Questions_and_Answers_-_W9124L-18-R-0002.pdf

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

U.S. ARMY MISSION AND INSTALLATION CONTRACTING COMMAND

1803 MACOMB ROAD

FORT SILL, OK 73503-1701

REPLY TO

ATTENTION OF:

CCMI-CEU-SI March 15, 2018

SUBJECT: Contractor Questions and Government Answers – W9124L-18-R-0002 – JFOC

SUPPORT SERVICES

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 77, Proposal Cover Sheet Template.

1. QUESTION: The Government states: "The name, title and signature of person authorized to sign the proposal. Proposals signed by an agent shall be accompanied by evidence of that agent’s authority, unless that evidence has been previously furnished to the issuing office."

An 'agent' by definition generally refers to a non-owner/non-employee authorized to transact legally binding business and/or documentation on behalf of the business concern. If a principal of the business (owner, CEO, COO, etc) signs the proposal, is additional documentation still required to demonstrate their authority? If so, what type of documentation is deemed satisfactory?

ANSWER: The person that is authorized within the business responding to negotiate on the company’s behalf should sign the proposal. For the purposes of this solicitation, “Agent” and “principal” are interchangeable.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement (PWS), Page 41, Paragraph 2.0.

2. QUESTION: Paragraph 2.0 states that the "Student to Instructor ratio shall not exceed 2:4."

Should this actually read 4:2? It would be unusual for a course to require more instructors than students.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. ASIL7 course Instructor to Student ratio shall not exceed 2:4. BOLC Instructor to Student ratio will be 1:4.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 81, Past Performance Questionnaire paragraph.

3. QUESTION: The Government states: "Any questionnaires not returned directly to all three

(3) email addresses above will not be reviewed and evaluated. The information contained in the questionnaires will be used to evaluate the offeror’s past performance." Since offerors may only request, but not compel, a government contracting representative to respond to all three (3) of the MICC Fort Sill contracting office POCs with a returned PP questionnaire, an untenable situation appears to have been created, whereby proposers run the risk of suffering the consequence of not having that PP questionnaire included in the evaluation. Given that manual PP questionnaires place an additional burden on all government contracting teams, would the Government consider authorizing receipt by one MICC Fort Sill contracting POC to represent adequate receipt for inclusion of that questionnaire with the PP materials submitted by the proposer?

CCMI-CEU-SI

SUBJECT: Subject: Questions and Answers for JFOC for Fort Sill Request for Proposal W9124L-18-R-0002

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Page 84, Element B: Compensation Plan.

4. QUESTION: Element B states that as part of the evaluation, the Government will consider “proposals envisioning compensation levels lower than those of predecessor contractors for the same work…." Will the Government provide a general benchmark that describes what it considers to be the typical "compensation level of predecessor contractors?" Supporting information will include data, such as recognized national and regional compensation surveys and studies of professional, public and private organizations, used in establishing the total compensation structure. Plans indicating unrealistically low professional employee compensation may be assessed adversely as one of the factors considered in making an award

ANSWER: A benchmark is not available for release. The Government will use all tools available to evaluate and determine whether or not the Compensation Plan described in the proposal will provide continuity, uninterrupted work, and the availability of qualified professional employees. Plans indicating unrealistically low professional employee compensation may be assessed adversely as one of the factors considered in making an award.

5. QUESTION: Past Performance Questionnaires are required to be provided to the Contracting Officer by the solicitation close date of February 9, 2018. Will the Government consider a response date of February 27, 2018? This will provide Past Performance responders a realistic time-line for answering the questionnaires.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

6. QUESTION: The RFP closing date is February 9, 2018 and the RFP is 1,034 pages in length. Will the Government consider a response date of February 27, 2018? This will provide offerors a realistic time-line for fully developing proposals for submission.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement (PWS), Page 55, Paragraph 13.0.

7. QUESTION: PWS Section 13.0 Key Personnel requires offerors to identify an individual, and an alternate, responsible for performance under the contract who have full authority to manage and direct the efforts of the workforce. Section 1.A. – Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications and Factor One Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications deal with qualifications and evaluation of proposed candidates that meet minimum qualifications as outlined in section

2.2.0 of the PWS. Section 2.2.0 of the PWS is minimum instructor qualifications. Are we correct to assume that the Key Personnel in PWS 13.0 are not required to meet the minimum instructor qualifications in PWS 2.2.0?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002 for changes. All contract personnel are considered Key Personnel.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Page 84, Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications and Factor One, Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications.

8. QUESTION: Based on Section 1.A. Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications and Factor One Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications it appears that all instructors are considered Key Personnel. Is that correct?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. All contract personnel are considered Key Personnel.

9. QUESTION: Are all of the instructors in the student to instructor ratio for each course contractors, or are any of them Government instructors, and if so, how many are Government instructors?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Government instructors are based on availability. The government is currently providing eight (8) military and two (2) civilian Fire Support instructors as a part of the JFOC instruction. The government is not currently providing military or civilian Fire Support instructors as a part of the FA BOLC instruction.

10. QUESTION: How many simulators are available to conduct simulation training for all 24 students in the resident course?

