QA_TSOC-V3_-9_Oct_15.xlsx
XLSX spreadsheet 24 KB Posted
- Solicitation number
- W911NF-15-R-0018
About this file
Questions and Answers
View the file
Other files
| File | Type | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| W911NF-15-R-0018_Solicitation_Amendment_03.pdf | ||
| RFP_-_Attachment_2_Cost_Summary_Sheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| W911NF-15-R-0018_Solicitation_Amendment_02.pdf | ||
| W911NF-15-R-0018_Solicitation_Amendment_01.pdf | ||
| RFP_-_Attachment_1_Fee.doc | DOC document | |
| RFP_-_Attachment_7_Annual_Small_Business_Participation_Report.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| RFP_-_Attachment_5_Past_Performance_Letter_and_Questionnaire.doc | DOC document | |
| RFP_-_Attachment_3_Utilization_of_Small_Business.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet | |
| A07-Solicitation_W911NF-15-R-0018.pdf | ||
| Exhibit_A_-_DD_Form_1423_Contract_Data_Requirements_List_(CDRL).pdf | ||
| RFP_-_Attachment_6_List_of_Approved_Subcontractors.xls | XLS spreadsheet | |
| RFP_-_Attachment_8_DD_Form_254.pdf | ||
| RFP_-_Attachment_2_Cost_Summary_Sheet.xlsx | XLSX spreadsheet |
Show all 13
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
Sheet1
| # | Paragraph Reference | Page in RFP dated 10 September 2015 | Question | Answer/Response |
| 1 | Misc | How many awards does the Government anticipate setting aside for small businesses? We respectfully request that at least 1 award be set aside for small businesses. | The Government will reserve the right to award more or fewer than the anticipated number of awards to large and small businesses, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government and based upon the number of offeror proposals received. There are no small business set-asides. | |
| 2 | Misc | So that offerors may use the full page count to respond to the Section L and M requirements, will the Government please exclude tables of contents, cover pages, and glossaries from the page limitation? | The requirement remains unchanged. | |
| 3 | Misc | Will the Government modify the requirement so that offerors may use 8 point font in tables and figures? | The requirement remains unchanged. | |
| 4 | Misc | Are offerors expected to respond to each PWS requirement in their proposals or just those that pertain to Section L and M requirements? | Offerors are expected to review the solicitation to its entirety. Please refer to sections L Instructions and section M basis for award for proposal submissions. It is up to the Offeror to determine how to propose within the limits stated in the solicitation. | |
| 5 | Misc | Will the Government modify the requirement to allow the inclusion of subcontractor past performance in order for offerors to demonstrate the strength of their proposed team? | The requirement remains unchanged. Reference: L.2.4.1 | |
| 6 | Misc | Will the Government please confirm that small business offerors can count their own participation towards the small business participation goals? If so, will this have a negative impact on the Government’s evaluation? | Small Business Offeror can count their own participation towards the SB participation goals. This will not have a negative impact on the Government's evaluation. | |
| 7 | Misc | As this is a $47M contract, three labor categories with only 100 hours seems like little information to fully evaluate offerors’ cost/price. Will the Government consider providing additional labor categories and full-time equivalent LOE so that offerors’ cost/price may be more comprehensively evaluated? | Sample labor categories will be used as stated in the solicitation to evaluate costs. The requirement remains unchanged. | |
| 8 | Misc | The RFP states that the size standard for NAICS Code 541330 is “$7,500,000.00.” However, according to SBA.gov, the size standard is $15M. Will the Government update the RFP to reflect this? | The correct size standard the Government will use is NAICS 541330, $15mil. | |
| 9 | Misc | Would the contract be limited to Special Forces or Special Operations Forces? Or, could other government agencies/organizations with specific TSOC missions/functions have access to the vehicle? | Yes, Other GOV agencies/organizations with specific COCOM, Theater or TSOC supporting missions/functions WILL have access to the vehicle. This effort is not limited to Theater SOCS nor Special Operations Forces. Supported units are described in Section 2.1. | |
