DLITE_II_RFP_Offeror_QA_responses_-_6_Nov_2015_-_revised_spacing.pdf

Question # Category

Mission Area (FP or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

1 General

Force Projection and Train and

Sustain

RFP

Are any of the STO task orders (Alpha, Bravo, and/or Charlie) awardable? Y

There is a high likelihood that STO A could be awarded.

2 General

Force Projection and Train and

Sustain

RFP

If so, which tasks are awardable?

Y

There is a high likelihood that STO A could be awarded.

3 General

Force Projection and Train and

Sustain

RFP

Will the government provide offerors with a conformed copy of the RFP in particular Sections J, L & M? N/A

This has been provided with Amendment 0004

4 General

Force Projection and Train and

Sustain

RFP

Will USG provide a conformed copy of the RFP through Amend

0002?

N/A

See response to #3 above

5 General

Force Projection and Train and

Sustain

RFP

Will USG please confirm the amendment # is 0002 not 0003 as indicated on SF30?

N/A

The second amendment was issued as

Amendment 0003. As stated on FBO when the second amendment (Amendment 0003) was posted, "due to a technical difficulties"

Amendment 0002 does not exist.

6 Pricing

Force Projection and Train and

Sustain

Section B

Will the government provide a complete Section B for offerors to incorporate within the price proposal?

N/A

See Amendment 0003

7 Pricing

Force Projection and Train and

Sustain

Section B

Please confirm that offeror should only populate CLIN X005, X009, X010, and X011 within Section B if bidding STO Alpha only. N

FP offerors should populate CLINs 0005,0009, 0010, 0011, 0012, and 0013 for STO Alpha

IAW the instructions in RFP Section L.5.5.5.

8 Pricing Force Projection

(Alpha)

Section B, CLIN

0027 Guaranteed

Minimum - Force

Projection, page 17

What data/cost goes in this CLIN?

N

Offerors are not required to populate this

CLIN. No cost or other data is required for this

CLIN.

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

Section B - CLINs or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

9 Pricing Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie) Section B

Does the government want to see Section B non-FFP items such as: 0014-0016, 0018, 0019, 0020,21-0024 , 0025, etc., if a

Contractor is a Small Business and is not required to have a CAS and is only pricing the T&S portion of the solicitation (e.g. Bravo

Sample Task – FFP)?

N

T&S offerors should populate CLINs 0017, 0025, and 0026 for STO Bravo IAW the instructions in RFP Section L.5.5.5. See

L.5.5.5.1 for CAS compliance instructions.

10 Program Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie) C.2.2.5.1 (p. 41)

C.2.2.4.3 requires the level 3 for the minimum CAT III English skill, however in C.2.2.5.1 provides for a lower 2+ English skill level if the individual is non-native speaker of English. Does

C.2.2.5.1 supersede C.2.2.4.3 in this case?

N

See Amendment 0004

Section C - PWS or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

11 Program Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie) C.2.2.5.1 (p. 41)

Every linguist nominated shall have passed language tests that are dated no earlier than nine months prior to submission for consideration, regardless of previous work as a linguist/translator.

All scores shall be recorded and presented in accordance with the

Interagency Linguist Roundtable (ILR) 5-point scale. Tests shall include Reading, Listening, Speaking and Writing in English and the Specified Contract Required Language. All tests shall be given and graded by an approved, accredited testing organization and the test results shall be presented in the ILR format. Tests scores through the Defense Language Proficiency Test (DLPT) V are favored over all other testing formats (e.g., ALTA Language

Test). The contractor shall forward resumes language testing results for all nominated linguists to the COR and Government

Lead prior to a linguist starting work on this contract. Exceptions may be granted by the government on a case-by-case basis. For tests adhering to the DLPT V format, a minimum score of 3 for each test shall be achieved. A minimum test score that is comparable to a 3 on the DLPT V for all other testing formats is acceptable. Linguists shall also score a minimum of 2+ in English if they are non-native speakers of English.

Understanding the government “prefers” the DLPT V Format, contracting companies currently do not have access or authorization to request a DLPT V. Is it the government’s intent to permit contracting companies’ access to the DLPT testing centers to better provide the government with this preferred format?

Y

See response to #10 above or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

12 Program Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie) C.2.3.1.2 (p. 45)

The structure will clearly identify local contractor facilities and any other facilities that may be used for possible reach back capability. Will the government please clarify if the contractor is required to have local facilities (within a 50 mile radius of Ft. Belvoir) available?

N

Local facility is simply identified as one being within a 50 mile radius of Ft. Belvoir. The contractor is NOT required to have a local facility

13 Contracting Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie) C.2.3.4.3 (p. 48)

The RFP requires that “95% or more of Linguists have ILR certification performed annually by independent tester/proctor.”

We specifically teamed with one of our subcontractors because they are a certified testing entity and believe that offered a strong differentiator for our team. Does this requirement then preclude them from serving as a third party, independent tester/proctor?