ANSWER: The Resident functional course ASI L7 course has seven (7) CFFT 3 simulators available. This is the same for the MTTs.

11. QUESTION: How many Government and how many Contractor instructors support the MTT courses?

ANSWER: There are currently six (6) government Instructors available to conduct the JFO MTTs.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 42, Paragraph 2.1.0.

12. QUESTION: The Phase-In period is 6 March 2018 through 4 June 2018, which is approximately 120 days. PWS 2.1.0 Phase-In discusses 30, 45, 60, and 90 days milestones in the phase-in but does state the number of days of the phase-in. Is the Phase-In 90 days or 120 days?

ANSWER: The phase-in period is 120 days. See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 79, Paragraph (b)(1)(b)

13. QUESTION: Factor One (1) Technical Capability states that “The offeror shall address as specifically as possible the actual methodology to be used for accomplishing the PWS tasks.”

The Volume outline required in the instructors does not require detail on the PWS technical approach. Rather, it requires the Key Personnel Qualifications and Compensation Plan. Does the government only require Key Personnel Qualifications and Compensation Plan in the Factor One? If a PWS technical approach is required, can the Government please provide the Factor One Instructions and Evaluation factors?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

14. QUESTION: The Past Performance page limit is 20 pages. Given the Government’s requirement for up to six (6) past performance citations at a limit of 3 pages each and the other information required in this volume (consent letters, organization change history), 20 pages is insufficient. Will the Government increase the past performance volume page limit to 25 pages?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. The page limit for the past performance volume has been increased to 25 pages.

15. QUESTION: The RFP is a LPTA award yet requires evaluation of a compensation plan to determine if the compensation plan is unrealistically low or not in reasonable relationship to the various job categories, since it may impair the contractor’s ability to attract and retain competent professional service employees. Given the complexity of the contract requirements and Government’s assessment of the offeror’s ability to provide uninterrupted high-quality work, will the Government please provide the following information so we can make a meaningful and reasonable salary determination for each labor category?

a. Labor categories used in the current contract.

b. Number of FTEs by labor category in the current contract.

c. Spending level by labor category and travel each fiscal year in the current contract.

ANSWER: The Government is unable to provide the proprietary labor information requested regarding the current contract. The travel required and identified on Schedule B is plug figure provided by the Government and is not a biddable item.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Pages 41 and 64, Paragraphs 1.2 and 19.0.

16. QUESTION: Page 3, Phase-In is listed as starting 6 March 2018 in CLIN 0001 and Full Performance beginning on 5 June 2018. Also, page 41, 1.2.1. states Full Performance begins on 5 June. However, Page 64-65, 19.0 Performance Requirements Summary (PRS), Performance Objectives (PO) 1 and PO 3 state: “All Instructors certified to teach NLT 120 days from start of contract phase in period.” Question, please clarify the apparent discrepancy between a 90 day phase-in and 120 days to become fully certified from phase-in/contract start and if the full performance period begins 90 days or 120 days after phase-in/contract start.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. The correct phase-in period is 120 days from the date of award.

REFERENCE: 5152.204-4001(c), Page 29, Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 79, and Performance Work Statement, Page 55, Paragraph 13.0.

17. QUESTION: Page 29, 5152.204-4001(c) last sentence states: “All proposed Contractor personnel are considered Key Personnel.” Also, page 79, Section 1.A – Element Key Personnel Qualifications requires the contractor to describe the qualifications of proposed personnel and to list them as Candidates 1, 2, 3, etc. However, page 55, 13.0, states: “Key Personnel. The contractor shall identify an individual, and an alternate, responsible for performance under the contract(s) who shall have full authority to manage and direct the efforts of the workforce and shall have full authority to commit resources and make decisions for the contractor(s).”

a. Are all contractor proposed personnel considered to be Key Personnel or are there two personnel considered to be Key personnel; i.e., one person plus and alternate?

b. Alternatively, instead of page 79, section 1.A stating “Key Personnel Qualifications

“should it simply state “Personnel Qualifications” to include availability of all personnel, and thus we separately identify one individual and an alternate as Key Personnel?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002 for changes. All contractor personnel are considered Key Personnel.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, Paragraph 1.2.1.

18. QUESTION: Page 41, 1.2.1 states in part: “…capability to conduct an estimated …13 MTTs…annually” Whereas pp.47 states: “Contractor shall instruct approximately 11 JFO MTT classes each fiscal year as does the chart on page 48. Using the estimated student throughput of 264 students per year or 24 students per MTT class, is 11 MTTs the number of estimated MTTs we should expect for planning purposes?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. For planning purposes, the correct anticipated number of MTT courses is 13 per year.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, Paragraph 2.0.

19. QUESTION: Page 41, 2.0, `states: “The Contractor shall present each JFO small group 80 clock hours of JFO instruction from the existing, current, or in revision JFO POI spread across 10 training days. Student-to-instructor ratio shall not exceed 2:4. Question. In order to determine the proper number of instructors, instead of “student-to-instructor ratio”, should this read “instructor-to-student ratio”?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. ASI L7 Instructor to Student ratio shall not exceed 2:4.