| 10 | Misc | Performance Standards a. With the work being technologically focused, and given technologies' tendencies towards rapid evolution, can we get clarification on "widely accepted/reasonable scientific and engineering standards?” We understand that multiple technologies are covered and will have different practice standards but can the government provide an example? | In the context of section 3.2, and acknowledging that the Government does not have specifics on task orders, these standards will be applied on individual task orders as appropriate. The specific standard(s) to be applied will be driven by the task order requirements, however examples might be ISO9000, FDA Approval or IEEE 802.11n. Refer to Sections M for evaluation criteria for award. Task order evaluation criteria will be established at the task order level. | |
| 11 | Misc | Performance Standards e. What defines a well-characterized objective? Not trying to play games here but just want to make sure we deliver the 5ws of their exact requirements. | In the context of section 3.2, and acknowledging that the Government does not have specifics on task orders, these standards will be applied on each task order as required. the Government will assess the ability of the offerors to understand and respond to environment, implications and consequences when responding to any and all future tasks. The successful offeror will convince the Government that they will be superior in establishing clear specific objectives that take these into consideration. | |
| 12 | Misc | Are there any more general or specific guidelines/details with which we need to comply for the GOVT QASP? | QASPs will be utilized by Government at the task order level as applicable. | |
| 13 | Misc | “The Offeror’s proposal must demonstrate available skilled and capable personnel to meet all task requirements under the PWS for the full term of the PWS.” Though this statement does not seem to fit under Corporate Experience and Teaming Arrangements, it requires offerors to propose personnel in Subfactor 3. It seems more appropriate to propose personnel under for Subfactor 1 or 2. Please confirm where proposed personnel should be addressed. | Proposed personnel should be addressed in Subfactor 3 as specified in the PWS. | |
| 14 | Misc | 89 of 128 | Page 89 specifies the small business size standard for this NAICS is $7.5M. However, the most recent SBA size standards table indicates the size standard for NAICS 541330 is actually $15M. Please confirm the small business size standard for this solicitation is indeed $15M. | The correct size standard the Government will use is NAICS 541330, $15mil. |
| 15 | Misc | 20 of 128 | Page 20 indicates the government will, "conduct an analysis of each task order requirement with consideration given to past performance, awardee experience and cost to determine if there is a reasonable chance of receiving two or more responsive proposals from the small business awardees." Therefore, it appears the government intends to award two or more IDIQ MA contracts to small business prime contractors. Please confirm two or more IDIQ MA contract awards will be made to qualified small business prime contractor bidders. | The Government will reserve the right to award more or fewer than the anticipated number of awards to large and small businesses, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government and based upon the number of offeror proposals received |
| 16 | Misc | In the event the government response to any of the above questions yields substantive impacts to a best value competition, particularly as it relates to sufficient time for sourcing highly qualified key personnel with signed letters of commitment, would the government consider an extension of proposal submission to 20 October? | The Government has extended the proposal due date to 23 October 2015 in order to respond to questions. See Amendment 01. | |
| 17 | Misc | What, if any, level of pricing is required from proposed subcontractors at this time? | At this time, pricing from the proposed subcontractors is not required. | |
| 18 | Misc | If Contractors provide a proposal compliance traceability matrix that maps the RFP requirements to the proposal submission, may this matrix be excluded from the page limitations? | Compliance traceability matrices are INCLUDED in the page limitations. | |
| 19 | Misc | If the Electrical Engineer, Intermediate, identified on attachment 2 Cost Summary Sheet is a labor category that should be priced, will the contract office add the labor category's description to the RFP? | The sample labor categories are; Program Manager, Operational Analyst, and Logistics Planner. Attachment 2 has been updated. | |
