipment to demonstrations, such as laptop computers or flip charts, to aid evaluators in tracking our demonstration? | The Offerors are may bring additional equipment to track the demonstration but, that equipment shall not include the use of any audio/video/photography recording/transmitting devices. Offeror equipment shall not interface with Government systems. The Government computer and internet will be used to access the Project Cost Management System. |
| 54 | Pg. 73, Section L-III.C.3 Volume II Tab F2: Subfactor 2 – Cost Management, c. Contract Cost Management dated 30-Mar-2018 states “Offerors shall address at a minimum the capabilities described in the PWS Section C.1.6.2, Financial Tracking and Reporting”; however, Section C.1.6.2 is Cost Tracking Nomenclature. “Financial Tracking and Reporting” is actually found in Section C.1.6.3. | Question: Will the Government please correct the reference in Section M to align with the proper Section C subparagraph to allow offerors to correctly cross-reference requirements? | The Government revised to align the proper section C.1.6.3. |
| 55 | Pp. 73 – 75, Section L-III.C.3 Volume III: Past Performance | Discussion: Section L of the RFP sets page the page limit per Past Performance citation at 3; however, there is no indication of a maximum number of Past Performance citations that may be submitted per offer. | |
| Question: Will the Government please clarify the maximum number of Past Performance citations allowable for submission by each Prime offeror? | There is no maximim number of recent and relevant Past Perfomance citations | | | |
| 56 | Pg. 69, Section L-III.C.2.c directs submission format as “Adobe PDF, Microsoft Word, PowerPoint and/or Excel version 2013.” | Question: Will the Government consider allowing Excel formats 2010 and 2016 for ease of submission by small businesses? | Micrsoft Word, PowerPoint and/or Excel compatible with version 2013 shall be submitted per solicitation. |
| 57 | Section B, CLIN 0010 and Section L, page 79. | Section L refers to CLIN 0010 as "FFP Type" while Section B reflects CLIN 0010 as a "COST" type CLIN. Please clarify. Further, will there be a Government-furnished cost estimate for CLIN 0010 similar to CLINS 0002, 0004, 0006, and 0008? We recommend the Government furnish the estimates, otherwise, upon what information can an offeror base their cost estimate? | The Government updated Section L. The Government will not provide "plug" for the CDRL and Delivery of CAP CLINS. |
| 58 | Section M, Table 4a., page 87, coulmn Titled "Extent of Participation of SB Firms in Terms of the Total Contract Value". | Will the Government please clarify how offerors should interpret the phrases "10% or more of the baseline" and "10% over the baseline". If the baseline is 20% of Total Contract Value, is the Government intending "10% over the baseline" to be 22% or 30%? | |
Additionally, the Government defines baseline (on page 76) as Total Contract Value; then you instruct us to define Small Business value as %age of 'baseline'; and to achieve Outstanding we need to achieve over 10% of 'baseline'. Is baseline TCV or the SB goal of 20%? Will the government please clarify this point and update the RFP? The Government updated Table 4a.
Baseline is defined as the Total Contract Value (TCV).
| 59 | Section M, Evaluation Factor 4 - Cost b(i)1 | The inclusion of CLIN 0013, FFP for Phase-In, in the total evaluated price unfairly penalizes all offerors other than the incumbent contractor. This factor should be eliminated from the overall price evaluation for all offerors or please provide a government developed 'plug number'. | Phase in costs can be incurred by all offerors to include the incumbent because phase in includes other than normal operational tasks that would be outside the daily operations the incumbent would perform. Phase in costs will be included in the evaluated price. |
| 60 | Section M, Table 2, Past Performance Relevancy Ratings | If an offeror submits several contract citations which are individually and/or collectively rated as highly relevant, will submission of additional PP citations for contracts which are not individually highly relevant in scope, size, complexity but reflect relevant experience in specialized elements of the WSMR MSS PWS drag down the offeror’s overall PP scoring? | Possibly, Past Performance is rating on a cumulative basis. |
| 61 | Reference Section M, Factor 1, SubFactor 3 Recruitment and Retention of Technical Expertise | The evaluation criteria refers to PWS sub-sections C.5.3.1 through C.5.3.4. The PWS, however, only extends through sub-section C.5.3.3. Is there a PWS sub-section C.5.3.4 anticipated to be released in a forthcoming amendment | There is no PWS sub-secton C.5.3.4. Section M updated. |
| 62 | Attachment 1 | Will the Government please confirm that Attachment 1, Cost_Pricing_Matrix is exempt from formatting requirements set forth in Section L of the DRFP. | Cost Pricing matrix is exmept from formatting requirements. Offerors shall follow all instructions found in the solicitation pertaining to the cost volumes. |
| 63 | Attachment 1, Cost Pricing Workbook | CLINs 10 through 13 are not included in the CLIN Pricing tab. Is this an oversight? | The Government revised Attachment 1. |
| 64 | Attachment 1, Cost Pricing Workbook | CLIN 13 is not included in the CLIN Pricing tab, but Section M states that the proposed price of all FFP Clins will be included in the TEP. Will the Government confirm whether the offerors proposed price for Phase-in is included in the TEP? | The Government revised Attachment 1. |