BOLC Instructor to Student ratio is 1:4.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, Paragraph 2.0.

20. QUESTION: Page 41, 2.0 states the “Furthermore, the Contractor shall appoint a contract Project Lead (PL) to interact with the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) and oversee contractor personnel.” Page 44, 2.4.3. states “The Contractor Program Manager shall develop a plan for each contract employee to complete the certification process during the Phase-In Period and in the event of turnover.” Question: May we safely assume the Government is using the terms Project Lead and Program Manager interchangeably or is the Government specifying two different personnel?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, Paragraph 2.0, Page 47, Paragraph 4.6.

21. QUESTION: Page 41, 2.0 and page 47, 4.6. In determining the number of contract instructors, should we assume the instructor-to-student ratios do not include any government instructors?

ANSWER:. See Amendment 0002. Current information is provided in PWS change.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 52, Paragraph 10.4.

22. QUESTION: OPERATIONS SECURITY (OPSEC) PLAN states: “Contractor personnel having access to classified information shall have the appropriate security clearance and shall handle classified information consistent with Army information security standards as instructed by the COR.” Questions:

a. Please provide clarification on whether contractor personnel need a Secret clearance at time of proposal submission or on the date they begin performance on the contract.

b. Will the government accept an Interim Secret clearance due to the backlog in

Government clearance verifications?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. This course does not require a security clearance.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 61, Paragraph 18.0.

23. QUESTION: Page 61, 18.0, Deliverables. Regarding In-Process-Reviews (IPRs), There appears to be a typo in the following sentence: “The COR will notify the Contractor of the specific time and location in writing at least 24 hours in advance and shall include a summary of all TCM requirements.” Instead of TCM, should it state JFOC requirements?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. “TCM” has been replaced with “JFOC”.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 78, Paragraph 3(a).

24. QUESTION: Page 78, 3. (a) states the contractor is required to submit a fully completed SF 1449 and that all monetary extensions are to be in whole dollars only. Page 82, (2) (a) Tab One Price addresses completion of the CLIN schedule and that dollar amounts shall be listed with two decimal places. There is no place on the SF 1449 for the offeror to list pricing, so are we correct in assuming that requirement is an error, and that the pricing instructions for the CLINs to list dollar amounts to two decimal places is correct?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Extensions shall be in whole dollars only.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 78, Paragraph 3(a), TAB B.

25. QUESTION: Page 78, 3. (a) TAB B, requires offerors to submit a completed SF 1449 with signature in block 14 and acknowledge any Amendments? Questions:

a. Block 14 is the Method of Solicitation block. Did the Government mean to state complete and sign block 30?

b. Where on the form are we to acknowledge Amendments, or do we simply acknowledge Amendments in TAB B of our General Volume response?

ANSWER: Please see Amendment 0002. Offerors are required to complete blocks 30a – 30c on SF 1449 when submitting proposal and acknowledge amendment on Block 11 of SF 30.

Amendments shall be included in TAB B of the General Volume Response.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-4, Page 31, Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires.

26. QUESTION: Page 31 of the subject solicitation under Statement of Equivalent Rates for Federal Hires shows a monetary wage fringe benefit of 42.6% for both a GS-12 Senior Military Trainer and a GS-11 Military Trainer. Can the Government please provide additional information on what this percentage represents (i.e. is it an estimated fringe rate needed to cover actual fringe costs, a percentage of another value not referenced in the solicitation, etc.).

ANSWER: This information is removed from the solicitation. The Service Contract Act does not apply to this contract.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Pages 30, 41, 47 and 49, Paragraphs 1.1.; 4.5; and 7.0.

27. QUESTION: Throughout the PWS, there are several references to insurance requirements and overseas travel. Since there is anticipated OCONUS travel to various overseas locations in support of JFOC MTT courses and TRAPs, will the Government allow the requirement for Defense Base Act (DBA) insurance be cost reimbursable as an ODC back to the contract? In many cases, DBA insurance is required when a contractor travels OCONUS.

ANSWER: The Government will not add a CLIN for cost reimbursement for the DBA travel insurance. In the event DBA insurance is required to perform requirements for specific locations, this cost may be submitted on specific travel requests for consideration.

REFERENCE: CLIN Schedule (Page 5), Performance Work Statement (Page 41) and Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 (Page 79).

28. QUESTION: The capability to “surge JFOC instructors” is mentioned in several sections of the PWS. Can the Government please provide some tangible examples or scenarios when the “surge capability” of JFOC instructors may be employed to support contract requirements?

ANSWER: An example would be a requirement from the Department of Defense or Department of Army to increase the number of classes in support of Army Growth directly impacting Fort Sill missions.

REFERENCE: 5152.204-4001 (Page 29), Addendum to FAR 52.212-4 (Page 79), Element A:

Key Personnel Qualifications.

29. QUESTION: Can the Government please reconcile and address the requirement for resumes for key personnel? Page 29 of 104 (Key Personnel) eludes to the fact that resumes are required and Page 79 of 104 (Section 1.A. – Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications indicates resumes are not required. Please clarify the requirement?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Resumes are not required.

REFERENCE: Travel Contract Line Item Numbers (CLINS), Performance Work Statement, Page 49, Paragraph 7.0.