| 20 | Misc | What type of equipment does the government anticipate offerors providing? Or, is this effort directed more towards supporting the operational integration and insertion of NVESD technologies? | Specifics of the equipment that may be provided under this contract will be identified in the individual tasks orders. CERDEC and NVESD support a range of activities assisting small unit operations and Expeditionary Warfare (including the Expeditionary Warfare Adaptive Red Team). This will generally (but not guaranteed to) be in small quantities to support mission integration and assessment. | |
| 21 | Misc | Is this a full an open competition? It indicates on FBO the Set Aside is N/A, but within the document it infers the a size standard of $7.5M under 541330 (not one of the exceptions) but no indication of it being full and open. We are having a kick-off meeting this morning and this is critical as to how we proceed. My current read is it is for SB at this $7.5M level. Can we get clarification please? | This is a full and open competition. The correct size standard the Government will use is NAICS 541330, $15mil. | |
| 22 | Section A - RFP Highlights, Para. 4 | 2 of 128 | The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 541330 - Engineering Services. The primary Product and Service Code (PSC) is R425. In addition, paragraph 7 states: Approximately Three (3) Task Order Contract Awards are anticipated as a result of the RFP. It is the Government’s objective to maximize practicable opportunities for small businesses. The Government will reserve the right to award more or fewer than the anticipated number of awards to large and small businesses, if it is determined to be in the best interest of the Government and based upon the number of offeror proposals received. Which NAICS 541330 small business size standard does the Government intend to use for this acquisition? | The correct size standard the Government will use is NAICS 541330, $15mil. |
| 23 | Section C PWS 4.1.11 | 14 of 128 | Page 14 Paragraph 4.1.11 states the, "Contractor shall provide offsite storage of NVESD unclassified and classified (up to and including SECRET) electronic media. This offsite storage location will be physically located outside the Fort Belvoir Base and will meet all security requirements for the storage of classified material up to and including SECRET. Attachment 8 Appendix B appears to indicate the prime contractor must have a SCIF facility, however, the requirement for a SCIF does not appear consistent with the language in the RFP. Please confirm the prime contractor is not required to have a SCIF and that the prime contractor is only required a facility clearance with SECRET storage capability. | The prime contractor is NOT required to have a SCIF. |
| 24 | Section C PWS 3.1 | 10 of 128 | Page 10 Section 3.1 indicates, "Contractor shall demonstrate exceptional competencies in developing innovative concepts within each of the campaign plan thrusts..." This requirement seems to require the bidder to demonstrate capability in each of the "campaign plan thrusts", however, the PWS does not appear to specify the "campaign plan thrusts". Please specify the thrust areas. | The campaign plan thrusts are the Theater tasks identified in the second paragraph of Section 1.1 (Background) in the areas defined in Section 1.2 (Scope): Intelligence, Operations, Logistics, Planning, Communications and Training. These may be adapted to Theater specific circumstances. The successful offeror will demonstrate understanding and capability to address all the above. |
| 25 | Section C PWS 3.3 | Reference: PWS 3.3 Support Rapid Response Operational Insertion and Integration of CERDEC/NVESD Technologies. The contractor shall provide technical capabilities that support ISR architecture, C4 network architecture, logistics and sustainment, training, assessments, mission support, force protection, de-mining, and other humanitarian assistance. COCOM technology interests are influenced by the size, diversity and special needs of their Theater. Associated challenges include communications, logistics and the inherent difficulties and complexities of understanding the socio-cultural environment. The challenges and opportunities of collaborative, interagency partnerships, particularly with respect to information sharing and building partner capacity, are also important to COCOM capabilities and will be supported by this contract. |
Question:
a. Is this incumbent work? Who is the incumbent?
b. Will work be executed OCONUS in Hazardous Pay areas?