N

Yes, they have a conflict of interest in perfoming the independent testing

14 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

Facilities Clearance. Contractor shall have and maintain a U.S.

Top Secret (TS) facility clearance and access to a currently accredited SCIF authorized for TS level safeguarding.

Will the government confirm the need to have a SCIF facility for this IDIQ contract?

N

A Top Secret (TS) facility clearance and access to a currently accredited SCIF authorized for

TS level safeguarding is required.

15 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 Facilities Clearance. Contractor shall have and maintain a U.S. Top Secret (TS) facility clearance and access to a currently accredited SCIF authorized for TS level safeguarding.

We currently have access to SCIF space. It is our understanding that our SCIF space needs to be accredited by the customer whose information is being safeguarded. Will the government consider changing the language in C.2.3.9.1.1.2 to " Contractor shall have and maintain a U.S. Top Secret Clearance and have access to a SCIF space which can be accredited for TS safeguarding"?

N

See response to #14 above or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

16 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 Facilities Clearance. Contractor shall have and maintain a U.S. Top Secret (TS) facility clearance and access to a currently accredited SCIF authorized for TS level safeguarding.

Is the the accredited SCIF authorized for TS level safeguarding applicable to Small Businesses submitting proposals for Train and Sustain?

N

See response to #14 above

17 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

Please confirm that this is a requirement for T&S small business:

Access to a SCIF

N

See response to #14 above

18 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

Do small businesses performing services which do not require a clearance need to have a facility clearance?

N

See response to #14 above

19 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

Access to a Secure Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF).

Offerors need to demonstrate access to a SCIF in the event classified requirements arise. INSCOM will not fund nor sponsor any offeror for a new SCIF. INSCOM requires offerors to have access to a SCIF, however, will not sponsor the SCIF.

How can INSCOM require a SCIF when they will not sponsor it? Companies require government sponsors in order to maintain SCIFs. So is it INSCOM's intent that offerors are to request other DoD agencies to sponsor a SCIF for them? Or is

INSCOM limiting this bid to only offerors that are fortunate enough to have other SCIFs based on other government contracts? This seems to create an unfair competition favoring extremely large companies who have had the benefit of a government agency sponsoring their SCIFs.

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

20 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

L.5.5.1.12.3 Access to a Secure Compartmented Information

Facility (SCIF). Offerors need to demonstrate access to a SCIF in the event classified requirements arise. INSCOM will not fund nor sponsor any offeror for a new SCIF. Offerors may demonstrate access through one of the following documents:

Current SCIF accreditation letter/message from a cognizant authority for a SCIF owned/operated by the offeror;

Co-utilization agreement along with current accreditation letter/message

Letter from a teaming partner / subcontractor

The SCIF requirement is a valid concern for the government, however, SCIF documentation generally requires other government entities involvement. Since

INSCOM did not have this requirement in the draft, Offerors have a very short timeline to get other government entities to participate in getting a Co-Utilization agreement. Since the award date for DLITE II is not until 23 August 2016, will the government consider changing the requirement for SCIF documentation from RFP submission to Contract Award?

N

See response to #14 above

21 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

IDIQ requires access to a SCIF in event the need arises, however

INSCOM will not fund or sponsor a SCIF for DLITE II; a SCIF not sponsored by INSCOM would require a Co-USE from the government sponsoring agency and would not be available for storage for several months while Co-Use is processed. Would

INSCOM consider modifying this requirement to require bidders to demonstrate access to a SCIF for the IDIQ proposal, and making a contractor SCIF a requirement for any subsequent Task

Order that requires SCI storage?

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

22 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

IAW L.5.5.1.12.3 of the solicitation, please verify that all offerors are to demonstrate access to a SCIF, as historically DLITE TO efforts have not required contractor operated SCIFs to be utilized in the performance of contract requirements.

N

See response to #14 above

23 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

IDIQ requires access to a SCIF in event the need arises, however

INSCOM will not fund or sponsor a SCIF for DLITE II; a SCIF not sponsored by INSCOM would require a Co-USE from the government sponsoring agency and would not be available for storage for several months while Co-Use is processed. Would

INSCOM consider modifying this requirement to require bidders to demonstrate access to a SCIF for the IDIQ proposal, and making a contractor SCIF a requirement for any subsequent Task

Order that requires SCI storage?

N

See response to #14 above

24 Security Force Projection

(Alpha)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

IAW L.5.5.1.12.3 of the solicitation, please verify that all offerors are to demonstrate access to a SCIF, as historically DLITE TO efforts have not required contractor operated SCIFs to be utilized in the performance of contract requirements.

N

See response to #14 above

25 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

Do subcontracted companies require a TS facilities clearance at award?

N

Prime is required to have TS FCL per Section

A ( Executive Summary paragraph 4), L.5.5.1.12.2, and M.2.1 (g). No requirement for subcontractor to have TS FCL at award.

