Post CoMSupCen Industry Day Q and A Log.pdf

Question and Answer Log for CoMSupCen DRAFT RFP – W9133L24R3801

Question

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

1 DRAFT RFP 108 Section K, 52.204- 8 (a) (1)

States “The North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code for this acquisition is 541614” however under Section M C.4.c.ii Relevancy states “Relevant efforts are defined as services/efforts that are the same as or similar to the scope, magnitude and complexity of the solicitation requirements, as well as the effort as compared to NAICS code 611512 required by the RFP”. Please clarify the NAICS code for this acquisition.

The NAICS code for this acquisition is 541614. The Section M reference has been updated to reflect that selected NAICS of 541614.

2 PWS 1.4.9.4 The PWS lists Key Personnel positions however under Section L iii Volume III- Technical (1) Section 1 – Staffing Plan states the offeror shall identify all position they deem as “Key Billet”. Does the Government want the Offeror to include the Key Personnel positions as Key Billet positions?

The Section L reference will be updated to read as follows:

"In addition to the positions identified in PWS paragraph 1.4.9.4 as "Key Personnel," the offeror shall identify any additional positions they deem to be “Key Billets” within their performance of the contract. Note, the Government is not interested in the individuals who will fill the key billets as personnel can (and always do) change. Rather, Key Billets, as described above and as used in this solicitation, are billets that the offeror considers as significantly influencing successful planning or performance of the contract. (DO NOT PROVIDE RESUMES, THEY WILL NOT BE REVIEWED OR

OTHERWISE EVALUATED)."

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

3 DRAFT RFP Section L (i) Volume I – General (Solicitations, Offer and Award Documents and Certifications / Representations) (3)

Western Door Federal is part of the larger Seneca Nation Group of companies. The Government recognizes that they will have access to competition sensitive information, as evidenced in part by the requirement to negotiate a non-Disclosure agreement with them. Has Western Door Federal established and OCI Mitigation Plan? If so, would it be possible to get a copy?

Neither Western Door Federal, LLC nor any other Seneca Nation Group entity will be participating in this source selection as an offeror or subcontractor at any tier.

Moreover, Western Door Federal, LLC will fully comply with the terms and conditions of the proprietary information exchange/nondisclosure agreement(s) executed pursuant to FAR 9.505-4(b).

4 PWS 1.2.1.1 What is the composition of labor categories to support the CST and CERFP teams?

The information provided in paragraph

1.2.1.1 is Background information, which demonstrates the scope and magnitude of the respective Government teams.

Providing the composition of labor categories of the respective Government teams is inapplicable to this paragraph

5 PWS 5.4 Information Technology (IT)

Does the Offeror maintain the software and/or hardware for Maximo and the COMSUPCEN website, or is the Offeror simply operators of those systems?

The contractor shall operate, maintain, and manage all IT systems used in support of CoMSupCen. The contractor is responsible to ensure all hardware and software that is required in support of CoMSupCen is in place and operational during the phase-in period identified in paragraph 1.4.15. Attachment 5 of the PWS, Government Furnished Equipment, identifies all of the GFE being provided to the contractor including IT hardware. The contractor is responsible for all software and hardware maintenance throughout the life of the contract. In order to be reimbursed by the Government, any software and hardware acquired by the contractor for the performance of the CoMSupCen contract shall be approved in advance by the Government.

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

6 PWS 5.4 Information Technology (IT)

Does the Offeror pay for individual seat licenses for Maximo (cost reimbursable)?

IBM’s Maximo Enterprise Asset Management Software (EAMS) licenses are currently provided to the Government through the incumbent contractor via a Proof of Entitlement (POE) furnished by the supplying authorized IBM Maximo EAMS Vendor on a cost reimbursable basis. Interloc Solutions’ Mobile Informer is a COTS application, approved and certified by IBM Corporation for deployment as an IBM Maximo EAMS application which deploys as a Maximo component via the Maximo “EAR file,” and is currently provided to the Government through the incumbent contractor on a cost reimbursable basis.