| c. What are the locations for performance-regions? | A- Support Rapid Response Operational Insertion and Integration of CERDEC/NVESD Technologies is PWS paragraph 3.2. This is not a follow-on to an existing contract. There is no incumbent. B - It is anticipated that significant work will be performed OCONUS. Work may be performed in hazardous areas. This will be driven by specific task order requirements. C - Exact locations/regions are unknown at this point and will be driven by task order requirements. While there is expected emphasis on CENTCOM, PACOM and SOUTHCOM and their related SOCs, support to the other theaters and NORTHCOM remains within scope of this effort. This change is reflected in amendment 02. | ||
| 26 | Section C PWS 3.3.4 Logistics Support | Reference: PWS 3.3.4 Logistics Support - Provide technical support related to design, development, acquisition, storage, distribution, maintenance, evacuation, and disposition of materiel on behalf of the headquarters |
Question: What level/knowledge of “which” Logistics Information Systems” is desired (Service specific/Joint)?
| This is an IDIQ contract to cover the broad range of contingencies and logistics challenges that are faced by Theater COCOMs, TSOCs and military units on a regular basis. The successful offeror will demonstrate a superior understanding of these challenges and convince the Government that they are capable of providing good solutions to those challenges. | ||
| 27 | Section C PWS 3.4 | Reference: PWS 3.4 Provide Headquarters or Command and Control Element Staff Support. Provide technical support to the Staff or Joint Staff sections of the Headquarters as described in this section. |
Question: Is there specific software knowledge required for Headquarters or Command and Control Element Staff Support?
| The software knowledge typically required for headquarters or command and control element staff support will vary based on the specifics of their location and the interaction with host nations, coalition partners and a variety of other factors. Typical staff sections that may be supported inlude: Intelligence, Operations, Personnel, Planning, Knowledge (Lessons Learned), Requirements and possibly Futures. The successful offeror will demonstrate knowledge and understanding of all these systems. | ||
| 28 | Section C PWS 4.1.11 | Reference: PWS 4.1.11 The Contractor shall provide offsite storage of NVESD unclassified and classified (up to and including SECRET) electronic media. This offsite storage location will be physically located outside the Fort Belvoir Base and will meet all security requirements for the storage of classified material up to and including SECRET. All contractor personnel involved in transporting classified material to the off-site storage location will have at a minimum a Secret level clearance and will have a valid courier authorization in their possession. The off-site storage location for NVESD classified back-ups will be a minimum of 10 cubic feet and will provide security measures for material up to Secret. |
Question: Does “outside the Fort Belvoir Base” include the Metropolitan Washington DC area?
| This storage should be in proximity to Ft Belvoir, within 60 miles of Ft Belvoir, to allow easy coordination of activities between the performer and the Government sponsor regarding classified issues. This does not include the entire Metropolitan DC area. | ||||
| 29 | Section C PWS 4.1.11 | Must an offeror have the capacity for a minimum of 10 cubic feet of classified storage at submission of the proposal, or on award of the contract? | An offeror must have the capacity for a minimum of 10 cubic feet of classified storage at the time of proposal submission. | |
| 30 | Section C PWS 4.1.24 | Must an offeror have a Level II OPSEC Coordinator (per AR 530-1) on staff when the proposal is submitted, or on award of the contract? | An offeror must have a Level II OPSEC Coordinator per (AR-530-1) when the proposal is submitted. | |
