2-_Consolidated_Responses_to_Industry_(Amendment_0009).pdf

Government’s Response to Industry Questions Amendment 0009

Question Number Reference Industry Question Government Response

1. RFP The current RFP Amendment

0008/0009 does not contain a fully conformed Section A – Section K.

While all RFP sections are critical, of particular concern is the absence of a fully updated Section B – Supplies or Services and Prices.

In order to ensure RFP compliance, and to ensure that Offerors are preparing for contracts discussion with a full Model Contract, will the Government please provide an updated RFP Sections A-K?

A conformed copy of the solicitation that includes all sections is provided with Amendment 0009.

2. Question 101, Aug 12, 2016 Q&A; Reference:

Technical Exhibit D – Specific Relevant Contracts Sheet

The government directs Offerors to Amendment 0006 (0007) for an updated Exhibit D, in which the Government “corrected the number to ensure format matches instructions on document.” However, no updated Exhibit D has been provided, and the most current Exhibit D is that which was provided in the initial Solicitation on April 1, 2016.

Please provide an updated Exhibit D.

Technical Exhibit D has not been updated. The offeror shall follow the submission format beginning on page 2 of Technical Exhibit D that was provided on April 1, 2016.

3. PWS Amendment 09, page 78, paragraph C.5.3., GENERAL AND

INFORMATION

TECHNOLOGY

The introductory paragraph of C.5.3 states: “Provide sufficient staffing and implement government-approved processes to accomplish all tasks associated with the following

See Amendment 0009. The reference to systems initialization has been removed from the PWS at paragraph C.5.3.

functions: Take Home Packages (THP), Facility Monitoring, Automated Data Process (ADP) Assistance Center, Briefing Production and Presentation, Webmaster, Data Management and Library and Systems Initialization.”

The PWS subsections that provide the specific requirements cover all the above functions except for Systems Initialization. Please confirm that Systems Initialization is no longer a requirement since no detailed requirements or description are provided in the PWS.

4. RFP amendment 08, page 22, Section M, Evaluation Factor 2, b., ii, Methodology for Accomplishing Base Support Functions - Staffing

Per M - “ii. Staffing Plan. Evaluation includes the proposed staffing plan that demonstrates a thorough understanding of the requirement to provide the required personnel, equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision and other items and nonpersonal services necessary to perform JRTC mission support as defined in the PWS.”

The inclusion of “equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision and other items and nonpersonal services” goes beyond staffing and these items are not included in the

Please see Amendment 0009. Section M has been updated to reflect the correct information that was included in Section L.

proposal instructions within Tab F2, Evaluation Factor #2, Technical Approach.

We request the government remove “equipment, supplies, facilities, transportation, tools, materials, supervision and other items and nonpersonal services” (and keep “supervision”) where cited in Section M or, alternatively revise Section L to indicate where such information is to be included.

5. RFP, Page 5, Section L, 1.f, Vol II, Tab B, Proposal Preparation Instruction/Page Limit Exclusions, Exceptions/ Assumptions

Paragraph f. excludes from the 125 page limit multiple items: front matter content (cover, cover sheet, Table of Contents, List of Tables and Drawings, Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms, and Cross Reference Matrix) in Tabs A, C, and D.

However, Tab B, Exceptions/ Assumptions, which is part of the front matter before the evaluated Factors F1 and F2, is not listed in Paragraph f.

Please confirm that Tab B Exceptions/Assumptions is not included in the Page Limit.

Exceptions and Assumptions ARE included in the page count.

6. RFP per Amendment 8, page 23, Section M, Vol.

II, Evaluation Factor #2, c Methodology for

This section states, in part (underline added): “The Offeror’s ability to successfully staff and execute two sample vignettes will be evaluated.

Pending response on final amendment.

Accomplishing Sample Vignettes for Training Rotations.

Each proposal will be evaluated on its ability to demonstrate a clear understanding of the contractual requirements and a corresponding plan to fulfill those performance requirements in the most effective and efficient manner possible for each rotational support functional task area. With respect to the Offeror’s understanding of the requirements, the clear identification of all support staff/role players and corresponding hours will be evaluated;”

The phrase “for each rotational support functional task area” appears to be in error based on (a) the instructions for response in Section L, which focus on role play only and not the full set of functional areas and

(b) the Government’s response to question 8, which states “Support staff/role players relate to the functional task area of role play.

Support staff/role players are limited to role play. The term support element was removed.” We request that the underlined wording in Section M be removed since it addresses content not otherwise required by the RFP or the Q&As for the Vignettes.

7. C.1.3.2. C.1.3.2 - Rotational Exercises states that JRTC typically hosts ten standard rotations exercises per year.

However, Technical Exhibit F - 16- 17 CTC Calendars indicate only 9 standard rotation exercises will be conducted within FY16 and FY17.