| 65 | Attachment 1, Cost Pricing Workbook | For the "Rates" tab, does the Government wish to see the complete break out of the base rate with all indirect burdens and fee for each year of the contract, or is the Fully Burdened Labor Rate with Fee by contract year sufficient? | Section L, Vol V, g provides what is acceptable regarding the proposed labor rates and all indirect rates. Fully Burdened labor rates are not acceptable |
| 66 | Attachment 1, Cost Pricing Workbook | May offerors include other supporting tabs in their final submission of the Cost Pricing Workbook, provided that the Rates tab remains the "controlling" driver for changes in the other tabs? | Yes, that is the intended purpose |
| 67 | Attachment 1 | Will the Government please confirm that Attachment 1, Cost_Pricing_Matrix is exempt from formatting requirements set forth in Section L of the DRFP. | The Government confirms that Attachment 1, Cost Pricing Matrix is exempt from formating requirements set forth in Section L of the Solicitation. |
| 68 | Attachment 1, Cost Pricing Matrix | Instructions on the Rates tab states that labor rates may include profit, and that these rates must be the controlling cells. However, since Fixed Fee is shown separately on the Summary Tab, labor rates must be exclusive of fee to properly populate and separate labor expense from Fixed Fee on this tab. Will the Government please correct the instructions to indicate what it is seeking on the Rates tab? | The full text of the instructions is " The offeror should list all indirect rates used in the contractor's proposal spreadsheet. These rates may include G&A, Material Handling, labor overheads, subcontractor overheads, profit / fee, and any other applicable rates. " These are examples of rates that shold be included on this tab. |
| 69 | Attachment 1, Cost Pricing Matrix | Does the Government wish for the totals in the CPFF CLINs to include Fixed Fee or not? For example, does the Government intend for the CLIN 1 Base Period total in cell E7 to equal the total of cells E6 + F6 on the Summary Tab? | The separation of the cost and the fixed fee helps identify the amount of fee applied to the CPFF CLINs. On the Summary tab the offeror is provided a space (cells E6 and F6 for example) to identify the separate amounts of the cost and fee separately. |
| 70 | Attachment 1, Cost Pricing Matrix, Rollup Tab | The "PHASE IN" box (cells B32 to D51) request the components of the offerors transition bid which is Firm Fixed Price. Unless the Government is specifically seeking the components of a FFP bid, we recommend this box be deleted and the Total Contract box (cells B8 to D27) be reconstructed to add a row for Phase-In FFP and retitle row 10 as "CPFF" Labor. | instructions on the attachment 1 rollup tab state " Other categories and/or lines may be added/removed/rearranged to maintain consistency with your accounting system and proposal." |
| 71 | Attachment 2 | Will the Government please allow offerors to provide Attachment 2 in the format of the offerors proposal for consistency (while maintaining the integrity of the document), to comply with the proposal preparation instructions that have been established in accordance with the general instructions? | The Offeror shall use the format provided for Attachment 2. The evaluation team will be able to view the same information in the same format from all Offerors. |
| 72 | Attachment 2, Past Performance Contact List | The Government provided this as an attachment, but removed the requirement for this list in the 01/19/2018 Draft RFP. Will the Government clarify if this list is a requirement? If it is, where should it be placed within the outline in Section L? | The Government has added instructions to Section L Past Performance Contract List. |
| 73 | Attachment 2 | Will the Government please allow offerors to provide Attachment 2 in the format of the offerors proposal for consistency (while maintaining the integrity of the document), to comply with the proposal preparation instructions that have been established in the DRFP? | The Offeror shall use the format provided for Attachment 2. The evaluation team will be able to view the same information in the same format from all Offerors. |
| 74 | Attachments 3 & 7 | The file, titled, “SBS_Attachment_7,_Past_Performance_Information_Sheet,” shows the document title to be "Past Performance Information Sheet - Attachment 3." There is no Attachment 3 in the RFP. Question: Should Attachment 7 have a title of "Past Performance Information Sheet - Attachment 7" in lieu of Attachment 3? Please verify the use of the correct attachment for Volume II Past Performance Information Sheet submittal. | Attachment 7 is titled "Past Performance Information Sheet" and Attachment 3 will be Government Furnished Property |
| 75 | Attachment 3; Pg. 16 Exhibit “AG” PWS C.1.3.6 | Discussion: In the various previous draft releases, GFP amounted to approximately 24,000 items. However, in Attachment 3, GFP tallies to less than 13,000 items, all of which is considered mission equipment, not office equipment. | |
Question: Will the Government please confirm the offeror will be responsible only for mission-related GFP to include supplying and therefore pricing all necessary office equipment? IAW FAR 45.000(b)(5) GFP includes mission related equipment and does not apply to property that is incidential to place of performace such as office space, desks, chairs, telephones, computers, and fax machines, that may be provided for Cntractotr use. The Government is actively revising Attachment 3, GFP to reflect this intent.