| 31 | Section C PWS 4.1.27, 4.1.28, 4.1.29, 4.1.24, 4.1.25, 4.1.26 | PWS 4.1.27, PWS 4.1.28, and PWS 4.1.29 are duplicates of clauses PWS 4.1.24, PWS 4.1.25, and PWS 4.1.26. Can the contract office remove the duplicated clauses? | Duplicated clauses have been removed from the PWS. See Amendment 01. | |
| 32 | Section C PWS 4.4.1 | 17 of 128 | Page 17 Paragraph 4.4.1 references requirements for a Quality Control Plan. However, Section L.2.2 Volume 2: Factor 1 - Technical, does not appear to indicate whether or not QCP must be included in the proposal. Please confirm the QCP is not required to be submitted with the proposal. If a QCP is required to be submitted with the proposal, please specify in which volume the QCP should be placed and the associated page limit for the QCP. | A Quality Control Plan (QCP) is not required for proposal submission. The requirements for submissions of QCP will be identified at the task order level. |
| 33 | Section C PWS C.3.1 | C.3.1 The government states that "contractors shall demonstrate exceptional competencies in developing innovative concepts within each of the campaign plan thrusts." Is the government referring to the thrusts from any one--or a specific--COCOM/C2 element campaign plan? Or each thrust within every COCOM's campaign plan? | The campaign plan thrusts are the Theater tasks identified in the second paragraph of Section 1.1 (Background) in the areas defined in Section 1.2 (Scope): Intelligence, Operations, Logistics, Planning, Communications and Training. These may be adapted to Theater specific circumstances. The successful offeror will demonstrate understanding and capability to address all the above. | |
| 34 | Section C PWS C.3.2 | C.3.2 This paragraph mentions providing support for "other Humanitarian assistance". Will the government clarify the Humanitarian Assistance type technology support required? | Humanitarian Assistance may result from a range of events, including natural and man-made disasters. The nature of the assistance will be predicated on the type of event, and as such, is difficult to predict. It will be incumbent, therefore, on the successful offeror to convince the Government that they have superior capabilities to respond to the broad range of potential events and conduct the resulting activities that might occur. | |
| 35 | Section C PWS C.3.3.5 | C.3.3.5 Paragraph discusses HQs or C2 element staff support for Civil Military Operations (CMO). Does the government expect the contractor to also provide support for other SOF core activities such as military information support operations (MISO), counter proliferation of WMD, etc.? | This is a theater based contract and may support a variety of activities in that context. The exact nature and the specifics of the tasks will be based upon emerging requirements and global activities. These will be specified in individual task orders. | |
| 36 | Section C PWS C.4.1.11 | What access level does the government expect for the offsite secure storage (e.g. duty hours, 24/7, as needed)? | Standard duty hours, 5 days per week. | |
| 37 | Section H.3.2 and L.2.3.1 | 35, 110 of 128 | The term “Small Business Subcontracts” is unclear (are we referring to Small Business Prime Contractors and the fee on their subcontracts, or are we referring to all Prime Contractors and the fee on their subcontracts with Small Businesses). Please confirm that the term “Small Business Subcontracts” is intended to refer to subcontracts awarded by a Prime Contractor to Small Businesses, and that “Other Than Small Business Subcontracts” is intended to refer to subcontracts awarded by a Prime Contractor to other than Small Businesses (for example: Large Businesses). |
The Solicitation includes numerous references to Commercial items; however, the Solicitation does not include 52.244-6 Subcontracts for Commercial Items. Would the government consider adding 52.244-6 to allow purchases of commercial items using FAR Part 12?
