20170524_Responses_to_Industry_Questions_-_W911S0-17-R-0011.pdf

Responses to Industry Questions

Solicitation Number: W911S0-17-R-0011

Requirement: Army Virtual Learning Center (AVLE)

1. Reference(s): Attachment 3, Past Performance Questionnaire – Can the PPQ be emailed to the government rather than returned by US Mail?

Response: Solicitation Amendment 3 Attachment 3_Past Performance Questionnaire has been revised to allow PPQ’s be emailed to all AVLE team members at the following email addresses:

curtis.arthur.civ@mail.mil tammie.d.campbell.civ@mail.mil rhoda.c.harrison-spence.civ@mail.mil

2. Reference(s): Volume II, Attachment 1, Proficiency Assessment: What is the page limit for the Proficiency Assessment?

Response: The total page limit for Volume II is 75 pages. That includes the Factor and both Subfactors.

3. Reference(s): PWS, 2.2. Proposal Format (d). The Government has asked for "12-pitch type and 10 point proportional spacing." Pitch generally refers to non-proportional fonts, so we are not sure what would be technically acceptable. Is Times New Roman 12 point acceptable?

Response: Changed Addendum ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS 2.2.(d) to reflect 12-font Times New Roman or Arial as the only acceptable fonts.

4. Reference(s): 20170511_AVLE_RFP_Attachment_6_-_STOEP_Price_Worksheets.

Attachment 6 only contains labor category pricing. The sample task may involve other costs, such as travel, hardware, and software licenses. How does the Government wish offerors to price non-labor costs?

Response: The STOEP pricing is for “labor-only”. Other direct costs such as travel, hardware, and software licenses are not being evaluated in this STOEP.

5. Reference(s): Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, A: Solicitation/Proposal Requirements, Section

2.1 Volume II (Table). Vol II Overarching Technical Narrative (Factor 1) has a limit of 75 pages.

Subfactor 1: Technical Approach and Subfactor 2: Proficiency Assessment are part of this volume. Is Subfactor 2: Proficiency Assessment (Attachment 1) included in the 75 page count?

If not, is there a page limitation for Subfactor 2: Proficiency Assessment (Attachment 1)?

Response: The total page limit for Volume II is 75 pages. That includes the Factor and both Subfactors.

6. Reference(s): Para 7.6 Submission Requirements, seventh bullet. Will the government consider using and evaluating existing CPARS past performance ratings in lieu of requesting CORs fill out a separate questionnaire?

Response: No, offerors must submit Past Performance Questionnaire.

7. Reference(s): Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, A: Solicitation/Proposal Requirements, Section

2.2 Proposal Format (k). What size font and what line spacing is the requirement for the proposal? The RFP states that, “Letter size and spacing requirements for illustrations and tables can be at the discretion of the Offeror but must be easily readable (at least 12-pitch type or 10 point proportional spacing).” This applies to illustrations and tables, but does not tell us the standard for the rest of the proposal. Generally, the font size for illustrations and tables is 8 pt.

font, while the font size for the main text of the proposal is 10 pt. Additionally, what line spacing is acceptable? Single? Double? 1.5?

Response: Changed Addendum ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS 2.2.(d) to reflect 12-font Times New Roman or Arial as the only acceptable fonts for main text of proposal. However, illustrations and tables can be at the discretion of the Offeror but must be easily readable.

8. Reference(s): Attachment 2 Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet. May offerors format or change the style (i.e. put information in a table) of Attachment 2 while still addressing all information required in Attachment 2?

Response: No, format changes will not be accepted.

9. Reference(s): Attachment 1 Proficiency Assessment. May offerors format or change the style of Attachment 1 while still addressing all information required in Attachment 1?

10. Reference(s): Table 2.1 states the Price Volume shall consist of Tab A – MAIDIQ and Tab B – STOEP. The Tab A instructions state in Section 9.3.3 that if additional LCATs are used, the offeror is to provide an explanation. Does the Government have any preference regarding the format? Can this rationale be submitted in Microsoft Word?

Response: In Accordance With (IAW), ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para. 2.2(b) Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, and/or Excel.

Electronic versions of the Price Proposal shall be submitted in MS Office Excel format ONLY, and shall not be read only or password protected.

11. Reference(s): We cannot provide exact page location as there is no page information in the RFP. Can the Government republish the RFP with page numbers listed?

Response: Revised RFP will include page numbers.

12. Reference(s): Section 2.2.e on page 100 states “Tab indexing shall be used to identify sections.” We see that tabbed sections are highlighted in Volume I – General and Volume VII – Pricing. Please confirm or clarify the following understandings:

* Volume I and VII are the only two volumes that will be broken out and separated by tabs.

* Volumes II, III, IV, V, VI should be separate volumes, but do not need to be separated by tabs.

* If tabs are needed, please clarify where divider sheets are necessary.

* Each tabbed section in Volume I and Volume VII shall be provided as a separate document on the CD/DVD. That is, Tab A, Tab B, Tab C, Tab D, Tab E will be individual documents on the CD/DVD, rather than one document inclusive of all sections.

Response: Put a divider sheet after each Tab and after each subfactor.