26 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

If the answer to the question above is yes, does the government want certification of subcontractor facilities clearance?

N

See response to #25 above

27 Security Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

Do all Small Businesses on the team require a facility clearance?

See response to #25 above or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

28 Security Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

For compliance, is the Offeror the only company required to have a Top Secret Facility clearance at time of submission? N

See response to #25 above

29 Security Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54)

J.2.3.3 (p., and

L.5.5.1.12.3 (p.381)

The level of Safeguarding has changed from NONE to SECRET on J.2.3.3 STO Charlie – DD254. Does the Prime have to have

SECRET Safeguarding prior to proposal submission?

N

Yes

30 Security Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

The level of Safeguarding has changed from NONE to SECRET on J.2.3.3 STO Charlie – DD254. Will the Prime be able to obtain Secret Safeguarding at the time of award and once the

DD254 is received?

N

See response to #29 above

31 Security Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

Amendment 1 states, on page 2, Reference #22 of the cover that

"Sections J.1.1, J.2.1.3, J.2.2.3, J.2.3.3 have updated DD254 contract number references" but it appears that the level of

Safeguarding required has changed from NONE to SECRET on

J.2.3.3 STO Charlie – DD254 with no reference to the change.

Will the government please confirm the safeguarding requirement for "J.2.3.3 STO Charlie – DD254"?

N

See response to #29 above

32 Security Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

Will the government remove the Safeguarding requirement of

Secret which appears on J.2.3.3 STO Charlie - DD 254? N

See response to #29 above

33 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54) and C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.

84)

Why did the FCL change from Secret to Top Secret?

N

FCL requirement has not changed.

34 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p. 54) and C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.

84)

Facilities Clearance. Contractor shall have and maintain a U.S.

Top Secret (TS) facility clearance and access to a currently accredited SCIF authorized for TS level safeguarding.

Will the government confirm the need for SB's to have a SCIF facility for this IDIQ contract?

N

See L.5.5.1.12.3, prime offerors need access to a SCIF, which may be through one they own, a teaming partner, or other arrangement.

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

35 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p.54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84) and L.5.5.1.12.3

(p.381)

Reference the requirement for access to a SCIF, this appears to be a direct “lift” from the INSCOM GIS RFP. Is this an actual requirement for the DLITE II contract? N

Yes.

36 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p.54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84), L.5.5.1.12.3 (p.381), and 2.3.10.2 (p. 302)

How many classified Task Orders were issued under the DLITE I contract?

N

No classified Task Orders were issued under the DLITE contract

37 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p.54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84), L.5.5.1.12.3 (p.381), and 2.3.10.2 (p. 302)

How many classified Task Orders does the Government anticipate will be issued under the DLITE II contract?

N

Unknown, number of classifed Task Orders will be determined by future mission requirements.

38 Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

C.2.3.9.1.1.2 (p.54), C.3.3.9.1.1.2 (p.84), L.5.5.1.12.3 (p.381), and 2.3.10.2 (p. 302)

Access to a Secure Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF).

Offerors need to demonstrate access to a SCIF in the event classified requirements arise. INSCOM will not fund nor sponsor any offeror for a new SCIF. Offerors may demonstrate access through one of the following documents:

Current SCIF accreditation letter/message from a cognizant authority for a SCIF owned/operated by the offeror;

Co-utilization agreement along with current accreditation letter/message

Letter from a teaming partner / subcontractor CSO identifying offeror may use SCIF for DLITE II, along with current accreditation letter/message. Will USG please clarify whether an accrediation letter and access to a SCIF from business partner we are not currently teaming with on DLITE II would satisfy this requirement?

N

A teaming or co-utilization agreement should be demonstrated.

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

39 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.2.4.1 (p. 70)

The cost of non-aligned ILR testing is considerable. Will the

Government please confirm the requirement is for each individual

CAT I to pass an English language test (speak, read, write) at the

ILR 2+ level proctored by a third-party (non-aligned) ILR testing service prior to being officially hired and accounted on this contract?

N

See STO Alpha paragraphs 2.2.3.1, 2.2.3.2, and

2.2.3.3

40 Security Force Projection

(Alpha)

C.3.2.4.2 (p. 70) ;

C.3.2.4.4.1 (p. 70) and C.3.3.9.15 (p.

86)

Candidates must be screened by USG personnel before being hired. Will the Government please confirm it will provide USG designated personnel to screen each individual CAT II and that the USG will make concessions to fill rate PRS for delays caused by availability of those USG designated personnel during deployment of linguists?

N

See J.1.5, CLIP Policy 20 SEP2010 Redacted

JUL 2012 protected” - Contract Linguist

Personnel Security Investigation and

Counterintelligence-Focused Security Review

Program Policy, dated 20 Sept 2010, Redacted

July 2012.