30. QUESTION: TRAVEL COST in the CLIN structure (0002, 1002, 2002, 3002, and 4002) states that Fee/Profit on travel is not allowable. Are G&A costs reimbursable on travel and ODCs? The inclusion of General and Administrative (G&A) costs are incurred by the contractor to procure, manage, and process travel claims. G&A costs are allowable according to DCAA.

Please clarify?

ANSWER: Any resultant award from this solicitation will be Firm Fixed Price, and will have a plug figure, which is non-biddable, for Travel. Anticipated G&A cost tied to projected travel requirements should be included in other CLINS.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 75, Paragraph A.1.1.1.

31. QUESTION: RFP states “Proposal shall be electronically submitted as a SINGLE pdf attachment to the AMRDEC SAFE computer portal...”. Does the Government want pricing along with the other three volumes all in one single .pdf document?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. All pricing documentation other than the accompanying price worksheet (submitted as a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet) shall be submitted as a single PDF.

The accompanying price worksheet (submitted via AMRDEC) shall not be submitted as a PDF document.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Pages 75 and 82 of 104, Paragraph A.1.1.1 and Paragraph C.3.d.2.a.2 and b (Tab Two (2) – Accompanying Pricing Worksheet)

32. QUESTION: Given the instruction “Proposal shall be electronically submitted as a SINGLE pdf attachment to the AMRDEC SAFE computer portal...”, by what means shall offerors “provide an accompanying Pricing Worksheet in Microsoft Excel (NOT PDF) with all formulas intact, and any supporting documentation substantiating the burden shall be submitted for back-up rationale and calculations showing the rate build-up that clearly identifies the methodology used to arrive at the fully loaded labor rates.”?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. All pricing documentation other than the accompanying price worksheet (submitted as a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet) shall be submitted as a single PDF.

The accompanying price worksheet (submitted via AMRDEC with PDF file containing remainder of proposal) shall be submitted as a Microsoft Excel worksheet.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Pages 75 and 82, Paragraph A.1.1.1 and Paragraph C.3.d.2.b (Tab Two (2) – Accompanying Pricing Worksheet)

33. QUESTION: Please confirm that the offeror may provide an accompanying Pricing Worksheet in Microsoft Excel (NOT PDF) OF THEIR OWN DESIGN.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. All pricing documentation other than the accompanying price worksheet (submitted as a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet) shall be submitted as a single PDF.

The accompanying price worksheet (submitted via AMRDEC) shall not be submitted as a PDF document.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Pages 41 and 47, Paragraph 2.0.

34. QUESTION: PWS states “Student to instructor ratio shall not exceed 2:4”. The way it is currently written, it requires 4 instructors for every 2 students and contradicts instructor to student ratios elsewhere in the PWS. Can the government please clarify the desired ratios?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Instructor to Student ratio shall not exceed 2:4 for the functional course, and 1:4 for the FABOLC-B course.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, PERIOD OF PERFORMANCE (1.1.1).

35. QUESTION: PWS states “…at full performance 5 June 2018, with the capability to conduct 13 MTTs” Is this a typo? MTT quantity throughout PWS is 11.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. For planning purposes, the anticipated number of JFO MTTs is 13.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Pages 49 and 50, Paragraph 7.0.

36. QUESTION: In order to plan, anticipate and capture ODCs for MTTs (especially OCONUS), can the government provide JFOC MTT locations that have been historically executed over the past 5 years?

ANSWER: The JFO MTT locations have varied over the past five (5) years. Historically, MTTs have been located in the following locations: major Army installations located in the U.S.

OCONUS locations are KOREA, GERMANY, ALASKA, HAWAII, and LATIVA.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Pages 21, 42 and 43, MINIMUM INSTRUCTOR QUALIFICATIONS (2.2.0) And FAR 52.222-17, Nondisplacement of Qualified Workers (May 2014) (E.O. 13495).

37. QUESTION: With the FAR requirement (52.222-17) to offer incumbent JFO instructors employment upon contract award, Do all current JFOC instructors meet the minimum instructor requirements and possess 428th FA BDE certifications outlined in this PWS?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Clause 52.222-17 is not applicable to this requirement.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 78, PROPOSAL PREPARATION INSTRUCTIONS – Paragraph C.2.h (Indexing)

38. QUESTION: What does “Tab indexing” mean? Please define technically the requirement for “Tab indexing” in a .pdf file.

ANSWER: Within the PDF document, please utilize the “Bookmark” function within Adobe to create tab indexing. The Tab indexing is required to separate the volumes, and sections within the volume, within the PDF document. These pages are not included in the page count (reference page 78, C.2.f.)

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, Paragraph 2.0, Scope.

39. QUESTION: Paragraph indicates “Student-to-Instructor ratio shall not exceed 2:4.” As written this appears to indicate 2 students for every 4 instructors. Request clarification on what the minimum student-to-instructor ratio is?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Instructor to Student ratio shall not exceed 2:4 for ASI L7 course and 1:4 for FABOLC-B course.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, Paragraph 2.0, Scope.