13. Reference(s): Section 7.1 on page 102 states that the “Offeror shall submit descriptions of up to four contracts.” Section 7.3 on page 103 states that past performance information is required for the Offeror and all teaming patterns, [sic] and/or joint venture partners, proposed to perform 20% of the labor.

* Is it the Government’s intention that the Offeror submit four contracts in addition to the past performance submitted for teaming partners? Or does the entire team submit no more than four all together?

Response: Four (4) total, to include prime and subcontractors. The Offeror shall describe the prime’s role and the subcontractor’s role in the work performed.

Requirements must be the same or similar in nature, size, and complexity to the services being procured under this solicitation.

14. Reference(s): Please confirm if a cover letter is excluded from the page count limitations.

Response: No, a cover letter will be counted as a page. IAW with ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para 2.2 (j) Page limits do not include covers for volumes….

15. Reference(s): Would the Government consider accepting 10-point font for tables and graphics?

Response: IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS 2.2.(k), fonts for illustrations and tables can be at the discretion of the Offeror, but must be easily readable.

16. Reference(s): Reference RFP 6.2. Staffing Approach. This section states that “the offeror shall provide Letters of Commitment (signed within 60 days of proposal submission) and resumes for key personnel.” The resumes we propose to submit are current employees of the Prime and Subcontractors. If proposed Key Personnel are current employees of the Prime and/or Subcontractors, do commitment need to be submitted with the proposal?

Response: Yes, Letters of Commitment for Key Personnel must be submitted, even if currently employees of the Prime and/or Subcontractors.

17. Reference(s): Is a resume and letter of commitment for a subject matter expert required for this proposal? Subject Matter Experts will be specific to individual task orders and we cannot assume that the sample task order will be issued in the base or a follow on option year. It is unrealistic to require to this action to be completed prior to the award of a delivery order.

Recommend that the government review the qualifications and approve a DO SME subsequent to the award at either the kickoff meeting or no less than 14 days after award.

Response: The resume is required for the SME at the STOEP level, not the letter of commitment.

18. Reference(s): Is the only pricing information required the fully burdened labor rates in Attachment 5 and Attachment 6?

Response: Yes, IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para.9.3.1, when completing the Total Estimated Price Worksheets the offeror shall provide its fully burdened hourly labor rate for each labor category listed.

19. Reference(s): Do we need resumes for all personnel listed in Pricing attachment 5?

Response: IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2 EVALUATION – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para.

3. Factor 3: Management and Staffing Approach. Resumes for the Key Personnel (Prime and Subcontractor), a list of other positions the Offeror considers key, the rationale for that designation and the qualifications that will be required of these key positions.

20. Reference(s): There are two different addresses provided with respect to proposal submission/delivery. Form 1449 in the Solicitation specifies:

ATSC-TCM-TADLP

ATSC TCM-TADLP

2112 PERSHING AVE

FORT EUSTIS VA 23604

While Section 1.4 of the SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS on page 97 of the Solicitation document specifies:

Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC) – Fort Eustis

Attn: Ms. Rhoda C. Harrison-Spence

Solicitation No.: W911S0-17-R-0011

705 Washington Blvd, Suite 126 (West Wing)

Fort Eustis, VA 23604

Which is the correct address to which the proposal should be delivered?

Response: IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para. 1.4, Proposals shall be submitted in hard copy and on CD/DVDs to the following address:

Mission and Installation Contracting Command (MICC) – Fort Eustis

Attn: Ms. Rhoda C. Harrison-Spence Solicitation No.: W911S0-17-R-0011 705 Washington Blvd, Suite 126 (West Wing) Fort Eustis, VA 23604

21. Reference(s): Is direct delivery via USPS, UPS, FedEx and/or personal delivery assured to the delivery address? Can a delivery signature be obtained at the delivery address at the time of delivery?

Response: Yes, a direct delivery via USPS, UPS, FedEx and/or personal delivery can be used to deliver proposals. Yes, a delivery signature be obtained at the delivery address at the time of delivery.

22. Reference(s): For purposes of presentation on the CD version of the proposal, is it acceptable to embed pdf document icons (for the Form 1449 and Form 30) in the MS Word proposal document as long as those pdf files are available on the CD so that they are directly accessible?

Response: IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para. 2.2.(b), Digital copies on CD/DVD-ROM Disk shall be provided in Microsoft Word, PDF, PowerPoint, and/or Excel formats.

23. Reference(s): Is there any possibility that the solicitation may be re-released with page numbers?

Response: Revised RFP will include page numbers.

24. Reference(s): Can you provide any guidance with respect to pricing for travel, other than that travel is expected for kickoff meeting(s)?

Response: The Government has giving the offeror’s a Not-To-Exceed (NTE) Amount of $150,000.00 for Travel. Please refer to PWS 1.23 - Contractor Travel.

25. Reference(s): There is no mention in the solicitation of the need or desire for a cover letter to accompany the proposal. Is such a letter expected or desired?

Response: If a cover letter is to accompany the proposal, it will be counted as a page. A cover letter is not expected, but is not precluded.

26. Reference(s): When will the government release answers to the questions submitted on the Draft RFP?

Response: Responses to Industry questions will be posted NLT 4:00PM EDT, 24 May 2017.

27. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 5, page 101, Factor 2, Subfactor 2. Please confirm that neither resumes nor individual names are required for the key personnel, including SME, for the STOEP?

Response: The resume is required for the SME at the STOEP level. Key Personnel are already addressed at the Base level in answers 16 and 19.

28. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 5, page 101, Factor 7.3. Can past performance from subs who are performing less than 20% be submitted?

Response: No, IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para. 7.3., Past Performance information described herein is required on the Offeror and all teaming partners, and/or joint venture partners or subcontractors proposed to perform at least 20% of the labor.

29. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 5, page 101, Factor 7.3. Are consent letters required for all subcontractors or from only those subcontractors submitting past performance?

Response: Consent letters are required for all subcontractors submitting past performance.

30. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 7.6, page 103. When are past performance questionnaires due to the Government? If Past Performance Questionnaires are due when proposals are due it could be difficult since Q&A will not be answered until 5 working days before proposal due date.

Response: Past Performance Questionnaires are due on 30 May 2017 at 11:00AM EDT.

31. Reference(s): Attachment 1 - Proficiency Assessment. When answering the Attachment 1 questions, should the offeror answer using only prime experience or the collective experience of the team?

Response: IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para. A.2. Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposal responses must be prepared by the prime and teaming partners, as opposed to outside consultants who have not been identified as members of the offeror’s team. Identify the prime or teaming partners who completed the Assessments in your proposal.

32. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 9.3.4.

For offerors to accurately identify labor categories subject to the Service Contract Labor Standards, will the government provide Wage Determinations and locations to be used?

Response: Use wage determination for offeror’s location.

33. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 6.2, page 102. Are Letters of Commitment only required for potential hires and not current employees? If they are required for current employees, are we having them commit to remaining in employment or to working on the AVLE contract? In both cases, it would seem they would be committing to something that involves too many variables beyond their control.

Response: Letters of Commitment are required for current and potential employees that will be working AVLE requirement.

34. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 2.2.g and 2.2.j, page 100. Will a Table of Exhibits count towards page count? Is the Table of Exhibits allowed to precede the Cross-Reference Matrix?

Response: IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para. 2.2(i), Page limits include appendices, charts, graphs, diagrams, tables, photographs, drawings, etc. (j) Page limits do not include covers for volumes, tables of contents, indices, title pages, cross reference indices, … if they are inserted solely to provide ease to the reader in locating parts/sections of the proposal. Pages will be counted if they contain any other information, i.e. diagrams, extraneous data, etc.

35. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 2.2.b, page 99. Are offerors able to submit .pdf documents vice Word docs on the requested CD- ROMs, to decrease the chance of formatting errors?

Response: Will incorporate addition of PDF format to ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para. 2.2(b). However, electronic versions of the Price Proposal shall be submitted in MS Office Excel format ONLY, and shall not be read only or password protected. All formulas, lookup tables, and links shall be intact, and no links shall exist to files not included with the submission. Spreadsheets shall not contain hidden worksheets. PDF or flat files will not be considered adequate. Failure to comply with these formatting requirements may result in rejection of your proposal. Offeror’s shall perform a virus check prior to proposal submittal.

36. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 2.2.d, page 99. “Printing shall be easily readable (12-pitch type and 10 point proportional spacing).”

Should this read “Printing shall be easily readable (12-pitch type or 10 point proportional spacing).”?

Response: Changed Addendum ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS 2.2.(d) to reflect 12-font Times New Roman or Arial as

37. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 2.2.k, page 100. For graphics, is a smaller font, such as 10-pitch type, allowable as long as it is easily readable?

Response: IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS 2.2.(k) However, letter size and spacing requirements for illustrations and tables can be at the discretion of the Offeror but must be easily readable.

38. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 2.0 Proposal Preparation Instructions, page 98. “Identify the prime or teaming partners who completed the Assessments in your proposal.” What Assessments and/or attachment is this referring to and in what volume(s) should offerors identify this information?

Response: IAW ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS para. A.2. Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposal responses must be prepared by the prime and teaming partners, as opposed to outside consultants who have not been identified as members of the offeror’s team. Identify the prime or teaming partners who completed the Assessments in your proposal. Reference Attachment 1, Proficiency Assessment, which will be included in Volume II. Reference Attachment 4, Standards and Specifications Knowledge Assessment, which will be included in Volume VI.

39. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 6.2, page 102. “The Offeror shall provide Letters of Commitment (signed within 60 days of proposal submission) and resumes for key personnel.” Are offerors able to submit Letters of Commitment after proposal submission, if it falls within 60 days?

Response: No, Letters of Commitment for Prime and/or Subcontractors shall be submitted with proposals.

40. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 7.1, page 102. “The Offeror shall describe the prime’s role and the subcontractor’s role in the work performed.” Does this indicate that the offeror is responsible for describing a prime’s role in a past performance citation, if the offeror performed as a sub, and vice versa? If so, it may be difficult to obtain such information if work done was proprietary. Will the Government consider removing this requirement?

Response: No, the Government will not consider removing this information. The Government cannot conduct a proper past performance evaluation without this information.