The Government is currently considering the acquisition of the Maximo EAMS and the Interloc Solutions’ Mobile Informer licenses directly from the authorized IBM Maximo EAMS Vendor and Interloc Solutions and providing them to the contractor. In either case the contractor does not incur the cost of the Maximo EAMS and the Interloc Solutions’ Mobile Informer licenses required to support the CoMSupCen effort. In order to be reimbursed by the Government, all software and hardware acquired by the contractor for the performance of the CoMSupCen contract shall be approved in advance by the Government.

7 PWS 4.2 Please clarify the Facilities Clearance requirement.

There is no facility clearance requirement.

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

8 DRAFT RFP 145 (6) Small Business Participation Past Performance

Page 145 of the solicitation asks for Small Business Participation. Is this needed since it is an 8(a) set-aside.

(6) Small Business Participation Past Performance has been removed from the solicitation. However, please be advised that FAR clause 52.219-8 is applicable to this solicitation notwithstanding the fact that it is a 8(a) set aside competition.

9 Would the Government consider providing work history for maintenance at OCONUS locations? The make and model of equipment, location of repair, and the duration.

The Government does not have specific work history for maintenance at OCONUS locations. However, as provided in paragraph 5.6 of the PWS, “Recent historical workload is presented in Attachment 7. Actual workload during the contract is expected to increase from the historical figures.” All equipment is standardized by team type (Please see PWS Attachment 3 Mission Essential Equipment List). In order to be reimbursed by the Government all repair and maintenance costs shall be approved by the Government in advance.

10 PWS 5.4 Information Technology (IT)

What Maximo modulars are used and does the Government intend to continue using the same ones? What version is the Government utilizing today? Is it licensed/hosted on premise solution or is the Govt leveraging IBM Maximo’s cloud-based SaaS solution model?

IBM’s Maximo EAMS licenses are currently provided to the Government through the incumbent contractor via a Proof of Entitlement (POE) furnished by the supplying authorized IBM Maximo EAMS Vendor on a cost reimbursable basis. The following Maximo EAMS licenses were provided to the Government through the incumbent contractor via a POE furnished by the supplying authorized IBM Maximo EAMS Vendor on a cost reimbursable basis: (13) IBM Maximo Asset Management Authorized User Annual SW Subscription & Support Renewal; (25) IBM Maximo Asset Management Express Use Authorized User Annual SW Subscription & Support Renewal; (39) IBM Maximo Asset Management Limited Use Authorized User Annual SW Subscription & Support Renewal. Interloc Solutions’ Mobile Informer is a COTS application, approved and certified by IBM Corporation for deployment as an IBM Maximo EAMS application which deploys as a Maximo component via the Maximo “EAR file,” and is currently provided to the Government through the incumbent contractor on a cost reimbursable basis.

The following Interloc Solutions Mobile Informer licenses were provided to the Government through the incumbent contractor on a cost reimbursable basis:

(50) Interloc Mobile Informer Subscription & Support licenses. In order to be reimbursed by the Government, all software and hardware acquired by the contractor for the performance of the CoMSupCen contract shall be approved in advance by the Government.

11 DRAFT RFP Past Performance and Corporate Experience

The RFP states, “Furthermore, the offeror shall neither submit, nor will the Government evaluate any information or

Section L will be updated to read as follows:

references that relate to any services performed by the offeror’s proposed subcontractor(s), joint venturers, partnerships, or any other business associations. The CAGE code of any example of experience submitted shall match that of the entity proposing or partner in the JV submitting a proposal. If the CAGE code does not match, the experience will not be evaluated.”

Under 13 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) § 124.109(c)(2)(iii), the size of a small business concern owned by a business entity of an Alaska Native Corporation (ANC) is determined independently without regard to the ANC, or any other business concern owned by the ANC. In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 15.305(a)(2)(iii), and as allowable for Federal procurements, contracting agencies can consider the past performance of an offeror’s affiliated companies.