40. QUESTION: Paragraph indicates “Instructor certification time for Optional CLINs will depend on individual contract requirements, (60 days for Joint Fires Observer Instructors)...”

Paragraph 2.4.0 indicates a minimum of 8 weeks for an instructor to become certified. Does the government adjust the “60 days for Joint Fires Observer Instructors” if government resources are not available to support the certification process and if yes, what adjustments does the government make?

ANSWER: The government will have employees available in order to facilitate contractor certification. That is correct -- there will be government employees available to certify contractor JFO-Is if needed.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Paragraph 2.0, Scope.

41. QUESTION: Paragraph indicates “Instructor certification time for Optional CLINs will depend on individual contract requirements, (60 days for Joint Fires Observer Instructors) as well as, notification lead times to the contractor if in the event an optional CLIN is utilized (30 days for Joint Fires Instructors).” Does the “30 days for Joint Fires Instructors” refer to the notification lead time for an Optional CLIN requirement or to the amount of time allocated for certification of the Joint Fires Instructors? If it is the certification time, what is the expected lead time for notification of the requirement for Optional CLIN requirements?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Optional CLINS are utilized in the event of a surge in requirements. Associated with each surge CLIN is time required by the offeror to certify personnel (i.e. 60 days, 90 days or 120 days). Required time is dependent on the contract requirements and stated in the PWS. In addition to the certification time frame, the Government will provide advance notification as time permits. The Government’s intent is to maximize notification time where possible to no less than 30 days. However, the notification time will be driven by the required start date. In some instances, 30 days may not be possible.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 42, Paragraph 2.1.0., Phase-In.

42. QUESTION: Paragraph indicates “The Contractor shall submit a Phase-In Training Plan with its initial proposal.” Is the Phase-in Training Plan to be submitted within the Technical Capability response or as a separate document/file?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 42, Paragraph 2.1.0., Phase-In.

43. QUESTION: Paragraph indicates “This plan shall contain a list of all proposed qualified contractor candidates/personnel.” Does the government want the names of each person? If not, what is required?

ANSWER: Resumes are neither desired nor required. Reference paragraph 18.0 Deliverables, the Employee Named Listing is required within 10 days after award. The Phase-in plan is now required after award. See Amendment 0002. Proposed candidates do not have to be named at the time of proposal submission. The list (add: provided at solicitation submission) can be labeled in any manner desired by the offeror (i.e. Candidate 1,2, 3 etc. or A, B, C etc…)

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 42, Paragraph 2.1.0., Phase-In.

44. QUESTION: Paragraph indicates “This plan shall contain a list of all proposed qualified contractor candidates/personnel.” Is it the intent of the government that the offeror has the individual person identified for each position at time of proposal submission? If yes, please confirm that it is the government’s intent for non-incumbent offerors not to retain/transition any incumbent employees since the offeror will already have made commitments to individuals for every position?

ANSWER: Resumes are neither desired nor required. Reference paragraph 18.0 Deliverables, the Employee Listing is required within 10 days after award. The Phase-in plan is now required after award. See Amendment 0002. Proposed candidates do not have to be named at the time of proposal submission. Any offer submitted should have qualified candidates identified, describe the candidates, and provide reasonable assurances that the contractor can obtain these candidates in the descriptive response. It is not the government’s intent to influence the offerors method of recruiting or hiring. Compliance with the solicitation and contract terms and conditions is the offeror’s responsibility.

45. QUESTION: This solicitation provides for a 65-page General Volume, a 50-page Technical Volume, and a 20-page Past Performance Volume, and 50-page Price Volume.

Additionally, the complexity of the response in developing and providing a cost-effective solution to meet these requirements requires significant work. Finally, depending on how fast the government can respond to questions, there is likely not enough time with current suspense to adjust proposals in response to answers provided. The provision of only 14 days to respond appears inadequate for anyone but the incumbent to effectively respond. Request that the suspense be extended to provide 30 days to respond.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Paragraph C.3. (b) (1) (b) (1.A) Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications.

46. QUESTION: The paragraph indicates “Offerors are not required to provide names, but may identify personnel as Candidate 1, 2, 3, etc (excluding Surge personnel).” Please confirm that the requirement is only for Key Personnel and that Key Personnel per para 13.0 Key Personnel are only the individual and the alternate responsible for managing the work effort...two personnel.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. All contractor personnel are considered Key Personnel.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Proposal Preparation Instructions C.3. (b) (1) (b) (1.B) Element B: Compensation Plan.

47. QUESTION: The Compensation Plan is normally included in the Price Volume. The requirements for the compensation plan includes cost/price information usually excluded from the technical volume to preclude bias in evaluating the technical response. Request that salary ranges be accepted to meet salary data requirement or that the Compensation Plan be moved to the Price Volume.

ANSWER: The compensation plan shall be provided in the Technical volume as stated in the solicitation.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Proposal Preparation Instructions C.3. (c) Volume III – Past Performance

48. QUESTION: The page limits displayed on page 77 limit past performance to 20 pages.

Page 80 allows up to 6 past performance references and page 81 indicates that each reference may be 3 pages long. This would create 18 pages of response and only leave two pages for Summary Page, Consent Letters, and Organization Change History. Request the government increase the page count or limit the past performance references to no more than 4

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Page limit is increased for Past Performance volume to 25 pages.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 and FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation Factors for Award c

(2) Factor One (1) – Technical Factor.