41 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.2.5.1 (p. 71)

If contractors are not permitted to sit for a military proctored

DLPT V, will the USG please clarify where linguists are able to take this exam? Y

See Amendment 0004

42 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.2.5.1 (p. 71)

Will the Government tailor ILR Language Certification testing requirements in English and the Specified Contract Required

Language requirements based on individual TO mission requirements, as opposed to requiring ILR Language Certification

Testing for English and the SCRL in reading, writing, listening and speaking for all nominated linguists?

N

See Amendment 0004

43 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.2.5.1 (p. 71)

For languages not available for testing in DLPT, what is the USG preferred method of testing? N

Offerors shall propose its method of testing for languages not available in DLPT.

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

44 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.2.5.1 (p. 71)

The PWs states "Test scores through the Defense Language

Proficiency Test (DLPT) V are favored over all other testing formats (e.g., ALTA Language Test)." Could the Government please clarify or remove this statement as Contractors cannot have this test administered. As such, the statement is restrictive and only applicable to Department of Defense personnel.

Y

See response to #43 above

45 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

C.3.2.4.5.1.3 (p. 71);

J.2.1 Section 2.2.3.2

(p. 294)

For offerors to appropriately price and propose qualified candidates in an efficient manner, qualification metrics must be unambiguous. Will the Government please define "lengthy residence" for the purpose of TCN SCRL capabilities?

N

"lengthy residence" is identified as one that demonstrates a thorough immersion of local culture, language, and history through years of residency

46 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.2.5.3 (p. 71)

We understand this requirement is meant to establish a new baseline for the Task Order under DLITE II; however, the additional cost of retesting all 8,000 linguists, many of whom would be considered otherwise "qualified", adds an unnecessary financial burden to the Government on this contract. Will the

Government please consider revising the testing requirement to any linguist whose test scores are more than 9 months old at the time of award (i.e., within the annual retesting window under

PWS language) to reduce overall cost to the Government and allow for less disruption during transition?

N

All incumbent linguist captures must be recertified within 180 days of award. All new linguist candidates must meet all contract specifications prior to performing on contract.

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

47 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

C.3.3 (p. 73)

/C.3.5.0 (p. 91)

For the outline Performance Requirements Summary for

"Response to contract and task order modifications (C.3.3.2 and

H.1) there is a discrepancy between the table in C3.3 and the table in C.3.5.0. The first table requires contractor response within 7 days for minor contract modifications and within 14 days for major contract modifications. The second table requires response for minor contract modifications within 3 days and response for major contract modifications within 7 days. Will the

Government please confirm/clarify the IDIQ Performance Level

Standard?

Y

See Amendment 0004

48 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.3.1.3.3 (p. 75)

The text implies the nomination must occur within 30 days of removal. Will the Government please clarify whether the actual replacement must occur within 30 days of removal or if the nomination must occur within 30 days of removal?

N

The Contractor should nominate replacements no more than 30 days after removal. The

Contractor will make its best effort for actual replacement within 30 days of removal.

49 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

C.3.3.3.4.2 Table 5

(p. 77)

C.3.3.3 Table 5, Personnel Management (C.3.3.3) "Meets fill requirements for CAT I, II, and II linguists…" Please confirm this should read, "Meets fill requirements for CAT I, II, and III linguists..."

Y

See Amendment 0004

50 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

C.3.3.4.4 Table 6 (p.

78)

The first column of the second row of the table refers to

"Training Management (C.3.3.4.2)" but C.3.3.4.2 appears to be missing from the RFP. Please provide paragraph C.3.3.4.2.

Y

See Amendment 0004

51 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

C.3.3.4.4 Table 6 (p.

78)

The first column references C.3.3.4.2 , but the subparagraph appears to be missing from the RFP. Please provide paragraph

C.3.3.4.2. Y

See Amendment 0004

52 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.3.9.3 (p. 84)

Please confirm paragraph number C.2.3.9.3 should be numbered

C.3.3.9.3. Y or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

53 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.3.9.4 (p. 84)

The PWS does not specify CAT II and CAT III linguists will be removed if access is not granted after one year. Will the

Government please clarify if this language only applies to CAT II and III linguists as the section is titled "Clearance Processing" or if CAT I linguists are included? N

Applies to any linguist deployed in an Interim access capacity, pending final clearance adjudication. In the event an individual is performing in a CAT 1 assignment IAW a technical exhibit requirement while pending collateral or SCI adjudication, there is no expectation to remove the individual based on this mandate.

54 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.3.10.3.1 (p. 87)

Will the Government please confirm that non-reimbursable travel language applies only to in-theater travel and not to mobilization? N

C.3.3.10.3.1 pertains to mission-related TDY travel. Mobilization travel costs will be included in offerors fixed price rates.

55 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.3.11.1.3 (p. 89)

Will the Government please confirm that all existing DLITE Task

Orders expire within the first 365 days following the award of

DLITE II or clarify the status of those Task Orders that do not expire during the IDIQ Phase-in period, or within 365 calendar days of contract award?