41. Reference(s): If a conformed copy of the RFP is released after questions are addressed:

a. Will the government please consider adding page numbers to the solicitation?

b. Will the government please consider starting each new section on its own page? For example, Inspection and Acceptance starts on the same page where the MAIDIQ PWS concludes and Evaluation starts on the same page that Instructions to Offerors concludes.

Response: Yes the conformed copy of RFP will include page numbers. Yes the Government will consider separating new sections in the solicitation.

42. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 7.4, page 103 and RFP section C. EVALUATION APPROACH, para 4, page 109. There appears to be a discrepancy regarding the “recency” criteria for past performance:

Section L states: “The offeror SHALL NOT go back any farther than three (3) years for the submitted date.”

Section M states: “To be recent, the effort must be ongoing or must have been performed during the past three (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.”

Can the Government please clarify whether past performance citations need to be no older than 3 years based on submission date or date of solicitation issuance?

Response: Government will change ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 and ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-2 to both reflect (3) years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.”

43. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 1.4, page 97. Are hand deliveries of proposals permitted? If so, are there any specific instructions that offerors must follow?

Response: Yes hand deliveries are permitted. Contact Fort Eustis Welcome and Visitor Center at telephone number 1 (757) 878-1878 for more information about on-post access criteria.

44. Reference(s): RFP section A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS, para 3.2, page 100. “The Offeror is cautioned that the SF 1449 must contain an original signature in block 30a of the form.” Will an electronic signature and/or a scanned copy of the SF 1449 suffice as an original signature?

Response: Yes, an electronic signature is acceptable.

45. Reference(s): Attachment 2 – Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet. Regarding Attachment 2, Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet:

Are offerors permitted to submit Attachment 2 in contractor format as opposed to the existing format that the Government provided, as long as all required information is provided?

Once offerors have prepared their relevant contract sheet, are they permitted to delete the instructions included in Attachment 2 in order to conserve space, as there is a 3-page maximum per reference?

Response: Offerors can delete the instructions.

Are offerors permitted to use Times New Roman size 10 font in Attachment 2?

Response: Changed Addendum ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS 2.2.(d) to reflect 12-font Times New Roman or Arial as the only acceptable fonts.

The upfront instructions in Attachment 2 do not align directly with the itemized list in Attachment 2. For example, #10 in the instructions is represented by #2 in the itemized list, and #2 in the instructions corresponds to #3 in the itemized list. Is this intentional?

Response: Revising Attachment 2.

Template items #2 and #5/#6 in the itemized list appear to require similar information. Can the Government please clarify the differences between these questions?

Response: Revising Attachment 2.

46. Reference(s): Is there an incumbent and if so, can you please provide the name of the incumbent?

Response: Yes there are six (6) incumbent contractors on CAPDL contract:

1. Keybridge Technologies Inc.

2. Craig Technologies Consulting Inc.

3. Delan Associates Inc.

4. The Cogar Group, LTD.

5. Information Experts Inc.

6. Nagwik Services, LLC.

47. Reference(s): For proposal delivery to 705 Washington Blvd, Suite 126 (West Wing), Fort Eustis, VA 23604, is prior visitor access required for those without a base pass?

Response: No, contact Fort Eustis Welcome and Visitor Center at telephone number 1 (757) 878-1878 for more information about on-post access criteria.

48. Reference(s): Other than hand-delivery, is there a preferred shipping deliverer such as Fed-Ex, UPS, or other that will not have a problem getting through the gate for delivery?

Response: No, the Government does not have a preferred shipping method or shipping company.

49. Reference(s): RFP, Attachment 2, Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet. The format of Attachment 2 is less than optimal. Preserving the Government’s items of information, font size and page length, are Offerors permitted to reformat Attachment 2 (using an MS Word table for example) to maximize input and readability?

50. Reference(s): RFP, App C, ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO

OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS, A. SOLICITATION/PROPOSAL REQUIREMENTS,

Paragraph 2.2 Proposal Format, Subparagraph (d), fourth sentence, page 99 of 153.

Reference says, “Printing shall be easily readable (12-pitch type and 10 point proportional spacing). File names should be “Company Name – Initial” for the first submission. File name of later submissions (if necessary), shall be “Company Name – Revision X’ with X indicating the number of the revision. File names should be “Company Name – Initial” for the first submission.

File name of later submissions (if necessary), shall be “Company Name – Revision X’ with X indicating the number of the revision.” We are somewhat confused by the 12-pitch type font requirement. Would the Government allow Offerors to use 10 point font for text and tables (i.e., Time New Roman 10 pt) and 8 point font for graphics?

Response: Changed Addendum ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO the only acceptable font.

51. Reference(s): RFP, App C, ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO

Paragraph 2.2 Proposal Format, Subparagraph (d), fifth and sixth sentences, page 99 of 153.

For file names, should Offerors put the “Company Name – Initial” after the Volume Name?

Response: No, for example the file name should read:

Company XYZ_Initial_W911S0-17-R-0011_Volume I_General

52. Reference(s): RFP, App C, ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO

Paragraph 2.2 Proposal Format, Subparagraphs (f) and (g), page 100 of 153

According to references, Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms and a Cross-Reference Matrix is required for each Volume. Because of the uniqueness and brevity of Volumes I (General and Administration) Volume VI (Standards and Specifications Knowledge Assessment) and VII (Price), would the Government allow Offerors to omit the inclusion of Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronym and a Cross-Reference Matrix for these Volumes (I, VI and VII)?