In addition, many companies are structured with multiple divisions or multiple legal entities that individually perform Prime Contracts but fall under a broader corporate umbrella. Recognizing such corporate structures exist across the industry, the procurement rules and numerous GAO decisions have made clear that procuring agencies may evaluate and credit an offeror with the past performance and corporate experience of affiliate companies where the offeror’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the affiliate (e.g., workforce, management, facilities, or other resources) will be meaningfully contributed to contract performance. See Decision File B-418486; B-418486.2; B-

418486.3 (Inquiries, Inc., May 27, 2020), "The Government will evaluate the Organizational Experience of a parent or affiliate as a prime contractor to a Federal entity within the past 5 years where the Offeror demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliate were meaningfully involved in the Organizational Experience reference, and the Offeror includes an express commitment that the resources of the parent or affiliate will be available to, and meaningfully involved in, performance under a contract awarded pursuant to this solicitation. Offerors should address, for example, conditions such as interlocking officers and boards of directors, the parent entity's officers taking an active role in contract performance, and contract management and substantive support provided by the parent’s corporate office or affiliate.

For offerors submitting an offer as a Joint Venture, the Government will consider the Organizational Experience of either the Joint Venture, or any of the members of the Joint Venture, for organizational experience references submitted as a prime contractor to a Federal entity within the past 5 years."

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response where the GAO states, “An agency properly may attribute the experience or past performance of a parent or affiliated company to an offeror where the firm’s proposal demonstrates that the resources of the parent or affiliate will affect the performance of the offeror…The relevant consideration is whether the resources of the parent or affiliated company--its workforce, management, facilities or other resources--will be provided or relied upon for contract performance such that the parent or affiliate will have meaningful involvement in contract performance.”

Would the Government please consider allowing Offerors to cite the prime contract experience and past performance of an affiliate company so long as the offeror demonstrates how the resources of the affiliate will meaningfully contribute to contract performance?

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

12 PWS 5.1.4

Management Information System

Who owns the Management Information System?

The Government owns the Management Information System. However, the contractor shall operate, maintain, and manage all IT systems used in support of CoMSupCen. The contractor is responsible to ensure all hardware and software that is required in support of CoMSupCen is in place and operational during the phase-in period identified in paragraph 1.4.15. Attachment 5 of the PWS, Government Furnished Equipment, identifies all of the GFE being provided to the contractor including IT hardware. The contractor is responsible for all software and hardware maintenance throughout the life of the contract. In order to be reimbursed by the Government, all software and hardware acquired by the contractor for the performance of the CoMSupCen contract shall be approved in advance by the Government.

13 PWS 5.4.3 Web Site Support

Is it expected the Offeror to host the website?

Yes, the contractor shall host the website.

14 Who provides the data connectivity for deployments?

The Government owns the equipment required to establish data connectivity while deployed. However, the contractor shall operate, maintain, and manage all IT systems used in support of CoMSupCen.

The contractor is responsible for all data connectivity for deployments. In order to be reimbursed by the Government, all software, hardware and data connectivity acquired by the contractor shall be approved in advance by the Government.

15 PWS 5.4 Information Technology (IT)

How many Maximo licenses are available?

See response to Question 10.

16 PWS 5.1.15

Deployment

The Draft RFP states: “Within six hours of a request made by the Government for a FAST package requiring personnel support, the contractor employees shall be fully prepared to deploy for a trip for a minimum of two weeks in support of the FAST package, with the understanding the deployments may take longer.”

Historical workload for FAST package deployment has not been provided. It is recommended the Government provides historical data that provides historical number of deployment days for the past three years. What constitutes appropriate personnel? Please define labor quantities and quantities. What has been the historical deployment time frame, the minimum is 2 weeks, what has been the average number of deployment days, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, other?