N

DLITE I task orders are valid until the

Contracting Officer decides otherwise. It is the intent of the Government to begin issuing new task orders timely under DLITE II and when practicable for the Government.

56 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.5.0 (p. 91)

Please define the acronym SPM.

N

Senior Program Manager

57 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) C.3.5.0 (p. 91)

The first column references C.3.3.4.2 , but the subparagraph appears to be missing from the RFP. Please provide paragraph

C.3.3.4.2.

Y

See Amendment 0004

58 Contracting Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

FAR 52.204-8, para

2 (p. 132)

Please confirm the size standard for the Train & Sustain is $7.5

Million, per the size standard determination by the Small

Business Administration, under the applicable NAICS code

541930 - Translation & Interpretation Services.

N

IAW FAR 52.2.4-8, the small business size standard is $7.5 Million.

Section I or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

59 Contracting Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

FAR 52.219-28 (p.

150)

With the inclusion of “Post Award Small Business Program

Representation (July 2013)”, if a Small Business prime contractor under T&S fails to re-certify as a Small Business under the applicable NAICS at the end of 5 years, will the prime contractor be “off-ramped” from T&S, or will they be eligible to participate on FP as a LB?

N

Businesses in the T&S mission area will not be required to recertify to remain in the pool.

60 Proposal Force Projection

(Alpha)

252.237-7023(b)

CONTINUATION

OF ESSENTIAL

CONTRACTOR

SERVICES

The Government has identified all or a portion of the contractor services performed under this contract as essential contractor services in support of mission-essential functions. These services are listed in attachment TBD (at the task order level), Mission-

Essential Contractor services, dated TBD (at the task order level).

(c)(1) The Mission-Essential Contractor Services Plan submitted by the Contractor, is incorporated in this contract.

252.237-7023, Section B states requirements stated in Section TBD will be determined at task order level ( c) (1) states the plan submitted will be incorporated into the contract.

Will the Government please confirm there is no plan required with this submission?

N

Confirmed.

61 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

252.237-7024

NOTICE OF

CONTINUATION

OF ESSENTIAL

CONTRACTOR

SERVICES (OCT

2010)

(b) The offeror shall provide with its offer a written plan describing how it will continue to perform the essential contractor services listed in attachment TBD (at the task order level), Mission Essential Contractor Services, dated TBD (at the task order level), during periods of crisis. Does the Government require this plan as part of the IDIQ or Task Order Alpha response, and will additional page count be allocated in order to provide this Plan?

The plan will be required at the task order level.

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

62 Pricing Force Projection

(Alpha)

Clause 5152.225-

No government support items are checked. Will the Government please provide the minimum IDIQ-level information or provide a sample applicable to each STO to allow offerors to better plan and price contract employee support for a more comprehensive submission?

N

See STO Alpha for government support items.

63 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.2 (p. 235)

PRS Table indicates that Contractor responds to minor contract modifications within 3 calendar days, and major contract modifications within 7 and 14 calendar days respectively, which indicates two conflicting "major contract modification" requirements. The IDIQ Acceptable Quality Level is defined in business days, not calendar days.

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.8 (p. 262)

The Security Plan and QCP are not listed in the organization table. Since they are not page limited, should be they included at the back of volume 2? Please indicate where and in what order they should be placed.

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.8 (p. 262)

Would the Government please consider allowing sections not included in page count (such as resumes) to be added as appendices in order to simplify page numbering?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.8 (p. 262)

Please confirm that the job descriptions mentioned in the ** footnote of Section J.1.8 Template: Proposal Organizational

Table – Force Projection Mission Area refers to the labor category descriptions for each labor category/job title requested in the last sentence of RFP Section L.5.5.2.2 Subfactor 2-

Staffing Plan.

N

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha)

Section J.1.8 (p.

262) and Section

L.5.5.2.2 (p. 383)

Please confirm that that the labor category/job title descriptions do not count against the Staffing Plan page limit. N

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.8 (p. 262)

Key Personnel resumes are not listed in the organization table.

Please confirm they should be included behind the Staffing Plan. N

Section J or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.8 (p. 262)

There is no requirement in Section L to provide resumes, nor evaluation criteria in Section M. Please provide guidance on content of resumes, where they should be placed in the proposal, and how they will be evaluated.

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.8 (p. 262)

Please provide a template for the resumes or indicate if

Contractor format is acceptable.

Y

Contractor format is acceptable. Contractor format should conform to any other applicable instructions or restrictions stated in the solcitation.

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.8 (p. 262)

There is no requirement in Section L to provide job descriptions, nor evaluation criteria in Section M. Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.8 (p. 262)

J.1.8 Proposal Organizational Table - Within the chart for

Volume 2 it indicates that Resumes and Job Descriptions are not part of the page count. However, within Section L.5.5.2.2

Subfactor 2 Staffing Plan there is no mention of resumes. Are resumes needed? And if so for who specifically, Key Personnel

(TOPM, TOAM, and TOQCM)?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 3

Force Projection

(Alpha)

Section J.1.8 (p.