| Confirmed. FAR clause 52.244-6 Subcontracts for commercial items has been added to the RFP. See Amendment 02. | ||||
| 38 | Section J | Section J lists “Small Business Participation Plan” as an attachment but it is not provided. In addition, the numbering for attachments appears to be off due to this. | Attachment 4 in not provided with the RFP (J Narrative), contractor will submit Small Business Participation Plan. | |
| 39 | Section K | 89, 96 of 128 | Will the Government please clarify the small business size standard for this requirement? The designated NAICS code 541330, with a size standard of $7,500,000 designated on pages 89 and 96 of the solicitation is dated. In accordance with the 14 July 2014 revised Small Business Administration (SBA) Size Standards NAICS Code 541330 has both a $15M and $38.5M standard. As the requirements for this solicitation is engineering services for military equipment the exception size standard of $38.5M is appropriate. As a precedent this size standard is being used by CTTSO SWTS and the Navy SeaPort-e contracts for similar work requirements. Please clarify the small business size standard for this requirement. | The correct size standard the Government will use is NAICS 541330, $15mil. |
| 40 | Section L | Section L lists three sample labor categories (Program Manager, Operational Analyst, and Logistics Planner). However, Attachment 2 – Cost Summary Sheet, lists a fourth labor category (Electrical Engineer). Will the Government please clarify the labor categories that should be priced and provide a description for the Electrical Engineer labor category? | The sample labor categories are; Program Manager, Operational Analyst, and Logistics Planner. Attachment 2 has been updated. | |
| 41 | Section L L.1.7 table | Would the Government also permit Arial font within graphics to allow for greater ease of readability? | The requirement remains unchanged. | |
| 42 | Section L L.2.2 Volume 2: Factor 1 - Technical, Subfactor 3 Corporate Experience and Teaming Arrangements | 109 of 128 | The Government requires that “Letters of Commitment must be provided by all teaming arrangements as defined by FAR subpart 9.6.” Will the Government allow that subcontractor Letters of Commitment will not count against page count for Volume 2? | Subcontractor letters of commitment will not count against page count for Volume II. |
| 43 | Section L.1.7 | 106 of 128 | Item L.1.7 requires offerors to submit proposals in "Microsoft Office 2007 software or higher and Adobe software if applicable". Except where specifically noted otherwise in the Solicitation. Please clarify if submission of proposals in Microsoft Word format is acceptable or if Adobe PDF is the preferred format. | L.1.7 required offerors to submit proposals in Microsoft Office 2007 software or higher or Adobe software if applicable. Offerors may submit in word format if they so choose. |
| 44 | Section L.1.7 table | 107 of 128 | The Government limits the Volume 5 page limit to 15 pages, and states in L.2.5 Volume 5: Factor 4 - Small Business Participation (page 116 of 128) that “Offerors that have enforceable agreements must provide fully executed copies (i.e. the entire agreement and not just the first and last pages) to receive more favorable consideration under Section M.” Our standard Teaming Agreement is 10 pages per agreement. Will the Government allow that subcontractor Teaming Agreements will not count against page count for Volume 5? | Teaming agreements will not count against page counts. All teaming agreements are to be included in Volume II - Technical only. |
| 45 | Section L.2.2 Volume 2: Factor 1 – Technical | 108-110 of 128 | Please confirm if the Government intends that bidders only respond to PWS 3.0 “Specific Tasks” and it’s subparagraphs (pages 10-12 of 128) in the Volume 2 response. If the Government intends that we respond to all PWS sections (for example, PWS 4 “Special Requirements” consists of an additional 11 pages of requirements), then please increase the page limit for Volume 2 from 50 pages to 70 pages. | It is up to the Offeror to determine how to propose within the limits stated in the solicitation. The page limit for Volume II remains unchanged. |
| 46 | Section L.2.2, Subfactor 3 | L.2.2 Subfactor 3. Are the required letters of Commitment from teaming partners sufficient to demonstrate their commitment to the team, or does the government require that Teaming Agreements be included in the submission as well. | The documentation of any teaming, partnering or joint venture agreement shall be included in Volume II entitled "Technical". "Letters of Commitment must be provided by all teaming arrangements as defined by FAR subpart 9.6." | |
| 47 | Section L.2.2, Subfactor 4 | Reference: Section L 2.2, Subfactor 4 The Offeror shall provide a resume not to exceed three (3) pages for each employee or prospective employee designated to fill a key position. |
The Offeror shall provide the following information for all employees designated as Key in the following resume format:
1. Name
2. Proposed Assignment: Title, Job Description and Organizational Responsibilities
3. Current Position (Beginning Date: Month/Year)
a. Firm
b. Significant Experience
c. Specific Projects
4. Previous Positions (at least 10 years)
a. Firm and period of employment
b. Significant Experience
c. Specific Projects
5. Education
a. Degrees, Dates, Major and School
b. Other Educational Training (month/year)
c. Licenses or Certifications
6. Professional Activities and Achievements
a. Awards
b. Significant Publications
c. Licenses or Certifications
7. Security Clearance and Investigation Type and Date
8. Unique Qualifications (Summarize any relevant, unique experience, education, or personal characteristics that may not be evident from the information above)
9. Letter of Commitment
Question: Is the letter of commitment included within the allowable 3-page resume count?