Response: No, the Glossary of Abbreviations and Cross Reference Matrix are required for each Volume.

53. Reference(s): RFP, App C, ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1, INSTRUCTIONS TO

Paragraph 3.3 TAB B, Standard Form (SF) 1449, page 100 of 153

Reference says, “The Offeror shall include a completed and signed SF 1449. The Offeror is cautioned that the SF 1449 must contain an original signature in block 30a of the form.” Can Offerors’ authorized signatories substitute an authenticated electronic digital signature (such as that provided from a Common Access Card (CAC)) for an original “pen and ink” signature?

Response: Electronic digital signature is acceptable.

54. Reference(s): Will the government consider allowing customer references that complete the governments past performance questionnaire on behalf of the offeror, to email the completed form to the designated recipient as an alternative to mailing the form? The PPQ only provides mailing instructions.

Response: Solicitation Amendment 3 Attachment 3_Past Performance Questionnaire has been revised to allow PPQ’s be emailed to all AVLE team members at the following email addresses:

curtis.arthur.civ@mail.mil

55. Reference(s): Solicitation Attachment 3, Past Performance Questionnaire. The directions at the end of the questionnaire annotates a physical mailing address and not electronic submission. Submission of a customer questionnaire will now be subject to the mailing system and vendors will have no control to ensure they are submitted on time. Can the questionnaires be submitted electronic and not physical mailing?

Response: Solicitation Amendment 3 Attachment 3_Past Performance Questionnaire has been revised to allow PPQ’s be emailed to all AVLE team members at the following email addresses:

curtis.arthur.civ@mail.mil

56. Reference(s): PWS, 5.1.1.1.3. What assistance is being offered to assist the contractor in obtaining a Certificate of Networthiness (which may take 2-3 years to obtain)?

Response: If contractor is referring to obtaining a Certificate of Networthiness for innovative technology that shall remain the property of the Government, then assistance may be available.

57. Reference(s): Can the government clarify if offerors should base labor rates on 1960 or 2080 hours when pricing labor categories for the AVLE opportunity? What does the government constitute to be a full-man year?

Response: The Government considers 1960 hours as a full year.

58. Reference(s): RFP, Paragraph 2.2. What is the font and font size required for the proposal response? We did not see that formatting requirement in the solicitation. The solicitation does specify 12-pitch type for illustrations and tables but not for text - at least from what we saw.

Response: Changed Addendum ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO the only acceptable font.

59. Reference(s): Attachment 2, Paragraph 10. In Attachment 2 concerning past performance, there appears to be two different formats for past performance with different sequences of information. The first ten paragraphs seem to represent one format. However, after paragraph 10, there appears to be another format with information in a different sequence. Would the government clarify which template they wish for offerors to use or clarify what the government intends by these two different formats?

Response: The initial ten (10) paragraphs provide instructions on how to complete the Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet.

60. Reference(s): Attachment 2, Paragraph 7. Does the government intend for the offeror to discuss relevancy of the contract in the same paragraph with the "Government or commercial technical representative or COR" or does the government intend for the relevancy to be discussed in a separate paragraph number 8?

Attachment 2, paragraph 7 reads as follows:

"7. Government or commercial technical representative or COR

Identify in specific detail for each contract listed, why or how you consider that effort relevant or similar to the effort required by this solicitation. In determining relevancy, consideration should be given but not limited to such things as product/service similarity, product/service, size and complexity, contract type, contract environment, division of company proposing, and subcontractor interaction."

Response: Offerors shall discuss in Paragraph 8. The narrative that falls under Paragraph 7 should be at the beginning of Paragraph 8. This Attachment will be revised.

61. Reference(s): Representations and Certifications. On page 61 FAR 52.212-3 Offeror Representations and Certifications indicates that the offeror shall complete only paragraph (b) of this provision if the Offeror has completed the annual reps and certs in SAM.

In the instructions section for Volume 1 General and Administrative, Section 3.3 Tab C Reps and Certs, the Offeror shall ensure that all Reps//Certs/Other Stmts are thoroughly completed with all blocks completed truthfully and completely.

Can the government please confirm the requirements for submittal of Reps and Certs?

Response: Please follow the submittal instructions that are listed for Volume I, General and Administration, TAB C – Reps and Certs.

62. Reference(s): Section 7.3 of the Instructions to Offerors states that, “Past Performance information…is required on the Offeror and all teaming partners, and or joint venture partners or subcontractors proposed to perform 20% of the labor.” This section goes on to require that, “The Offeror shall submit, along with the information required in this paragraph, a consent letter, executed by each subcontractor, teaming partner, and/or joint venture partner, authorizing release of adverse past performance information to the offeror so the Offeror can respond to such information.”

For the following reasons, will the Government reconsider its requirement that each joint venture partner submit Past Performance information (as per Section 7.3)?