262) and Section

L.5.5.3.3.1 (p. 385)

Should TOC reference L.5.5.3.2.1 be L.5.5.3.3.1?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 3

Force Projection

(Alpha)

Section J.1.8 (p.

262) and Section

L.5.5.3.3.1 (p. 385)

Should Glossary reference L.5.5.3.2.2 be L.5.5.3.3.2?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 4

Force Projection

(Alpha)

Section J.1.8 (p.

262) and Section

L.5.5.4.1.1.3 (p. 386)

Should the Relevant Project Summary L.5.5.4.1.2 be

L.5.5.4.1.1.3?

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 4

Force Projection

(Alpha)

Section J.1.8 (p.

262) and Section

L.5.5.4.1.1.3 (p. 386)

There is no L.5.5.4.1.2. Please confirm the correct reference is

L.5.5.4.1.1.3.

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Organization -

Volume 4

Force Projection

(Alpha)

Section J.1.8 (p.

262) and Section

L.5.5.4.5.1 (p. 387)

Should the TOC reference L.5.5.4.2.1 be L.5.5.4.5.1?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal File

Names -

Volume 1

Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.1.11 (p. 267) and

L.5.5.1 (p. 379 -

382)

L.5.5.1 Volume 1 and it subparagraphs list 15 different items to be included in Volume 1. However, J.1.11 only list 9 files. The five missing sections from J.1.11 are SF33 (L.5.5.1.3), Key

Corporate POCs (L.5.5.1.4), Executive Summary (L.5.5.1.6), Proposal Master Table of Contents (L.5.5.1.7), Proposal Cross

Reference Matrixs (L.5.5.1.8), and Proposal Adequacy Checklist

(L.5.5.1.10). What file does the government want these section requirements to go into? Or does the government want each of these requirements to be their owns files which is missing from J.1.11? Please clarify.

Y

See Amendment 0001

Proposal File

Names -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.1.11 (p. 267) and

L.5.5.2 (pg 382 -

385)

Section L for Volume 2 does not correlate with J.1.8 or J.1.11.

J.1.11 does not contain file names for sections that our outlined in

J.1.8 or in Section L.5.5.2

What file does the government want these section requirements to go into? Or does the government want each of these requirements to be their owns files which is missing from J.1.11?

Y

See Amendment 0001

Proposal File

Names -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.1.11 (p. 267) and

L.5.5.2.2 (p. 382 -

385)

The table asks for the document titled "(insert Contractor Name) -

SP.docx" and is listed as the "Security Plan". Could the

Government please confirm this should state "Staffing Plan"?

Y

See Amendment 0001

Proposal File

Names -

Volume 2

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.11 (p. 267)

Should Key Personnel resumes be included in the same file with the Staffing Plan or should they be a separate Word file? Y or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

Proposal

Content and

Format -

Volume 1

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.11 (p. 267), J.1.12 (p. 268), and

L.5.5.1.8 (p. 380)

Proposal Cross Reference Matrix Instructions state to submit in

MS Excel Format in Section L, however Attachment J.1.11 Force

Protection Volume File Name table states it shall in MS Word.

Would USG please clarify which format is preferred?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal File

Names

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie) J.1.12 (p. 268)

Regarding CD-R submission, should contractors also submit electronic files for each Volume that contain an entire compilation of separate Volume files as specified in J.1.12?

N

Yes, but may also provide a consolidated

Volume file in addition to the individual files for each volume. Electronic submission refers to CD-R but not portal, email, or any other electronic method of submittal.

Proposal File

Names -

Volume 1

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.12 (pg. 268) and

L.5.5.1 (p. 379 - 382)

L.5.5.1 Volume 1 and it subparagraphs list 15 different items to be included in Volume 1. However, J.1.12 only list 9 files. The five missing sections from J.1.11 are SF33 (L.5.5.1.3), Key

Corporate POCs (L.5.5.1.4), Executive Summary (L.5.5.1.6), Proposal Master Table of Contents (L.5.5.1.7), Proposal Cross

Reference Matrixs (L.5.5.1.8), and Proposal Adequacy Checklist

(L.5.5.1.10).

What file does the government want these section requirements to go into? Or does the government want each of these requirements to be their owns files which is missing from

J.1.12?

Y

See Amendment 0001

Proposal File

Names -

Volume 1

Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.1.12 (p. 268) and

L.5.5.1.5 (p. 380)

Will USG allow offerors to submit the Reps and Certs in pdf format? If not, will the USG provide the Reps and Certs in MS

Word for offerors to complete? N/A

See Amendment 0003 for Word document version. Offerors should submit this in Word document format. Offerors may also include a

PDF version in addition to the Word document version.