Please confirm the required number of standard rotational exercises the offeror should propose for each contract/option period.

Offerors shall follow the PWS requirements.

10 standard rotational exercised should be proposed in accordance with AR 350-50-2.

8. Amendment 8/9, page 28, C.1.14.2.13, (Level II) LTP Signal/Net Operations Coach

The amendment states: “The Contractor shall designate a LTP Signal/Net Operations Coach for performance under this contract. The LTP Signal/Net Operations Coach shall possess, at a minimum, military experience at the multi-functional Brigade or Combat Arms Brigade level. The Government requires the above qualifications; however, a MEL 4 graduate and experience as an Army Service School instructor/small group leader, or as a CTC OCT is desired.” However, in PWS paragraph C.5.5.2.1, page 88 the Signal/Net Operations Coach is crossed out and a Ground Cavalry Squadron – 1 added. If it is the intent to delete the Signal/Net Operations Coach requirement and add a Ground Cavalry Squadron Coach, we recommend deleting the requirement

Please see updated PWS in Amendment 0009.

The Signal/Net Operations Coach has been removed, and the Ground Cavalry Squadron Coach has been added to paragraph C.1.14.2.13.

in C.1.14.2.13 and adding the Ground Cavalry Squadron Coach to Level II personnel along with the required/desired qualifications.

9 RFP per Amendment 8, page 23, Section M, Vol.

II, Evaluation Factor #5, For this factor, the last paragraph, last sentence states: “...however, for purposes of total evaluated cost calculation, the vignette costs will NOT be added to the overall total evaluated cost (comprised of the CLIN amounts as described above)."

Please clarify whether the Government intends for this sentence to refer to just vignette 2, or to both vignettes.

See Amendment 0009. The identified paragraph refers to both vignettes. The term “vignette costs” has been changed to “the cost of the vignettes.”

10 Amendment 8/9, page 25, C.1.14.1.3., (Level I) Leader Training Program (LTP) Senior Brigade Coach

For this position, the amendment deletes the requirement for a Brigadier General (BG) or military equivalent, but still requires experience as a Deputy Commanding General (DCG) for a Division. Is it the Government’s desire to have a BG/DCG qualified individual filling this position or a COL/BDE CDR qualified individual?

See Amendment 0009. PWS paragraph C.1.14.1.3 has been updated.

11. RFP, Section A, SF33, Sec 9; Section L.1.c, Proposal Volumes, page 5, page 1, 9, Solicitation

Please confirm Offerors shall submit their proposals in accordance with the instructions provided in Section L (page 5) indicating the number of copies required. The SF33 Section 9 indicates that “Sealed offers in original and 6 copies for furnishing the supplies or services in the

Offerors are to follow the instructions set forth in Section L. Block 9 does not allow for multiple entries per volume. Please follow the instructions at Section L for the number of copies that shall be submitted for each volume.

Schedule will be received…”.

Section L indicates a varying number of originals + copies by volume.

Suggest the Government provide an updated SF33 which leaves the number of copies in Section 9 “blank” or update the instructions in Section L to reflect the desired copies.

12. Page Limit Exclusions, RFP Amendment 6 dated 15 Aug, revised Proposal Instructions 1.f;

Government’s Final Response to Industry Q&A – #1.

Proposal instructions, paragraph 1.f, Page Limit Exclusions, clearly state that Labor Category Descriptions (V.II Tab F2-b) and Manpower Matrices (V.II Tab F2-d.iv) are exempt from page count.

The Government modified the answer to Question 1 since the draft answer and now includes the sentence “Labor categories listed under the basis of estimates shall be included in the 125 page limit.”

Manpower matrices are an essential component of basis of estimate and include division of labor by labor category, number of personnel proposed for each labor category, employment status, and required skill level. The addition to Government Answer #1 is confusing as both

Both Labor Category Descriptions (Volume II, Tab F1-c), and Manpower Matrices (Volume II, Tab F2-d.iv) are excluded from page count as described in the proposal preparation instructions of section L of the solicitation.

Labor Category Descriptions and Manpower Matrices are already excluded from page count. It is unclear what has changed and what labor category information should now be included in page count.

Please provide clarification as to the Government’s intent as expressed by the addition to the Government’s Answer to question #1.

13. Employee Compensation

Plan, Final Response to Industry Q&A, #108;

Volume II, Mission Capability, second paragraph; RFP, Proposal Content, Volume II, page 8 of 28, second paragraph, second to last sentence states:

“The Mission Capability Volume shall not contain any pricing data.”