While this requirement makes perfect sense relative to teaming partners and subcontractors in light of FAR 15.305(2)(iii), it does not appear to be specifically required by the FAR clause cited and appears to run counter to one of the purposes of the 8(a) Business Development Program, i.e., the ability of an 8(a) participant under such Program to marshal its resources and creativity to pursue and perform larger prime contracts, such as A-VLE, with a more experienced and/or larger business;

FAR 124.513 states that, “A joint venture agreement is permissible only where an 8(a) concern lacks the necessary capacity to perform the contract on its own, and the agreement is fair and equitable and will be of substantial benefit to the 8(a) concern.” If the SBA has ratified a particular joint venture agreement as “fair and equitable” in terms of resources and expertise, the joint venture then becomes a separate legal entity that becomes the Offeror relative to this acquisition. If each joint venture partner’s past performance is evaluated discretely outside of the context of the joint venture partnership formed, then the substantial benefits in terms of resources and expertise accruing to both the Government and the 8(a) joint venture participant are attenuated to the level of teaming partners and subcontractors;

The requirement that each joint venture partner consent to the release of past and present performance information for purposes of discussion with the Prime Contractor/Offeror means that the joint venture partners are consenting to the release of such information to themselves; and

Because, as per Evaluation Factor 4, “The prime contractor, proposed joint venture partners, and/or subcontractors…will be assessed individually and the results will then be assessed in their totality…” and lacking any other information to the contrary relative to the Performance Confidence Assessment Rating Method, an offeror composed of 5 teaming partners, each performing 20% of the labor and each having an assessment of Neutral Confidence for the four contracts required and cited, could have an overall Performance Confidence Assessment Rating higher than a joint venture composed of a single 8(a) participant and a single non-8(a) participant that has complied with the requirements of Section 7.3 but has, as a result, an Assessment Rating of Substantial Confidence for one of the joint venture partners but only Neutral Confidence for the other joint venture partner.

If the assessment of Past Performance is intended to gauge the probability of meeting Solicitation requirements, we believe that such assessment, given the number of past performance citations permitted, should be based on the totality of past performance citations, regardless of the participating party, to ensure the highest probability of meeting the Solicitations requirements and the highest performance metrics of the Government.

Response: No, the Government needs to know the Past Performance for each joint venture partner. 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.

63. Reference(s): PWS Para 1.5 Request the Government provide a Pre-Submission Quality Assurance Surveillance Plan (QASP) for reference in the offeror’s QMP, in time for proposal submission

Response: Please use the Performance Requirements Summary (PRS) to develop the Quality Control documentation.

64. Reference(s): As this is a sizeable proposal effort, would the Government consider an electronic submission on 25 May and hard-copy delivery within 3 business days?

Response: No the Government will not consider this. All hard copy proposals are now due on 30 May 2017 at 11:00AM EDT.

65. Reference(s): Should any questions require an amendment to the RFP, request the government re-release the RFP with page numbers for ease of reference.

Response: Yes the conformed copy of RFP will include page numbers.

66. Reference(s): Para 2.1 Reference Volume VI – Would the Government consider incorporating this requirement (Factor 5) as part of Volume II Overarching Technical Narrative so that an additional volume is not required for a 7 page document? As a separate volume, this unnecessarily increases the workload and costs associated with preparing, producing, and shipping an additional volume.

Response: No, the Government will not consider this.

67. Reference(s): Para 6.2Reference Instructions to Offerors, Volume IV, Staffing Approach, “The Offerors shall provide Letters of Commitment …” Does the government expect Letters of Commitment from all key personnel, even if they currently work for the offerors team, or are Letters of Commitment only required for new hires not currently employees?

Response: Letters of Commitment are required for all key personnel, to include current and potential employees that will be working the AVLE requirement.

68. Reference(s): Since this is a DoD procurement, FAR 52.227-14 and FAR 52.227-23 should be removed on page 58 of the RFP. Those clauses only are to be included in civilian agency (i.e., non-DoD) contracts.

Response: The two clauses, FAR 52.227-14 and FAR 52.227-23, will be deleted from the solicitation.

69. Reference(s): DFARS 252.227-7013, DFARS 252.227-7014, and DFARS 252.227-7016 are the appropriate clauses for this procurement that should be listed instead of FAR 52.227-14 and FAR 52.227-23. DFARS 252.227-7015 already is correctly listed in the RFP.

Response: DFARS 252.227-7013, DFARS 252.227-7014, and DFARS 252.227-7016 will be included in the solicitation in the amendment.

70. Reference(s): ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors – Attachment 3 Past Performance questionnaire.

Can the completed Past Performance Questionnaire be emailed to Mrs. Rhoda C. Harrison- Spence?

Response: Solicitation Amendment 3 Attachment 3_Past Performance Questionnaire has been revised to allow PPQ’s be emailed to all AVLE team members at the following email addresses:

curtis.arthur.civ@mail.mil

71. Reference(s): ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors – Volume 6, 6.2 Staffing Approach. States The Offeror shall provide Letters of Commitment (signed within 60 days of proposal submission) and resumes for key personnel. Are Letter of Commitment required for currently employed personnel?

Response: Letters of Commitment are required for current and potential employees that will be working AVLE requirement.

72. Reference(s): Attachment 2 Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet

Section 10, requires information that is already requested in previous parts of the Attachment.