Proposal File

Names -

Volume 1

Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.1.12 (p. 268) and

L.5.5.1.5 (p. 380)

Will the Government allow offerors to submit Reps and Certs

(Section K) as a PDF attachment? N/A

See response to #85 above.

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

Proposal File

Names -

Volume 1

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.12 (p. 268) and

L.5.5.1.8 (pg 380)

Section L.5.5.1.8 asks for the Cross Reference Matrix to be done in Excel but this file is not accounted for in J.1.12.

Is the Cross Reference Matrix supposed to be its own file within Volume I? Or if not which of the nine listed MS Word

Documents do you want this excel table integrated into?

Y

See Amendment 0001

Proposal File

Names -

Volume 6

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.12 Volume 1

(pg. 268) and section

L.5.5.5 (pg 387)

The J.1.12 Template for file names appears to be missing the

Glossary6.docx file name on the chart.

Will the government please confirm that a file for the Vol 6 Glossary should also exist separately?

Y

See Amendment 0001

Cover Letter

– Attachment

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.13 (p.269) and

L.5.5.1.1.1 (p. 380)

Should we put Not Applicable for both the DCMA and DCAA

POC lines on J.1.13 if our accounting system has not yet been audited?

N

Yes

Cover Letter

– Attachment

Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.1.13 (p.269) and

L.5.5.1.1.1 (p. 380)

“Evidence that proposal signatory is authorized to legally bind the

Offeror” What kind of “evidence” is acceptable by the

Government?

N

Signatory must be identified in System for

Award Management (SAM) as authorizied

Cover Letter

– Attachment

Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.1.13 (p.269) and

L.5.5.1.1.1 (p. 380)

What evidence is required to prove that the proposal signatory is authorized to legally bind the Offeror? N

See response to #90 above

Personnel

Security

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.15 (p. 271)

The sample does not require the “Key Position” proposed for the candidates. Can the contractor add a column for Key Position, or can the Government provide a new template with that column?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Past

Performance

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.19 Question B.3

(p. 276)

Has contractor management been proactive in ensuring linguists are paid regularly and on time?

Will the government please clarify how a customer would have accurate knowledge of a contractors payroll procedures?

N

This is a Past Performance Question, if valid linguist complaints were filed about not being paid, then the customer will likely have a record of linguist performance issues.

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

Annual Rate

Table

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.22 (p. 280)

STO Alpha Fixed Price Annual Rate Table is missing Base year column. Please confirm an additional column titled base year is required.

Y

See Amendment 0003

Annual Rate

Table

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.22 (p. 280)

The Table only shows rates for Option Year 1 through Option

Year 5 - should offeror add a Base Year? Y See Amendment 0003

Annual Rate

Table

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.22 (p. 280)

Will J.1.22 STO Alpha Fixed Price Annual Rate Table be evaluated? If so, how?

Y

See Amendment 0004

97 Program Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.22 (p. 280)

There are varying, layered quantities by linguist category on this table. Is the Government expecting different prices at different bands?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Annual Rate

Table

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.22 (p. 280)

Will the government confirm offerors should not include costs for Project Management Labor, ODCs, DBA, and travel in

Attachment J.1.22 STO Alpha Fixed Price Annual Rate Table?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Annual Rate

Table

Force Projection

(Alpha) J.1.22 (p. 280)

How does the government intend to use this information?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Compliance

Checklist -

Volume 1

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.24 (p. 283)

Volume 1, #17 and

L.5.5.1.13 (p. 381)

17. Small Business Subcontracting Plan (L.5.5.1.13)

Per the RFP L.5.5.1.13, SBSP applies only to offerors who are

"Other Than U.S. Small Businesses”, please clarify that #17 is not required of all offerors

N

Volume 1 applies to all offerors with the caveat in L.5.5.1.13 of RFP, which states "Small

Business Subcontracting Plan (applies only to offerors who are “Other Than U. S. Small

Businesses”)."

Proposal

Compliance

Checklist -

Volume 1

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.24 (p. 283)

Volume 1, #18 and

L.5.5.1.13.1.2 (p.

381)

18. Past Compliance with Subcontracting Plans (L.5.5.1.13.1.2)

Per the RFP L.5.5.1.13.1.2, Past Compliance with SP applies only to offerors who are both (1) Other Than U.S. Small Businesses and (2) have had prior contracts requiring SBSP… please clarify that #18 is not required of all offerors

See response to #100 above.

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

Proposal

Compliance

Checklist -

Volume 3

(T&S)

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.24 (p.283); C.2

(p.324); J.2.3

(p.348); L.5.5.2.1.2

(p.383)

L.5.5.2.1.2 requires responses for QCP for TO J.2.1 (Alpha) or

J.2.2 (Bravo). It does not require a response for J.2.3 (Charlie), however J.1.24, Proposal Compliance Checklist, lists 1c, Quality

Control Plan under Volume 3 – Technical (Applicable to Train and Sustain only [(C.2 and J.2.3]). Should this reference in

J.1.24 be deleted?