49. QUESTION: The technical factor shows two elements of evaluation under this factor and indicates that “The elemental ratings will be used to determine the overall rating for the factor.”

Neither of the existing elements provide for the evaluation of response to the PWS requirements other than Key Personnel Qualifications and Compensation Plan. Request the government add an element with evaluation criteria to address other elements of PWS requirements or confirm that only element A and element B will be used in evaluation?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Evaluation Factors for Award c (2) a Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications.

50. QUESTION: The paragraph indicates “The government will evaluate the qualifications of prospective employees for all positions...” Please confirm that the evaluation is only for Key

Personnel 13 and that Key Personnel per para 13.0 Key Personnel are only the individual and the alternate responsible for managing the work effort...two personnel?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. All contract personnel are considered Key Personnel.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 and FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation Factors for Award c

(2) b Element B: Compensation Plan

51. QUESTION: The Compensation Plan is normally included in the Price Volume. The requirements for the compensation plan includes cost/price information usually excluded from the technical volume to preclude bias in evaluating the technical response. Request that salary ranges be accepted to meet salary data requirement or that the Compensation Plan be moved to the Price Volume.

ANSWER: The compensation plan shall be provided in the Technical volume as stated in the solicitation.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 and FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation Factors For Award c (2) b Element B: Compensation Plan

52. QUESTION: The paragraph indicates “Proposals envisioning compensation levels lower than those of predecessor contractors for the same work will be evaluated on the basis of maintain program continuity....” Request the government provide the compensation levels of the referenced predecessor contractors or remove this as an evaluation criterion? Furthermore, compensation on existing contracts often have compensation rates that are no longer reflective of the specific labor requirements of the solicitation (in either a higher or lower direction). Request that the evaluation of realism use other FAR based evaluation techniques and this evaluation criteria be removed.

ANSWER: The Government is unable to provide the proprietary labor information requested regarding the current contract.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1 and FAR 52.212-2, Evaluation Factors For Award c (4) Factor Three (3) – Price

53. QUESTION: It appears that the cost of transition is included in the price evaluation.

Inclusion of this cost in evaluation appears to unfairly bias the price evaluation in favor of the incumbent who will not have to incur these costs due to incumbency. Request the government either exclude these costs from evaluation or provide a nominal price “plug” for the Phase-in that each offeror must include in their price submission.

ANSWER: Transition and Phase In costs are routinely included in service contracts whenever contracts are re-solicited/competed and such a time period is required prior to full performance.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 75, Paragraph A.1.

54. QUESTION: Paragraph states “1.1. ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION: Proposal shall be electronically submitted as a SINGLE pdf attachment to the AMRDEC SAFE computer portal at the following website:” Given the potential size of the file to accommodate up to 185 page proposal response, request confirmation that the site can accept exceptionally large files.

ANSWER: AMRDEC Safe accommodates up to 2GB per file, which should be sufficient to accommodate proposals of this size.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 47, Paragraph 4.6.

55. QUESTION: The para indicates “The Government will not schedule more than one FABOLC-B class at a time.” The table shows 8 classes annually with 84 days per class. Request clarification on how the 8 classes of 84 days each occur annually with only one class being scheduled at a time?

ANSWER: There may be multiple FABOLC-B classes running concurrently. The JFO portion of this POI is only a two (2) week portion of that time which allows the Government the flexibility to only schedule one (1) class at a time during the JFO portion.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 47, Paragraph 4.6.

56. QUESTION: The table shows JFOC Resident and JFOC MTT requirements as 10 and 11 classes annually with 10 days for each class. The number of instructors required is highly dependent on the scheduling of these courses. Request confirmation that the resident and MTT courses are not taught at the same time or that the government provide schedule or guidance on overlap to provide adequate information for effective staffing and pricing.

ANSWER: There are times when the JFOC Resident and JFOC MTT is being conducted concurrently. The annual schedule will be published prior to the new FY, generally NLT the end of August of the current FY. This will allow for reaction time to ensure resources are available to conduct the two courses simultaneously.

57. QUESTION: I’m writing in regard to your 10 January 2018, FBP posting for the JFOC.

The pre-solicitation notice reflects “Best Value”. Does the Government anticipate applying a best value trade-off or best value LPTA approach for this evaluation?

ANSWER: In accordance with the Addendums to FAR 52.212-1 and FAR 52.212-2, the Government will employ a Best Value: Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA) approach.

58. QUESTION: Due to the complexity of the PWS and volume of documents to analyze, will the Government Consider extending the deadline for submitting questions to 7 February and the proposal due date to 1 March?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, Paragraph 2.0.

59. QUESTION: In PWS 2.0 there is a sentence which reads “Student-to-instructor ratio shall not exceed 2:4”. Can the Government clarify which instructional events this ratio pertains to and verify that the student to instructor ratio is not reversed? Or should it read “Student-to-instructor ratio shall not exceed 4:2”?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Instructor to Student ratio shall not exceed 2:4 for the ASI L7 course and 1:4 for the FABOLC-B course.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, Paragraph 2.0.