| Letters of commitment are excluded from the allowable page count. See Amendment 01. | ||||
| 48 | Section L.2.3.2.2 | Section L.2.3.2.2 of the solicitation directs three labor categories at 100 hours each, while Attachment 2 includes four labor categories at 100 hours each. Please advise if pricing for the Electrical Engineer Intermediate is required, and if so, please provide the associated labor category qualifications. | The sample labor categories are; Program Manager, Operational Analyst, and Logistics Planner. Attachment 2 has been updated. | |
| 49 | Section L.2.3.2.2, L2.3.2.3 | RFP L.2.3.2.2 states there are 300 hours to price, and L.2.3.2.3 states there are three labor categories to price. Attachment 2 Cost Summary Sheet contains a forth labor category: Electrical Engineer, Intermediate, and sums to 400 hours. Which of these takes precedence? Can the contract office correct the conflict? | The sample labor categories are; Program Manager, Operational Analyst, and Logistics Planner. Attachment 2 has been updated. | |
| 50 | Section L.2.3.2.3 | Subfactor 4 clearly specifies the Program Manager as Key Personnel. Subfactor 4 also mentions two functional key areas and that, "the Offeror shall propose one person for each key functional area to serve as key personnel." However, this section does not specify which labor category (Section L.2.3.2.3) should be submitted for each key area. The bidder assumes the Program Manager is the Key Personnel for the, "Rapid Response Operational Insertion and Integration of CERDEC/NVESD Technologies" key area and that the operational analyst labor category is to be used for the "HQs or Command and Control Element Staff Support". Please confirm this is a correct assumption. Otherwise, please clarify specifically which labor categories are to be used for each key area. The bidder understands these two positions may be augmented by other key personnel deemed worthy of mention by the bidder. | It is up to the Offeror to determine how to propose within the limits stated in the solicitation. | |
| 51 | Section L.2.3.2.3 | Section L.2.3.2.3 states, "offerors shall assume the location of performance is on a Government site at Fort Belvoir, Virginia," however, the "HQs or Command and Control Element Staff Support" key functional suggests the Key Personnel supporting this key function would be located at a HQ or Command and Control Element Staff Support location, such as a TSOC HQ. The bidder assumes this key personnel must be located at a TSOC. Please specify the exact location for the "HQ or Command and Control Element Staff Support" key personnel. | For proposal and evaluation purposes only, offerors shall assume the location of performance is on a Government site at Fort Belvoir, Virginia and that the period of performance is during the first year of performance (1 November 2015- 30 October 2016) of the TSOC contract. For the purposes of pricing the Offeror shall assume a 1 November 2015 start date. | |
| 52 | Section L.2.3.2.3 | 111, 112 of 128 | The solicitation provides position descriptions for three labor categories (Program Manager; Operational Analyst; Logistics Planner) and Attachment 2 Cost Summary Sheet includes the additional labor category “Electrical Engineer, Intermediate”. Please clarify if the “Electrical Engineer, Intermediate” labor category will be evaluated. If so, then please provide an “Electrical Engineer, Intermediate” labor category description and confirm if the proposed “Electrical Engineer, Intermediate” rate will be used for evaluation purposes only (as stipulated for the other labor categories) and not incorporated into the contract. | The sample labor categories are; Program Manager, Operational Analyst, and Logistics Planner. Attachment 2 has been updated, see amendment 02. |
| 53 | Section L.2.3.2.3 | 111 of 128 | Questions. Will the Government provide a position description for the Electrical Engineer, Intermediate as required on the Cost Summary Sheet? |
The Government provided a position description for the Program Manager, Operational Analyst, and Logistics Planner to support rate determination on the Cost Summary Sheet. No position description was provided for the Electrical Engineer, Intermediate.