Section 10 items 1 to 10 refer, please confirm if this information is required again.

Response: Section 10 is asking for information in regards to when a delivery schedule had to be revised.

73. Reference(s): ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 Instructions to Offerors – Volume 6, 6.2 Staffing Approach.

Are Letters of Commitment required for currently employed personnel?

Response: Yes. Letters of Commitment are required for current and potential employees that will be working AVLE requirement.

74. Reference(s): PWS, Page 99, Paragraph 2.2

Paragraph 2.2 (k) states that letter size and spacing must be easily readable (at least 12-pitch type or 10 point proportional spacing). Selection of letter size appears contradictory based upon these criteria. Pitch indicates the number of characters per inch, while proportional spaced fonts are sized by points as shown below:

12 Pitch: Size (font) 10 Courier New = 12 characters per inch

Proportional Spaced Font: Size (font) 10 (point) Times New Roman, or 10 point Calibri

Will the Government confirm its desire that the use of Font size 10 Courier New or Font size 10 Times New Roman are acceptable as font selections for the response to the A-VLE proposal?

Response: Changed Addendum ADDENDUM TO FAR 52.212-1 INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS – COMMERCIAL ITEMS 2.2.(d) to reflect 12-font Times New Roman or Arial as

75. Reference(s): Section 1.7 on page 11 indicates that contract period can be 5 years --- base year + 4 option years. However, the CLIN/Item Numbers in the SF1449 only cover four years:

0001-0002-003 through 4001-4002-4003. What is the discrepancy?

Response: There is no discrepancy. CLINS 0001 – 0003 are for the base year. CLINS 1001 – 1003 are for Option Year 1. CLINS 2001 – 2003 are for Option Year 2. CLINS 3001 – 3003 are for Option Year 3. CLINS 4001 – 4003 are for Option Year 4. That makes up the contract period of five (5) years.

76. Reference(s): What’s the deadline for you to receive Past Performance Questionnaires from the agencies for the Past Performance we’re reporting?

Response: Past Performance Questionnaires are due on 30 May 2017 at 11:00AM EDT.

77. Reference(s): If we have copies of completed Past Performance Questionnaires for any of these engagements, can/should we include them in the Proposal?

Response: No. The Government will use the completed Past Performance Questionnaires that are submitted to us.

78. Reference(s): Should the Past Performance Volume include our description/discussion of work we have done for engagements on which we are submitting (or having others submit) Attachment 2 – Past Performance Questionnaire?

Response: Yes, include description/discussions for these engagements.

79. Reference(s): Can we include additional information regarding past performance engagements for which the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment 3) does not apply (for example for commercial customers, and/or for work that, while comparable in size and complexity, may not be comparable in content to the work covered in this solicitation)?

Response: Past performance engagements must be similar in nature and complexity to this solicitation.

80. Reference(s): The Solicitation asks for a Cross Reference Matrix in each Volume.

However, it seems that responses/descriptions for meeting all the requirements are covered in Volume III (Overarching Technical Narrative) and possibly Volume IV (STOEP). Do you just want copies of the [same] matrix in each volume?

Response: The Cross Reference Matrix should be specific to each specific Volume.

81. Reference(s): Will awardees be authorized to add additional subcontractors after IDIQ award for specific Task Order releases?

Response: Yes, but the Prime Contractor must provide 50% of the work performed. The Contracting Officer must be notified of all subcontractors that are added to the contract and what duties they will be performing.

82. Reference(s): Can the Government please clarify if not having the STO key position disqualifies a company from bidding on the entire contract (MAIDIQ Level)?

Response: Failure to provide the STO key position will cause the offeror to receive an Unacceptable rating.

83. Reference(s): Will the Government consider extending the due date for this effort?

Response: Amendment 2 was posted to FEDBIZOPPS on 19 May 2017 at 9:04 AM EDT to extend the closing date of this solicitation from 25 May 2017 at 3:00 PM EDT to 30 May 2017 at

11:00 AM EDT.

84. Reference(s): Part 1- General, Page 11, Paragraph 1.2 – This paragraph specifically mentions the Oculus Rift HMD. Is this the government-mandated HMD or can a vendor use another HMD?

Response: Oculus Rift and Samsung Gear VR are the government mandated HMDs. No others will be accepted.

85. Reference(s): Part 1- General, Page 14, Paragraph 1.22 - there is a disconnect between the list of Key Personnel and the list of personnel for pricing on Attachment 5, the MAIDIQ Total Estimated Price Worksheets.

a. For example, at 1.22.1 for Key Personnel there is a Program Manager, but on the MAIDIQ the PM is not listed. Can we add that labor category to the matrix for pricing purposes?

b. 1.22.3 for Key Personnel there is a Software Developer, is this the same as the Computer Programmer/Software Developer on the MAIDIQ?

c. 1.22.8 for Key Personnel there is a Computer Programmer (Desktop or Notebook Simulations), there is no labor category on the MAIDIQ that matches Computer Programmer (Desktop or Notebook Simulations). Please clarify.

Response: 2. a–c. Revised Attachment 5 is provided

86. Reference(s): Part 1- General, Page 15, Paragraph 1.22.5 – This paragraph mentions C# as the programming language. Can other programming languages be used or is C# required?

