Attachment_16_-_Questions_&_Responses_to_Solicitation_&_Amendment_0001.pdf

QUESTIONS & RESPONSES

SOLICITATION W91249-18-R-0001 & AMENDMENT 0001

1. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 1.11.4, Page 148 of 175 reads: All comments and/or questions must be submitted via a SINGLE email per Offeror, preferably in a Microsoft Word document attached to the e-mail. Submit to the point of contact in paragraph 1.11.2 above no later than 4:00p.m. EST on 20 April 2018. Does this statement mean offerors are only allowed to submit questions one time between now and 20 April?

Government Response: Questions are to be submitted in accordance with Section L of the solicitation.

2. Solicitation, Section L – 7.2.1, 7.3.6., Section M – 2.2.2.1 – Recency Assessment. An assessment of the past performance information will be made to determine if it is recent. To be recent, the effort must be substantially complete (80% or more) or must have been performed during the past three years from the date of issuance of this solicitation. Past performance information that fails this condition will not be evaluated.

a. The instructions in Section L require the offeror to provide a minimum of 3 references for relevant contracts performed during the past 3 years. Will the Government please clarify the statement in Section M that the effort must be substantially complete (80% or more) to be evaluated?

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0001. Paragraph 7.2.1 in Section L of the solicitation speaks to Relevancy. Paragraph 2.2.2.1 in Section M of the solicitation speaks to Recency, which states, “To be recent, the effort must be substantially complete (80% or more) or must have been performed during the past three years from the date of issuance of this solicitation.

b. Does the Government intend to limit past performance evaluations to only those efforts that have completed, for instance, at least 9.6 months (80%) of a 12-month period of performance?

Government Response: Please see Government’s response to question 2a.

3. Solicitation, Paragraph 8.2.2, Page 162 of 175 states “In order to maintain a minimum level of commonality between proposals, each offeror is required to complete (in entirety) the four (4) cost summary spreadsheets provided at Attachment 10. The cost summary spreadsheets shall be provided for the base effort and each option year.” We were unable to locate the four (4) cost summary spreadsheets in the provided Attachment 10 workbook, there is only one TAB labeled “Summary”. Secondly, as a summary spreadsheet is needed for the “base effort and each option year” should there be five (5) in total?

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0002, Section L, Paragraph 8.1.2.3

4. In the provided Attachment 10 workbook each Period TAB (Base, OY1, OY2, OY3, and OY4) this was somewhat confusing as there are Cost only CLINS labeled in the TABS that seem to ask for the associated Labor. Secondly, the government provided template stops at CLIN 0017 and we did not see any guidance in the provided instructions suggesting offerors should add the remaining Labor CLINS (CLIN – 0019, 0021, 0023, 0025, 0027, 0029, 0030, 0031, and 0033)?

Government Response: Please see Attachment 10 issued with Amendment 0001, each period tab consists of labor CLINS only.

5. It appears that Clause 252.244-7001 is incorporated because Clause 52.244-2 is incorporated.

Would the government consider removing the requirement for an acceptable purchasing system (252.244-7001) as long as the contractor obtains the consent to subcontract IAW 52.244-2 as this presents an undue burden on 8(a) small businesses?

Government Response: FAR 52.244-2(c) states, “If the Contractor does not have an approved purchasing system, consent to subcontract is required for any subcontract that- (1) Is of the cost-reimbursement, time-and-materials, or labor-hour type.”

6. Amendment 0001, Page 32, 7.0 Volume III – Factor 2: Past Performance and Page 34, 8.0 Volume IV – Factor 3: Cost/Price. The two volumes listed above include a “Factor” designation in the title, while Volumes I and II do not. Please clarify if the Government intends for the “Factor” designation to be included in the titles of Volumes I – IV.

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 6.0 in Section L issued with Amendment 0002

7. Amendment 0001, Page 35 lists the title of Volume IV as “Cost/Price” while Page 25 lists the title of Volume IV as “Price.” Please clarify the title the Government prefers contractors to use for the proposal.

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 3.1.1 in Section L issued with Amendment 0002

8. Amendment 0001, Page 34, 7.2.3 states the following: “All Offerors shall submit information substantiating the Offerors’ past performance in complying with FAR 52.219-8, “Utilization of Small Business”, maximizing opportunities for U.S. small business subcontractors. “However, the chart for Volume IV proposal instructions on Page 32 does not indicate where the above-referenced information shall be housed in the proposal. Please provide instructions as to where in the proposal contractors should provide the Utilization of Small Business Information.

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 7.1.1 in Section L issued with Amendment 0002

9. Amendment 0001, Sections 2.1.2 and 2.1.6 on Pages 23 and 24 respectively, state that each volume shall contain a detailed and a Glossary. However, Page 27-Section 5.0 does not list a Table of Contents and Glossary for Volume I. Please clarify if a Table of Contents and Glossary should be included in Volume I.

Government Response: Yes, for each volume; please see Paragraphs 2.1.2, 2.1.4, and 2.1.6 in Section L issued with Amendment 0001

10. Amendment 0001, Section L, Paragraph 6.3, Page 29, indicates that Volume II requires a List of Tables and Drawings but does not state if this document will be counted in the page limit.

Section 2.1.2 and 2.1.6 on Pages 23 and 24 respectively, also provides information regarding page limitations for each volume, but does not indicate if the List of Tables and Drawings is counted towards the volume page limit. Please clarify if the List of Tables and Drawings is counted toward Volume II’s page limit.

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 2.1.2 in Section L issued with Amendment 0001

11. Solicitation and Amendment 0001, Section L, Paragraph 8.1.2.2.b states that section 9.2.7.4 contains requirements for detailed basis of estimate narratives, but 9.2.7.4 is not provided.

Would the Government please provide?

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0002 for update

12. Solicitation and Amendment 0001, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.8.6 - The government requires that “… Data file should be .XLS file format (MS - Excel 2013 or earlier)…” and that “Files shall be in read-only format, using PDF files. All price breakdown information to aide in the cost/price evaluation shall be submitted in Microsoft Office Excel.” Per Section L, Table 3.1.1 – Proposal Organization of the RFP, the government requires digital format for Price to be submitted using “MS Excel” for “Digital Format.” These requirements appear to contradict each other. Does the government intend for the offeror to submit excel and pdf version of the Cost/price model?

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0002 for update

13. Solicitation, Section M, Paragraph 1.2 - Relative to Rejection of Proposals in the RFP, the Government States that “The Government may reject any proposal that is evaluated and determined to be unacceptable, fails to comply with the contract terms and conditions, or is excessively high or low in price.” What metric will be used to determine if a price is “…excessively high or low…”? If an offeror deviates from baseline staff through application of innovations and best business practices that leads to a reduced staffing, and total price, could this endanger the offeror of being considered “excessively low in price” and therefore having their proposal rejected, if discussions are not held, and therefore a competitive range not established?

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 2.5 in Section M issued with Amendment 0001

14. Solicitation, Section L, Vol III, Factor 2: Past Performance, Paragraphs 7.1.1 & 7.3.5 – Paragraph 7.1.1 provides a page limit for Vol III, Past Performance - the Summary Page (5 pages), Organizational Structure Change History (3 pages), and Specific Relevant Contract

Reference Sheets (5 pages for each). Yet Paragraph 7.3.5 allows an offeror to submit up to 8 relevant contract reference sheets. With these page limitations, an offeror may only be able to include four past performance write-ups if 5 pages are necessary for each reference to ensure the Government has sufficient detail in vetting both the past performance relevance and confidence ratings of an offeror. Would the Government consider increasing the Volume III page limitations to 48 pages?

Government Response: Please see table in Paragraph 7.1.1 of Section L issued with Amendment 0001, which shows the Exclusions from Page Limitation

15. Section F of Solicitation - Deliveries or Performance, p. 89 of 175 – p 96 of 175 – Delivery Dates for the following are incorrect: 0033 30-SEP-2019, 1032 30-SEP-2020, 2032 30-SEP- 2021, 3032 30-SEP-2022, 4032 30-SEP-2023. Can the government please update delivery dates for CLINS 0033, 1032, 2032, 3032, and 4032?

Government Response: No change is required, these are Contractor Manpower Reporting CLINS; please see Solicitation

16. Amendment 0001, 6.3.3 TAB C, SUBFACTOR 3: ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING PLAN; 6.3.3.3.b.2, page 32 of 46 - If personnel have not been identified by name yet, the offerors shall provide the duties and responsibilities to be performed in that position and what experience and capabilities they will be looking for in filling these positions. Can job descriptions be excluded from the page count?

Government Response: Job descriptions shall be included in page count. Please see Paragraph

3.1.1 in Section L issued with Amendment 0002

17. Amendment 0001, Section L, page 26 of 46, 3.1.1 Proposal Volumes Organization, Number of Copies, and Page Limits; Table 3.1.1 – Proposal Organization, IV Price. Digital Format MS Excel. Can the offeror submit the electronic copy of their Price Narrative as a supporting documents in PDF or MS Word format?

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0002

18. Amendment 0001, Section L, page 36 of 46, Paragraph 8.1.2.2, Tab 4 – Cost and Supporting Information. The Government has stated the ceiling cost for Other Direct Costs (ODC) and Material, fee will not be paid on materials and ODCs; funding and ceiling amount will be included on the contract when awarded. Is the government referring to Reimbursable CLINS 0003, 0005, 0008, 0010, 0012, 0014, 0016, 0018, 0020, 0022, 0024, 0026, 0028, 0032 in the Base Period and X002, X004, X007, X009, X011, X013, X015, X017, X019, X021, X023, X025, X027, X031 in all Option Periods? Will the government allow the offeror to include indirect costs such as overhead and G&A costs in these items?

Government Response: Fee and Overhead is not allowed on any of the Base and Option year Supplies and Materials CLINs.

19. Amendment 0001, Section L, page 37 of 46, Paragraph 8.1.2.12, Tab 4 – Cost and Supporting Information. In order to expedite the evaluation, offerors (prime and sub) are requested to provide a copy of their cost and pricing proposal, in the same format required by this RFP, to their cognizant DCAA office upon submission of the proposal to the Contracting Officer. The offeror shall provide information regarding its cognizant DCAA office, to include point of contact, telephone number and email address. Please clarify if this a requirement for the Subcontractor if they elected to submit their proposal with the Prime’s.

Government Response: Yes, please see Paragraph 8.1.2.12 in Section L issued with Amendment 0001

20. Performance Work Statement, Paragraph 1.5, Page 4 of 172, the period of performance is not accurate. Would the government please provide an updated period of performance?

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0002

21. Solicitation, Section L Paragraphs .2.1.1 and 2.1.4, Page149 of 175, Bullets are used to itemize lists, summarize steps and for other reasons that maximize the effectiveness of the message that the author is trying to get across to the reader. 1.5 line spaced bullets reduce the readability and degrade the message that is trying to be conveyed. Will the Government consider allowing bullets to be single spaced?

Government Response: Please see Paragraphs 2.1.1 and 2.1.4 in Section L issued with Amendment 0001

22. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.1, Page149 of 175, For readability purposes, will the Government consider excluding headings from the 1.5 line spacing requirement?

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 2.1.1 in Section L issued with Amendment 0001

23. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 5.1, Pages 153-154 of 175, states “required to submit… Section B, Section K, and Section I.” TAB C is Section B and TAB D is Section K. Currently, there is no allocated TAB for Section I. Will the Government please assign a position for Section I in Volume I?

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 5.1 of Section L issued with Amendment 0002

24. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraphs 7.1.1 and 7.4, Pages 158 and 160 of 175, the table in section 7.1.1 excludes Past Performance Questionnaires (PPQs) from the page limit.

a. Will the Government confirm that the PPQs do not go in the volume?

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 7.1.1 and 7.2.1.1 of Section L issued with Amendment 0001, which state it is excluded from page limitation.

b. Will the Government confirm that the requirement is for a “List of Questionnaire Recipients” and not the PPQs?

Government Response: Yes, please see Paragraph 7.2.2 of Section L issued with Amendment 0001

25. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 7.1.1 and 7.3.4, Pages 158 and 159 of 175, In order for offerors to be compliant, will the Government clarify where the Organization Structure Change History goes? Does it go after the Summary page (per L.7.1.1) or after the Client Authorization Letters (per L.7.3.4)?

Government Response: Please see paragraph 7.1.1 of Section L issued with Amendment 0001

26. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraphs 5.1, 6.1, 7.1 and 8.0, Pages 153, 154, 158 and 161 of 175, Volumes I, II and III are very specific as to how each volume is to be marked. Specifically, the three volumes “must be clearly marked “VOLUME X – VOLUME TITLE, RFP W91249-18-R- 0001.”” There are no such instructions for Volume IV – FACTOR 3: COST/PRICE. Will the Government clarify whether Volume IV should be clearly marked in any particular way?

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 8.0 of Section L issued with Amendment 0002

27. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 8.1.2.2, Page 161 of 175, Typically there are no amounts included on the SF33. Will the Government clarify the requirement in L.8.1.2.2: “The offeror shall ensure that the information submitted in this volume is consistent with and fully supports the amounts set forth in the SF33 and continuation sheets”?

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 8.0 in Section L issued with Amendment 0001.

Ensure the amounts in the cost/price volume is consistent (agree and not different/contradictory) with the amounts provided in the SF33.

28. Attachment 13, Page 2, item #2 requests “Completion Date/Delivery Schedule.” Item #5 requests the same information. Additionally, the instructions on page 1 do not correspond to the items listed on pages 2 – 4 and are also missing instructions for some of the items therein. Will the Government please revise the attachment to ensure all instructions are included, that they correspond with the items on pages 2 and if possible, remove any duplicated requests?

Government Response: Please see Attachment 13 issued with Amendment 0002

29. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 6.3.2.a, Page 156 of 175 Section M, Paragraph 2.1.2.b, Page 170 of 175 and PWS C.1.6.1, Page 9, (PWS) Key personnel resumes and position descriptions for key personnel will take up a considerable amount of pages within Volume II - Mission Capability. Will the Government consider excluding the Key personnel resumes and position descriptions from the Volume II 75 page limit?

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 3.1.1 in Section L issued with Amendment 0002;

Page limit for Volume II has been changed from 75 pages to 150 pages

30. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 7.3.5, Page 160 of 175, states, “Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheet – Sheets shall be in accordance with Past Performance Questionnaire Attachment and are limited to five (5) pages per reference (See Attachment 13).” Is the Offeror required to use the Relevant Contract Reference Sheets as provided, or may we put the required information into our own template? Will the Government confirm that the first page on Attachment 13 with instructions does not count toward the five page limit?

Government Response: Yes, the offeror is required to use Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheet (Attachment 13) and the first page with instructions will not count.

31. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 7.4, Page 160 of 175, For the contracts identified on each Specific Relevant Contract Reference, the Offeror shall forward a copy of the Past Performance Questionnaire to the points of contact responsible for monitoring performance under such contracts.” Will the Government confirm that only one Past Performance Questionnaire is to be sent to one point of contact per reference?

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 7.2.1.1 in Section L issued with Amendment 0001

32. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraphs 2.1.1, Pages 149 of 175; Paragraph 3.1.1, Page 152 of 175, Table 3.1.1 shows Volume II – Mission Capability as having a 75 page limit. Section L.2.1.1 requires text lines to have 1.5 line spacing. Within the last year, both Fort Benning and Yuma Proving Grounds have issued RFPs (Solicitation #W911SF-16-R-0012, W9124R-15-R- 0001 respectively) that started out with extremely similar requirements. Both solicitations adjusted the page limitation to allow for offerors to clearly articulate their solutions and provide the vast amount of information required in this volume. In order for offerors to properly address all the requirements in sections L and M in a compliant matter, will the Government increase Volume II – Mission Capability page limit to 100 pages and single spaced.

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 3.1.1 in Section L issued with Amendment 0002;

Page limit for Volume II has been changed from 75 pages to 150 pages

33. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.7, Page 149 of 175; Paragraph 2.1.4, Page 150 of 175, There are various requirements for the headers and footers such as company name, RFP number, etc. In addition to that offerors need to include disclaimer language. Will the Government consider including headers and footers into 2.1.4 “Tables, Charts, Graphs, and Figures” so as to allow headers and footers to be no smaller than Times New Roman 10 point font?

Government Response: The language will remain as is per Amendment 0001; however, headers and footers will be at the offeror’s discretion.

34. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 7.2.1, Page 159 of 175, Per the draft Solicitation the Government has determined that in order for a past performance to be considered recent it shall not go back any further than three (3) years from the submittal date of proposals. The Government has also stated that there will be a tradeoff for technically acceptable proposals that places significant importance on past performance.

Section M, Paragraph 2.2.2.1, the Government has further defined recency as a contract that is 80% or greater complete or must have been performed during the past three (3) years. Our understanding of this criteria is that the project must be in progress and 80% completed or 100% completed within the past three (3) years to be compliant. Given the importance of past performance to the source selection criteria we feel that this is highly restrictive and will not allow offerors to properly present their full capabilities depth of experience and the quality of services that they have delivered to their customers. To demonstrate how restrictive this is, we present the following: “Under this recency criteria, an offeror could have successfully completed a highly relevant U.S. Army DPW contract and been re-awarded a follow-on five (5) year contract for the same work, but if they had not completed the fourth year of performance for that follow on effort the entire project (both contracts) would have to be excluded from submission in this proposal. The original contract would be outside of the three year window and the current contract would be below the 80% completion requirement.”

Offeror’s Recommendation: “Within the last year, both Fort Benning and Yuma Proving Grounds have issued extremely similar RFPs (Solicitation #W911SF-16-R-0012, W9124R-15-R- 0001 respectively), however, the recency requirement allowed the contractor to go back five years from the submission date of the proposal. We recommend adjusting this criteria (similar to what was done for Benning and Yuma) to defining recency as contracts that are fully completed or in progress for nine or more months but within five years. Under this criteria, the entire example above will be able to be presented to the Government to assist them in fully evaluating the capabilities of the offeror.”

Government Response: IAW FAR Part 42.1503(g) Agencies shall use the past performance information in PPIRS that is within three years (six for construction and architect-engineer contracts) of the completion of performance of the evaluated contract or order, and information contained in the Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information System (FAPIIS) e.g., terminations for default or cause. Therefore, wording will not change.

35. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 7.4, Page 160 of 175, Past Performance. Will the Government accept CPARS in lieu of PPQs? The contractor has no ability to compel the Government reference to provide the PPQ and the CPAR is considered the official record of contract performance.

Government Response: CPARS will not be accepted in lieu of PPQ; however, you may send it in addition to your PPQ(s).

36. Solicitation, Section B, The CLIN structure includes CPFF CLINs for labor, and Cost CLINs for supplies and materials. The CLIN description states “This is a non-fee bearing Cost Reimbursable CLIN and shall be priced as cost only with a Not-to Exceed amount of $___, which refers to fee (i.e. profit) not allowable indirect costs or burdens.” Will the government confirm that where a contractor’s Cost Accounting system normally allocates indirect costs such as G&A or Material Handling onto direct materials, that remains an allowable cost for invoicing?

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0001; Fee and Overhead costs are not allowed on the supplies and materials CLINs.

37. Solicitation, Section B, Multiple CLINS, In some Cost CLINS the term Estimated Cost is used but in others the term Net Amount is used. Should all Cost CLINS, no matter which period use the same term? If so, please provide an amended Section B.

Government Response: The term “Estimated Cost” is reflected on Cost CLINS. The term “Net Amount” is reflected on the Contractor Manpower Reporting Firm-Fixed Price (FFP) CLINS.

38. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.8.5, 151 of 175; Paragraph 3.1.1, Page 152 of 175,

2.1.8.5 states, “Each volume of the electronic proposal shall be in its own subdirectory on the CD-ROM, sequentially labeled Volume I through Volume III. Volume IV, Price, shall be submitted on a separate CD-ROM.” Table 3.1.1 requires each volume to be submitted individually on its own CD-ROM (2 CD-ROMS per volume). Will the Government please clarify if eight (8) CD-ROMS are required (two for each volume) or four (4), two (2) containing Volumes I – III and two (2) containing Volume IV?

Government Response: Two (2) CD-ROMS shall contain Volumes I thru III, which shall be in its own folder on the CD-ROM and labeled as Volume I, Volume II, or Volume III. Two (2) separate CD-ROMS shall be submitted for Cost/Price. Therefore, a total of 4 CD-ROMS shall be submitted.

39. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.8.7, Page 150 of 175; Paragraph 2.1.5 thru 2.1.6, Page 151 of 175; 2.1.8.7 states, “Proposal Table of Contents file. This file serves as a table of contents for the proposal information. Also, include the list of key terms used in the proposal with their definitions, and a list of acronyms and abbreviations used in the proposal.” L.2.1.5 and L.2.1.6 require each volume to have its own table of contents and glossary. Where does this “Proposal

Table of Contents file” go? Is it embedded in one of the volumes? Does it get its own CD- ROM and binder? Will the Government please clarify the requirements?

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0001, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.5

40. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 5.1.1, Page 153 of 175 This paragraph states, “See paragraph 10.0 of Section L – Instruction, Conditions and Notices to Offerors.” Section L doesn’t have a paragraph 10.0. Please clarify the reference location.

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0002 for update

41. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 3.1.1, Page 152 of 175 Table 3.1.1 shows that for Volume IV, Price we are to submit in a Digital Format of Microsoft Excel. Will the Government allow offerors to submit their cost or pricing information narrative using Microsoft Word instead of Microsoft Excel?

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 3.1.1 in Section L issued with Amendment 0002

42. Solicitation, Section L, Paragraph 8.1.1, Page 161 of 175, which states, “All information relating to the proposed price including all required supporting documentation must be included in the section of the proposal designated as the Cost/Price volume. Under no circumstances shall this information and documentation be included elsewhere in the proposal.” However, the entire Section B is required in Volume I. In order for offerors to be compliant will the Government update that language to say “except for Section B in Volume I – General & Contract Documentation or something similar?

Government Response: Please see Amendment 0002 for update

43. Amendment 0001, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.1, Page 23 of 46 states: “Text type shall be Times New Roman. Except for the reproduced sections of the RFP document, the text size (font) shall be no less than 12-point with normal proportional spacing. Text lines shall have 1.5 line spacing.” Given the large amount of data and narrative required to be presented within the proposal, would the Government consider changing the requirement to 10 point font or to single

(1) line spacing, or both? This would allow offerors to better utilize the allowable page count to best present their solution for the RFP requirements.

Government Response: Amendment 0001, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.1 remains unchanged

44. Amendment 0001, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.4, Page 24 of 46 Tables, Charts, Graphs And Figures states, “For tables, charts, graphs and figures, the text shall be no smaller than Times New Roman 10 point.” Given the large amount of data required to be presented within the proposal, would the Government consider changing the requirement to 8 point font for tables, charts, graphs and figures? 8 point font is easily read when used on 8 ½ by 11 or 11 x 17 sized paper. This would allow offerors to better utilize the allowable page count to best present their solution for the RFP requirements.

Government Response: Amendment 0001, Section L, Paragraph 2.1.4 remains

45. Amendment 0001, Section L, Paragraphs 7.1.1 and 7.2.1.1, Page 32 - 33 of 46, Provides a table that states the Volume Total Number of Pages is to be 25 pages, but excludes Past Performance Questionnaires and Specific Relevant Contract Reference Sheets.

a. We can find no requirement to provide Past Performance Questionnaires as part of the submitted volume. Please confirm that only a summary of the list of Past Performance Questionnaire recipients is required to be submitted and is not subject to the pages included in the 25 page volume limitation.

Government Response: Please see Paragraph 7.2.1.1 of Section L issued with Amendment

b. Paragraph 7.2.1.1 states that the maximum allowable number of Specific Relevant Contract Reference is a total of 8 between the prime offeror and the proposed subcontractors performing 10% or greater of the efforts. Each is limited to 5 pages. Based on this, we are assuming that total allowable pages for this volume could be as many as 66 pages. 25 for the Volume mandated supporting documents, 40 pages for Specific Relevant Contract Reference (8x5) and one for the summary of Past Performance Questionnaire recipients. Is this a correct assumption?

Government Response: Please see table in Paragraph 7.1.1 of Section L issued with Amendment 0001, which shows the Exclusions from page limitation. The page limitation remains 25 pages.