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Compliance

Checklist -

Volume 3

(FP) and

Volume 4

(T&S)

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.24 (p. 283), Volume 3/4

Percentage of Small Business Participation by Category

(L.5.5.3.1.4)

Percentage of Small Business Participation by Individual

Business (L.5.5.3.1.5)

Volume 3/4 Table of Contents (L.5.5.3.2.1)

Volume 3/4 Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms

(L.5.5.3.2.2)

Please confirm these references should be to sections L,5.5.3.1.3, L.5.5.3.1.4, L.5.5.3.3.1, and L.5.5.3.3.2 respectively.

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Compliance

Checklist -

Volume 5

(FP) and

Volume 6

(T&S)

Force Projection

(Alpha) and Train and Sustain (Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.24 (p. 283), Volume 5/6, #2

A statement regarding the offeror’s compliance with FAR 9.104-

1 (L.5.5.5.1.1.1)

- OR - Documentation requested in L.5.5.5.1.1.2

There are no sections L.5.5.5.1.1.1 and L.5.5.5.1.1.2. Please provide the correct references.

Y

See Amendment 0004

Proposal

Compliance

Checklist -

Volume 6

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.24 (p. 283), Volume 6, #5b

Technical Exhibit refers to CLIN0011

Will the government please clarify per L.5.5.4.6 Travel shall not be proposed for this effort?

N

L.5.5.5.4.6 Travel (CLIN X023). Travel shall not be proposed for this effort.

Proposal

Compliance

Checklist -

Volume 6

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie)

J.1.24 (p. 283), Volume 6, #5b and

L.5.5.5.4.5 (p. 387)

In section Volume 6 T&S it lists 5bTravel (L.5.5.5.4.5); This conflicts with L.5.5.5.4.6 Travel (CLIN X023). Travel shall not be proposed for this effort. Is the

Travel information needed for the T&S Price Proposal?

or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

Sample Task

Order

Technical

Exhibit

Train and Sustain

(Bravo and Charlie) J.2.3.2 (p. 352)

Technical Exhibit refers to CLIN0011 Please clarify that this TO does not relate to CLIN0011 Force Projection Mission Area

(DBA)

Y

See Amendment 0004

108 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.1.2 Sectioon 1.1, Figure 1 (p. 288)

The map shows Balkh Province but nowhere in the listing of

TAAC cities or locations is Mazar-e-Sharif or Balkh listed. Will the Government please clarify the actual locations for TAAC support to allow offerors to properly propose management and support structures for STO Alpha?

Y

See the STO A Technical Exhibit in

Amendment 0004.

109 Quality Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.1.2 Section 7.1 (p.

261)

This section cites that 3+ customer complaints within a PoP will be reported to the KO. Page 241 of the PRS table suggests no more than 5 validated complaints as the AQL standard. Could the government please clarify the standard for noncompliance (3 and above or once the number of complaints reaches 5)?

N

QASP Section 7.1 is a notice to the KO that there have been 3+ customer compliants so that more Government attention can be applyied to verify/validate the root cause of the complaints has been resolved so that the AQL is maintained.

110 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.2.1 Section 3.4 (p.

308)

The STOA PWS states "All other items, furnishings operational equipment, cleaning, and painting are a contractor responsibility".

Could the Government please confirm that these items, if applicable, should be included in ODCs CLIN X009?

N

Yes, this type of cost would be included in the

ODC CLIN. The offeror shall propose additional costs comensurarte with their technical solution which will be evaluated in accordance with sections L and M.

111 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.2.1 Section 3.4 (p.

308)

The STOA PWS states "Contractor will be required to provide its own commercial internet access to its Operation Center.

Contractor will be responsible for the procurement of items to properly equip personnel to effectively complete required services" Could the Government please confirm that the above-mentioned items should be included in ODCs CLIN X009?

See response to #110 above or T&S) & Task

Order

Citation Comment / Question

RFP

amended?

(Y/N or

N/A)

Government Response

If there are any discrepancies between this Q & A and the Solication (including Amendments), the language in the Solicition to include Amendments shall govern.

112 Program Force Projection

(Alpha)

J.2.1 Section 3.5 (p.

308)

"Billeting/Office Space. The gaining/supporting unit shall provide buildings for billeting of contractor’s linguist personnel.

Billeting and Office Space will be located on individual installations and forward operating bases (FOB). Contractor will be required to provide its own commercial internet access to its

Operation Center. Contractor will be responsible for the procurement of items to properly equip personnel to effectively complete required services. Assistant Contracting Officer

Representative (ACOR) will conduct a monthly inspection with regard to the billets adequacy and availability of life support and inform the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) of any corrective action as necessary."

Given the limited adequate internet connectivity options available in theater to provide connectively to the contractor's Operations Center, does the Government want the contractor to provide satellite internet connectivity to its central Operations Center and remote management sites?

N

Offerors shall not assume that Internet connectivity will be provided by the

Government.