60. QUESTION: In PWS 2.0 there is a sentence which reads “Student to instructor ratio shall not exceed 4:1.”. Can the Government clarify which instructional events this ratio pertains to?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. Instructor to Student ratio shall not exceed 2:4 for the ASI L7 course and 1:4 for the FA BOLC-B course.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 78, Paragraph C.2.(I), Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms.

61. QUESTION: Where would the Government like the glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms to be inserted within each proposal volume?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. After the table of contents page(s) for each volume.

REFERENCE: 5152.204-4001, Page 29.

62. QUESTION: The solicitation states in 5152.204-4001 KEY PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS (MAR 2009) (LOCAL CLAUSE) (a) “Certain experienced professional and/or technical personnel are essential for successful accomplishment of the work to be performed under this contract. These "Key Personnel" were identified by name within the contractor’s proposal and their resumes were submitted for evaluation during the source selection process.” This conflicts with the INSTRUCTIONS TO OFFERORS Volume II, Factor 1, (1.A) ELEMENT A: KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS (a) “Describe the qualifications of the proposed personnel. The qualifications submitted shall address at a minimum: education, professional experience, specific experience, professional awards, and other relevant activities and achievements which reflect that each proposed candidate meets the requirements and minimum qualifications in the PWS. Describe how the proposed personnel satisfy specific qualifications (to include security clearances) required by the PWS. Discuss the availability of key personnel proposed. Offerors are not required to provide names, but may identify personnel as Candidate 1, 2, 3, etc. (excluding Surge personnel). Resumes are not desired or required.” Can the Government clarify the information required to describe Key Personnel?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. All contract employees are considered key personnel.

REFERENCE: 5152.204-4001, Page 29.

63. QUESTION: 5152.204-4001 KEY PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS (MAR 2009)

(LOCAL CLAUSE) (C) states “All proposed Contractor personnel are considered Key Personnel.” This conflicts with PWS 13.0. KEY PERSONNEL: "The contractor shall identify an individual, and an alternate, responsible for performance under the contract(s) who shall have full authority to manage and direct the efforts of the workforce and shall have full authority to commit resources and make decisions for the contractor(s).” Can the Government please clarify the definition and responsibilities of “Key Personnel”?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. All contract employees are considered Key Personnel.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 57, Paragraph 15.8.

64. QUESTION: PWS 15.8 references 1.6.15, but there is no 1.6.15 in the PWS. Can the Government clarify what 15.8 refers to?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Page 41, Paragraph 1.2.1.

65. QUESTION: States" Contractor shall be at full performance 5 Jun 2018, with the capability to conduct an estimated 10 resident, 13 MTT’s (2E-F233/250-ASIL7) and 8 FABOLC-B classes annually." While PWS 4.6 states 11 MTTs. Which number of MTTs is correct?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. For planning purposes, the correct anticipated number of MTT courses is 13 per year.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Pages 42 and 64, Paragraphs 2.1.0 and 19.0.

66. QUESTION: Dictates a 90 days Phase In (6 March 2018-4 June 2018). PWS 2.1.0 states that all personnel with be certified to meet the entire Phase In period. Yet the PRS states all instructors certified to teach NLT 120 days from start of contract Phase in period under PO 1 and PO 3. What is the correct timeline for instructor certification 90 or 120 days?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. The Phase-In period is 120 days.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-2, Page 84, Basis for Contract Award.

67. QUESTION: The Solicitation states that award is to be made to the Lowest Price Technically Acceptable offer. Due to the highly-skilled, specialized experience required of the instructors on this contract, an LPTA source selection process will likely result in higher turnover and lower-quality candidates for this hard-to-find, difficult-to-retain workforce. The industry day held by Ft. Sill in December 2017 highlighted the concern the Government has with industry's ability to recruit and retain low-density, highly-specialized skilled personnel (like JTACS). Issuing this contract under LPTA conditions may not be in the Government's best interest over the life of the contract, especially considering the increasing demands for this type of highly- skilled employee. Would the Government consider changing the source selection process within the Best Value continuum to a Tradeoff process rather than an LPTA process, with higher consideration given to factors other than price? Over the life of the contract, the Government would almost assuredly achieve its desired Best Value relative to the accomplishment of mission requirements and price using the Tradeoff process in source selection.

ANSWER: The evaluation method will remain Best Value: Lowest Price Technically Acceptable (LPTA).

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 79, Paragraph 1.A., Element A.

68. QUESTION: To state resumes are not required after asking for every element that goes into a standard resume and to include a defacto Letter of Commitment worded as "availability of Key personnel" amounts to basically resumes and LOCs for the entire staff. Given the population of qualified candidates in the Lawton-Fort Sill area is so small calling the people "candidates" instead of just using their names does not prevent simply matching the write-ups to known current employees. This is giving the incumbent a significant advantage and is a potentially protestable approach. Recommend requiring the Project Lead and Alternate Project Lead qualifications only.