Historical data that provides historical number of deployment days for the past three years: (went back to include all events from 1 Jan 2017 to provide clarity on number of days required)

1. January 2017 – President Trump inauguration HRF FAST shipped to Ft Indiantown Gap, PA for inauguration support.

Three (3) CoMSupCen personnel deployed with the MED FAST SME 1 – DSO Rep for Logistics Support (contractor) SME 2 – EMO Rep for equipment maintenance support (contractor) SME 3 – KDA scientist for analytical equipment support (contractor)

TOTAL DAYS FAST DEPLOYED: 5

2. June 2017 – HRF85 Exercise HRF FAST shipped to Devil’s Lake, ND for exercise support.

Two (2) CoMSupCen personnel deployed with the MED FAST SME 1 – DSO Rep for Logistics Support (contractor) SME 2 – EMO Rep for equipment maintenance support (contractor)

TOTAL DAYS FAST DEPLOYED: 5

3. September 2017 – Hurricane Harvey Medical FAST shipped to Texas in support of HRF06 / 149th Medical.

Two (2) CoMSupCen personnel deployed with the MED FAST SME 1 – DSO Rep for Logistics Support (contractor) SME 2 – JSG Medical Logistics

NCO (USAF/ANG)

TOTAL DAYS FAST DEPLOYED: 10

4. September 2018 – 2023 (annual recurrence except for 2020 due to COVID 19) Radiological FAST shipped to Sandy Hook Coast Guard Station for United Nations General Assembly Support Two (2) CoMSupCen personnel deployed with the MED FAST SME 1 – DSO Rep for Logistics Support (contractor) SME 2 – EMO Rep for equipment maintenance support (contractor)

TOTAL DAYS FAST DEPLOYED: 16

5. February 2023 – Full CST FAST Exercise – Frankfort, KY CST FAST pulled loaded and moved to Frankfort, KY in support of 41st CST exercise.

Two (2) CoMSupCen personnel deployed with the FAST SME 1 – DSO Rep for Logistics Support (contractor) SME 2 – KDA scientist for analytical equipment support (contractor)

TOTAL DAYS FAST DEPLOYED: 1

6. August – October 2023 – Maui, Hawaii wildfire response support Partial Medical FAST (3 pallets) shipped to Hawaii.

Partial CERFP FAST (1 FSRT pallet) shipped to Hawaii.

No SME personnel were deployed.

TOTAL DAYS MEDICAL FAST PALLETS

DEPLOYED: 73

TOTAL DAYS FSRT FAST PALLET

DEPLOYED: 65

What Constitutes appropriate personnel?

Appropriate personnel are determined at the time of the FAST request. Based on the nature of the incident or event requiring FAST support

Define labor mix and quantities:

As with Hawaii in 2023, no personnel were required compared to Texas in 2018 where only two personnel were required.

CST FAST does not typically include JSG/Medical support.

Each deployment will be from no support personnel, up to four personnel initially and potentially a second group of four personnel relieving those in place if an incident continues to the point where that becomes necessary.

A full CoMSupCen team would include:

SME 1 – DSO Rep for Logistics Support (contractor) SME 2 – EMO Rep for equipment maintenance support (contractor) SME 3 – KDA scientist for analytical equipment support (contractor) SME 4 – JSG Medical Logistics NCO (contractor or USAF/ANG)

What has been the historical deployment timeframe, the minimum is 2 weeks, what has been the average number of deployment days, 2 weeks, 3 weeks, other?

As evidenced in the above listed deployments, there are no set times for days a FAST may be deployed. The one-day deployment for an exercise is simply an exercise to test the ability to move the FAST. In the case of each real-world support event, the number of days varies

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response greatly depending on the incident or event. If a standard were needed, a minimum of 10 days would be fair for routine, reoccurring events such as UNGA. Unexpected events such as the fires in Maui or a hurricane or tornado response should expect a FAST, if activated and shipped, to remain in place a minimum of 30 days.

17 With the high procurement volume, it is suggested for the Government’s consideration to:

1) Provide within the PWS invoicing details and perimeters / process by CLIN type, etc.