Response: C# is the programming language specified as part of the requirements for the Multimedia Artist and Animator in paragraph 1.22.5 and the Video Game Designer (Serious Gaming, AR and VR) in paragraph 1.22.8.

87. Reference(s): Part 1- General, Page 15, Paragraph 1.22.8 – This paragraph mentions the current Army Game for Training – VBS3. Is this the government-mandated game engine to use or may the vendor use another game engine?

Response: Virtual Battlespace 3 (VBS3) the government mandated game engine.

88. Reference(s): Part 1- General, Page 15, Paragraph 1.22.8 – This paragraph mentions Oculus Rift and Samsung Gear VR. Are these the government-mandated HMDs to use or may the vendor use other HMDs?

Response: Oculus Rift and Samsung Gear VR are the government mandated HMDs. No others will be accepted.

89. Reference(s): Definitions and Acronyms, Page 17, ARMY GAMES FOR TRAINING – This paragraph mentions the current Army Game for Training – VBS3. Is this the government-mandated game engine to use or may the vendor use another game engine?

Response: Virtual Battlespace 3 (VBS3) is the government mandated game engine. No others will be accepted.

90. Reference(s): Definitions and Acronyms, Page 21, Level 4 IMI - This paragraph states:

‘Immersive multimedia or computer-simulated virtual or augmented reality, the learner engages in a real-life scenario responding to sensory cues.’ Is the expectation that the learner will be in a physical contextual setting, where the proximity of the learner is near a physical item/environment from which they are learning? (IE, Augmented Reality overlaid on a tablet's camera view of an actual helicopter) OR Is the expectation that the learner will be in a digitally simulated setting, where the proximity of the learner is in a simulated environment in which they are learning? (IE, Augmented Reality overlaid on a tablet’s simulation of a helicopter photo/video?)

Response: It is anticipated that the learner will be in a simulated environment. Requirements will be further detailed by task order.

91. Reference(s): Definitions and Acronyms, Page 24 VIRTUAL REALITY – How does the government envision VR – simply an HMD plugged into a laptop or desktop or a fully immersive VR experience that allows participants to move freely and untethered in an unlimited VR space while in a limited real space?

Response: HMD plugged into a laptop or desktop. Requirements for an untethered experience are not anticipated for the first year.

92. Reference(s): Part 5 – Specific Tasks, Page 29, Paragraph 5.1.1 – As new and emerging technologies come to the forefront, can the contract be amended to allow for the addition of hardware costs if required?

Response: If the Contractor proposes a new technology in future task orders, then the Government would clarify in the task order if hardware costs are included.

93. Reference(s): Part 5 – Specific Tasks, Page 32, Paragraph 5.4.1.6.2 - Simulations using Augmented Reality - This paragraph mentions utilizing smartphone technology for the AR device. Is this the only AR device type to be accounted for or are other devices to be considered as well (such as Google Glass, tablets, etc.)?

Response: Other devices that can be considered for AR are Oculus Rift and Samsung Gear VR that are the government mandated HMDs.

94. Reference(s): Part 5 – Specific Tasks, Page 33, Paragraph 5.4.2.1 – For VR products using a game engine as the image generation software, is the vendor still required to use VBS3 as the game engine? As it is a VR solution vice a serious game solution, is a waiver still required from TCM Serious Games and Virtual Simulations and Gaming to use a different image generation application/game engine?

Response: Virtual Battlespace 3 (VBS3) is the government mandated game engine. No others will be accepted.

95. Reference(s): Page 112, Part 1 – is the Aviation Captains Career Course-Reserve Component Phase 3, taught at the students’ homes via personal computer or at a reserve/active duty base?

Response: All Army DL is based on delivery either at home or at the duty location. Statistics report most training is taken from the duty station.

96. Reference(s): Attachment 4 Total Evaluated Price Worksheet –

a. What is the government’s rationale regarding the yearly estimated annual hours allocation?

b. What is the correlation between estimated annual hours, e.g. the video game designer at 4,225 hours in the base year, means a more limited number of Level III and IV development in the base year. Is this assumptive thinking correct?

c. Are the estimated annual hours applicable to the overall contract or for each of the “up to” three awardees?

Response:

13.a. The hours by labor category are based on anticipated requirements for each product for the year. Each product type, each level of interactivity requires different level of effort in terms of production, QA, and management.

13.b. It is anticipated that the number of requirements for level III and IV will be lower for the base year and then increase over the contract years.

13.c. The estimate of annual hours is applicable to the overall contract.

97. Reference(s): PWS, 1.22 Key Personnel (including 1.22.1 through 1.22.8). What level or number of years of experience may be substituted for education for Key Personnel?

Response: There is no level or number of years of experience that may be substituted for education for Key Personnel.

98. Reference(s): PWS, 1.22.3 Software Developer (Digital Learning Content Object Applications), “a minimum of five years’ experience developing successful SCORM® 2004 3rd Edition scoring DL and two years’ paid experience developing successful xAPI scoring DL”.

Given that xAPI is relatively new, the requirement for 2 years of experience in xAPI is proving to be…