| The sample labor categories are to be evaluated are; Program Manager, Operational Analyst, and Logistics Planner. Attachment 2 has been updated, see amendment 02. | ||||
| 54 | Section L.2.3.3.3 | Are the 100 hours that the Government has provided in the Cost Summary Sheet for evaluation purposes only? | L.2.3.3.3 Sample labor categories will be used to evaluate costs. | |
| 55 | Section L.2.4.1 | 113 of 128 | We have performed recent and relevant support to HQ and C2 Element Staffs across multiple task orders on an MA-IDIQ. The nature of the work is that separate TSOCs and staff elements are supported through separate task orders. We can effectively summarize the multiple task orders within a single two-page Past Performance response. Will the Government accept multiple task orders under an IDIQ as a single past performance reference (one of the three required)? | It is up to the offeror to determine how to propose within the limitations stated in the solicitation. |
| 56 | Section L.2.5 Volume 5: Factor 4 - Small Business Participation | 115 of 128 | Question. Will the Government consider an extension to the proposal due date as an amendment with responses to questions has not been released and the Government's answer regarding the size standard assigned to NAICS 541330 ($15M or $38.5M) may substantially alter the proposal response? [Note: A question was submitted regarding the NAICS size standard on 18 Sep 2015] |
Offerors must build a team to comply with 'Utilization of Small Business' requirements. Correction of the small business size standard for NAICS 541330 (identified as $7.5M on pages 89 and 96) and assignment of the $15M or $38.5M value will significantly impact the Offeror's team composition and response. This is especially true where the Prime Offeror may qualify as small business under a $38.5M standard but not a $15M standard.
| The Government has extended the proposal due date to 23 October 2015 in order to respond to questions. See Amendment 01. | ||||
| 57 | Section M.2.2, M.5.2 | 121, 123 of 128 | The Government selected "Good" in paragraph M.2.2 as the threshold in the Technical Factors evaluation for consideration for award. 'Good" represents the second highest rating (Purple) in the five-tiered technical ratings (Outstanding, Good, Acceptable, Marginal, Unacceptable) but conflicts with paragraph M.5.2 which states that a rating of "Marginal" (two ratings below Good) will eliminate a proposal from the competitive range. With four Technical subfactors, a proposal that meets the government's requirements and may be strong in many areas may be inappropriately eliminated from consideration when "Good" rather than "Acceptable" is used to define acceptability. Will the Government consider amending the requirement in paragraph M.2.2 from an adjectival rating of "Good" to a rating of "Acceptable" in the Technical Factor to achieve award consideration and match paragraph M.5.2? | Paragraph M.5.2 Technical, states that “marginal levels of overall approach to the technical factor could indicate a lack of understanding concerning mission requirements and may result in the entire proposal receiving an unfavorable rating and/or being eliminated from the competitive range.” The Contracting Officer determined that due to the complexity of the requirement, an adjectival rating of no less than “Good” must be achieved in Technical Factor (to include all subfactors) for an offeror to receive consideration for award. |
| 58 | Section M.5.2 Sub-Factor 3: Corporate Experience an Teaming Arrangements | The last sentence of this paragraph reads, "The evaluation will examine the Offerors ability to support mission requirements in the United States and out to various." Are OCONUS locations meant to be specified? If so, which COCOM/ TSOC(s)? | Sentence should state: "The evaluation will examine the Offeror's ability to support mission requirements in the United States and out to the various theaters. While there is expected to be emphasis on CENTCOM, PACOM and SOUTHCOM and their related SOCs, support to the other theaters and NORTHCOM remains within scope of this effort. This change is reflected in amendment 02. |
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .