Cont. Compiled Questions for Solicitation W9124D20R0016.pdf

Cont. Compiled Questions for Solicitation W9124D20R0016

Information herein are corrections and addresses to questions and answers per attachment title (Compiled Questions for Solicitation W9124D20R0016)

Reference: Section SF 33, Paragraph Block 12, Page 1

Question 4: What is the preferred delivery method for the Government? Does the Government prefer a commercial carrier, and which carrier is preferred: FEDEX, UPS, or USPS? Does Fort Knox have any restrictions or considerations for a commercial carrier?

Answer 4: Electronic/email copies will be accepted. Accepting electronic mail (email) submission only (PDF, Word and Excel files [no zip files] as instructed within the RFP. No requirement for hardcopy (binder) and CD submission. Offeror shall e-mail proposal to Karen Keys at karen.e.keys.civ@mail.mil and cc John Haarala at john.p.haarala.civ@mail.mil. Hand carried, United States Postal Services, commercial delivery or fax copies will not be accepted.

a) Self extracting .exe files or .zip files are NOT acceptable. The use of hyperlinks in proposals is prohibited.

b) Electronic copies that are not searchable will not be accepted and the proposal will be rejected as non-responsive.

c) Offeror shall format email proposals as one each attachment as follows: I.

Technical Capability, II. Cost/Price, III. Past Performance and IV Solicitation, Offer and Award Documents and Certification/Representations.

Question 424: Page 110, the solicitation states, “All subfactors are determined to be critical. All subfactors are of equal importance for evaluation purposes” and then Page 112, Ratings, states, “…there will be an overall roll-up adjectival rating at the Technical Factor level.” If the subfactors are of equal importance, please clarify how the Government will acquire the “overall roll-up adjectival rating.”

Answer 424: Subfactors are of equal importance to other subfactors. To arrive at the appropriate adjectival rating, the evaluator and SSEB must look at the severity and numbers of strengths, weaknesses, and deficiencies, and match them with the adjectival rating definitions.

Section L 3.c.(iii)((1)(a) and 3.c.(5) Pg 106 and 107 respectively

Question 447: Section 3.1(iii)(1)(a) states that if the work was performed as a subcontractor, also provide the name of the prime contractor and POC within the prime contractor organization.

Section 3.c(5) states that offerors are discouraged from providing points of contact with another contractors' facility (in case an offeror is in a subcontract with another contractor who has submitted a proposal on the same requirement). Offerors shall provide and submit the prime contract number and all Governmental POC in lieu of subcontract numbers or prime contract POCs. These sections seem to directly contradict each other. Given the size and scope of this effort and the likelihood that many offerors may have relevant past performance as a subcontractor to a company that is also submitting a proposal for this requirement, will the Government modify the language so that both sections are consistent with the requirement that all POC information provided should be for Government POCs?

Answer 447: The language remain the same.

Question 452: Re: delivery, would the Government consider allowing for electronic-only delivery given that some contractors/ teams may be in mandatory telework or temporary arantine situations (i.e., without access to their corporate proposal production facilities)?

Answer 452: See answer to question #4.