ANSWER: All contract employees are considered Key Personnel, therefore, qualifications for all proposed personnel shall be submitted.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 79, Paragraph 1.A., Element A.

69. QUESTION: PWS 13.0 describes Key Personnel as "an individual, and an alternate, responsible for performance under the contract(s) who shall have full authority to manage and direct the efforts of the workforce and shall have full authority to commit resources and make decisions for the contractor(s).”, but under Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications, the Government seems to describe all personnel as "key personnel". Can the Government clarify the definition of key personnel and also clarify what information is required for Key Personnel and for all personnel (if they are two different things)?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002. All contract employees are considered Key Personnel, therefore, qualifications for all proposed personnel shall be submitted.

REFERENCE: Pg. 29 of 104, 55 of 104, 79 of 104, and 85 of 104, 5152.204-4001 KEY PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS (MAR 2009) (LOCAL CLAUSE), PWS 13.0. Key Personnel, (1.A) ELEMENT A: KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS and Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications.

70. QUESTION: Page 29 states " These "Key Personnel" were identified by name within the contractor’s proposal and their resumes were submitted for evaluation during the source selection process." Page 55 states, "13.0. KEY PERSONNEL: The contractor shall identify an individual, and an alternate, responsible for performance under the contract(s) who shall have full authority to manage and direct the efforts of the workforce and shall have full authority to commit resources and make decisions for the contractor(s). Page 79, "Offerors are not required to provide names, but may identify personnel as Candidate 1, 2, 3, etc. (excluding Surge personnel).

Resumes are not desired or required. Page 85 states, "Element A: Key Personnel Qualifications.

In evaluating this element, the Government assessment will focus on whether the Offeror’s proposed personnel are adequately qualified based upon the requirements listed in the PWS. The Government will evaluate the qualifications of prospective employees for all positions to ensure that the proposed candidates meet the minimum qualifications as outlined in section 2.2.0 of the PWS. All of these statements conflict with each other. The way the solicitation currently reads, it seems like the Government is asking for a full listing of resume-type information for all candidates, which is potentially space prohibitive and potentially irrelevant. For example, on page 79, the Government asks for a listing of all candidates "professional awards". Since there is no specified requirement for any particular professional awards in the PWS, nor is there a particular service award that is commonly associated with being a JTAC, what is the purpose of asking for this information? Can the Government clarify exactly what it will take to be technically compliant on Key Personnel requirements per Element A: KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS and the information required for all candidates?

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: 5152.204-4001 KEY PERSONNEL REQUIREMENTS (MAR 2009) (LOCAL

CLAUSE) , PWS 13.0. Key Personnel, (1.A) ELEMENT A: KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS and Element A: Key Personnel Qualification

71. QUESTION: (1.A) ELEMENT A: KEY PERSONNEL QUALIFICATIONS asks offerors to "Describe the qualifications of the proposed personnel. The qualifications submitted shall address at a minimum: education...". And on pg. 67, for PO1, "a defect is defined as Contractor contract staff that does not possess the education..." and on page 69 under FAILURE TO PERFORM: "A defect is defined as Contractor staff that does not possess the education..."

Since there is no specified requirement for education listed in the PWS, can the Government clarify what education is required and what they mean by education? If none is required, then we recommend that it be removed as a defect and removed as a requirement in the evaluation criteria.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

REFERENCE: Performance Work Statement, Pages 42, Paragraphs 2.1.0 and 2.4.0.

72. QUESTION: Could the Government please verify the numbering system in the PWS? For example, is 2.1.1 and 2.1.2 part of 2.1.0? Is 2.4.1, 2.4.2, and 2.4.3 part of 2.4.0?

ANSWER: Please see Amendment 0002. Numbering has been revised.

REFERENCE: Addendum to FAR 52.212-1, Page 79, Paragraph C.3(b)(1)(b).

73. QUESTION: Per the Proposal Preparation Instructions [C.3(b)(1)(b),], the required outline for Volume II includes a tab for the “List of Table and Drawings,” but does not account for the glossary of abbreviations required in each volume. Please clarify the required outline arrangement for Volume II, and whether or not a Glossary of Abbreviations and Acronyms is required for this volume.

ANSWER: See Amendment 0002.

74. QUESTION: Please validate the JFOC solicitation is encumbered by the Service Contract Act (SCA) rules regarding contract transition and hiring of incumbent personnel.

ANSWER: The JFOC solicitation is not encumbered by the SCA rules regarding incumbent personnel. See Amendment 0002.

75. QUESTION: Please confirm there are no active collective bargaining agreements (CBA) established to represent the existing work force. If there are any CBAs, please provide those to all offerors to allow for proper pricing calculations.

ANSWER: There is not a CBA established for this contract.

REFERENCE: Solicitation Attachment 5, POIs and Lesson Plans.

76. QUESTION: Regarding Attachment 5 (POIs and Lesson Plans), are there estimated training requirements/projections available for each course presented to allow offerors to properly estimate optimized manning to provide full coverage for all projected customer training needs.

Clarification of Question above (from interested party): Regarding Attachment 5 (POIs and Lesson Plans) and course data noted in paragraphs 2.0 and 4.6 of the Performance Work Statement; (1) can you…