The answer to question 108 simply states that the Compensation Plan will be evaluated in Evaluation Factor #1, implying that it should be located in the offeror’s Volume II, Tab f1: Evaluation Factor #1 – Management Approach.

However the RFP clearly states the Mission Capability Volume “shall not contain any pricing data”. Since the compensation plan includes substantial price related data, the two references would appear to be in conflict. Standard industry practice typically requires the Compensation Plan to be submitted in the Cost Volume for these reasons.

The compensation Plan will be evaluated in Evaluation Factor #1 – Management approach as it will be used to ensure high employee retention as stated in the solicitation.

The Plan should not contain any pricing related information and it will not be excluded from the page count.

Additionally, a complete employee Compensation Plan for a large services program will typically be 25-50 pages to include all the supporting data and would not be easily reviewed by technical evaluators.

a. Where should the Offeror physically include the employee Compensation Plan within their proposal?

b. Since the Compensation Plan will contain pricing data (i.e., salary information for labor categories), should the offeror provide this plan with any pricing data redacted to insure we are compliant with Volume 2 instructions regarding proposal content?

c. If the Compensation Plan is to be included in the Mission Capability Volume, will it be exempt from page count?

14. Technical Exhibit D –

Specific Relevant The answer to question #101 states “See Amendment 0005, corrected the number to ensure format matches

See Response to Question #2.

Contracts Sheet, Q&A #101 instructions on document.” This answer implies that there is a corrected TE D but no such document was included in the Amendment.

Would the Government please clarify if there is a new TE-D and provide the corrected copy?

15. Labor Categories and Wage Determination, Q & A #5 & #46

In addition to the WD referenced a CBA is provided for the labor categories of General Clerk III, Fire Marker I and Fire Marker II which is effective through 30 June 2018.

Is it the intent that Offerors use the CBA rates for the entire contract period?

Yes, the CBA is to be used. Once a new CBA has be negotiated it will be incorporated into the resultant contract.

16. Vignette Costs, Q & A #9 And #109 and Amended Section M, Factor 5 Cost

The Government amended Section M, Factor 5 Cost to add evaluation of the Vignette 1 and 2 costs.

a. Will Section L be amended to provide instructions regarding the Vignette Cost Proposals?

b. Please clarify how the Government will evaluate the Costs proposed for Vignettes 1 and 2.

Instructions to the costs of the Vignettes are on page 17 of Amendment 0007.

How the government will be evaluating the costs of the Vignettes are on page 27 of the Amendment 0007.

As stated on Page 27 of Amendment 0007, “The vignette cost proposal will be evaluated for completeness, adequacy, and consistence with the overall proposal; however, for purposes of total evaluated cost calculation, the vignette costs will NOT be added to the overall

c. Will the Government use the Vignette 2 proposed costs or the “plug” number provided for the MRE for purposes of the cost evaluation.

total evaluated cost (comprised of the CLIN amounts as described above).”

17. Phase-Out, Q&A 110 and

PWS C.1.11.2.1

The Government response to Q&A 110 states that Phase Out is included in CLIN 4005 Option Year IV Schedule B.

Based on the PWS Phase Out requirements the work force will be reduced during the last 60 days of Option Year IV.

Does the Government agree that the total hours and dollars will be lower for Option Year IV than for Option Years I, II & III?

It is up to the offeror to propose their solution for phase-in and all options years.

18. NTC, RFP Amendment 0007, PWS dated 25 August 2016

Contractor is required to provide SOF support at the National Training Center in California. Amendment 0007 did not provide the applicable DOL Wage Determination for the NTC in California.

Will the government please provide the applicable DOL Wage Determination for the National Training Center in California?

Please see amendment 0009. The applicable wage determination for the NTC area has been added.

19. Compensation Plan and Subcontractors, Section B, Amendment 0001 and

The above amendments to the solicitation made changes to the Section B, but no conformed Schedule B has

A conformed copy of the solicitation is provided with Amendment 0009.

Amendment 0006; Section L, Proposal Content, Volume I been issued. Section L Volume I requires a completed Section B to be included at Tab C.

Since contractors are required to include a completed Section B in our submission, will the government provide a conformed Section B incorporating all changes made to date?

20. Compensation Plan and Subcontractors, Amendment 0007, Section L, Volume V, Tab B Cost, page 17 of 27; Section L, Clauses Incorporated by Reference, FAR 52.222- 46, Evaluation of Compensation for Professional Employees

The above-referenced section states that “At a minimum, the Offeror is required to support subcontracts to the same level of detail and information as required from the prime Offeror.” Offerors are required to submit a compensation plan in accordance with FAR 52.222-46.

Are subcontractors required to submit a Compensation Plan as part of their proprietary proposal submission?

No, subcontractors are not required to submit a Compensation Plan as part of their proprietary proposal submission