| 76 | Attachment 4 | The attachment states, "Please return this completed Questionnaire via e-mail to the Contracting Officer identified in the cover letter", but there is no sample cover letter with instructions. Will the Government provide a sample cover letter with instructions? | The Government removed cover letter reference in Attachment. |
| 77 | Attachment 4, Past Performance Questionnaire Form | The Government provided a Past Performance Questionnaire; however, there are no instructions in Section L related to the questionnaires. If Past Performance Questionnaires are required, will the Government consider requiring them only for contracts where current CPARs are not available in PPIRS? | The Government has added instructions to Section L Past Performance Questionaire. |
| 78 | Attachment 4 | Will the Government please allow offerors to provide Attachment 4 in the format of the offerors proposal for consistency (while maintaining the integrity of the document), and to comply with the proposal preparation instructions that have been established in the DRFP. | The Offeror shall use the format provided for Attachment 4. The evaluation team will be able to view the same information in the same format from all Offerors. |
| 79 | Attachment 5 Resume Format | On the provided Attachment 5, number 5 is "Current work location." | |
| Will the Government clarify what is meant by "Current work location." Is the Government requesting the city and state of the Key Person's current employment? | Current Work Locaton = City and State | | | |
| 80 | Attachment 5, Resume Format | Will the Government please allow offerors to put Attachment 5 into Offerors format, while protecting the integrity/order of the information that has been requested by the Government, in order to comply with proposal formatting instructions set forth in the RFP. | The Offeror shall use the format provided for Attachment 5. The evaluation team will be able to view the same information in the same format from all Offerors. |
| 81 | Attachment 6, Consent Forms | In the instructions for the consent form, the Government states, "the completed consent forms should be submitted as part of your Past Performance Volume I." | |
| Please confirm that the consent letters are to be submitted in Volume III - Past Performance TAB D. | The Government confirms that the Consent Letter will be submitted in Volume III, Past Performance. | | | |
| 82 | Attachment 7 | Will the Government please allow offerors to provide Attachment 7 in the format of the offerors proposal for consistency (while maintaining the integrity of the document), to comply with the proposal preparation instructions that have been established in the DRFP? | The Offeror shall use the format provided for Attachment 7. The evaluation team will be able to view the same information in the same format from all Offerors. |
| 83 | Attachment 7 | Attachment 7 has the title "Past Performance Information Sheet - Attachment 3". According to Section J, Attachment 3 is "Government Furnished Property". | |
| Will the Government please correct the title on Attachment 7 and provide Attachment 3 to offerors. | Revised to reflect Attachment 3 - Government Furnished Property and Attachment 7 - Past Performance Information Sheet | | | |
| 84 | Exhibit AG (PWS) C.1.3.6.2 and Exhibit N | Both the PWS and Exhibit N require the Property Management Plan to be provided at proposal submission. Section L doesn't currently have the Property Management Plan listed as a requirement. Will the Government consider allowing offerors to make the Property Management Plan an appendix to Vol II and not include it within page count? | There is no page count limit to the property management plan. It should be submitted as a separate document and not part of any specific volume. See solicitation paragraph (e) page 70. |
This is the start of the file's text. The full file is on GovTribe.