2) Provide a workflow of their approval process Auditing / back-up procurement requirements

Payment will be made in accordance with the Routing Data Table included in the clause at DFARS 252.232-7006 - Wide Area Workflow Payment Instructions. In general, invoices for cost reimbursable CLINs will be paid via cost vouchers, and invoices for firm fixed price services will be via the 2 in 1 Invoice.

In accordance with FAR 32.905, payment will be made upon receipt of a proper invoice and satisfactory contract performance.

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

18 DRAFT RFP (ii) Volume II – Go/No-Go Criteria

d. Financial Responsibility

The Draft RFP states: “The offeror shall submit evidence of its ability to finance and procure up to $90,000,000 in materiel purchases for the first year of expected performance as well as $90,000,000 annually for anticipated 9 additional years of performance within the overall contract ordering period.”

We are recommending the Government consider having the Offeror provide a certified letter of credit as ability to finance and procure up to $90,000,000 annually for anticipated 9 additional years of performance within the overall contract ordering period. Provide full transparency of share resources and source selection.

Share data for auditing purposes and well as systems permissions. Have the proof outside of the page count.

Section L of the final RFP has been revised and provides instructions on what information is required to be submitted by offerors with their proposal to demonstrate satisfactory evidence that the threshold identified in the RFP can be met.

19 PWS Section 5.4 Information Technology

The Draft RFP states: “The contractor will backup up all operational data daily and will maintain a complete weekly backup stored offsite at a COR-approved location.”

Question: Has this historically been a back-up site set up at another Government facility or a Contractor provided facility?

Currently, there are daily backups for all servers on site at CoMSupCen and there are weekly backups provided at two additional locations within the United States. FedRAMP protected back up storage via IBM’s Cloud Services at a FedRAMP certified data center has been historically utilized. In order to be reimbursed by the Government, backup locations shall be approved in advance by the Government.

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

20 PWS 5.3.3 Purchasing Procedures

It states in the RFP that: “The contractor shall efficiently and effectively manage the timing and volume of purchases made in response to automated ASL-generated reorder points so as to: (1) maximize purchasing labor efficiency, (2) reduce unnecessary duplication of effort, and (3) obtain the best overall price by consolidating requirements to take advantage of quantity discounts where possible.”

It is recommended the Government add the following language regarding discounts: “The Contractor agrees that any refunds, rebates, credits, or other amounts (including any interest) accruing to or received by the Contractor or any assignee under the contract shall be paid by the Contractor to the Government, to the extent they are properly allocable to costs for which the Contractor has been reimbursed by the Government under the contract. The Contractor shall credit the Government for 50 percent of trade discounts, including early payment discounts, offered by vendors, including discounts lost by lack of prompt payment by the Contractor. The Contractor may retain 50 percent of all discounts actually received by the Contractor.”

The Government respectfully declines the recommendation to add the suggested language.

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

21 PWS 1.4.15 Phase In / Phase Out Periods

The Draft RFP states: “The transition is expected to take approximately 30 days.”

It is recommended the Government allows 45-60 days to allow sufficient review work in progress, warehouse inventory, repair parts, equipment, material items work in progress, active work orders, property accountability, work history, purchases, invoices, etc. for the high volume of procurement in support of this critical mission.

The contractor must meet all of the requirements delineated in paragraph

1.4.15 within the 30-day phase in period.

Please be advised that the Government will not fund the contractor’s phase in efforts required pursuant to paragraph 1.4.15.

22 PWS Sections 1.4.9 and 1.4.9.4.3

The first reference for Contract Manager describes a position of full authority over the contract. This is assumed to be the same position as Site Director in 1.4.9.4.2 and not the Contracts Manager in

1.4.9.4.3. Please provide clarifications.

The reference to “Contract Manager” is not intended to refer to the same position as the Site Director in paragraph

1.4.9.4.2. However, the Contract

Manager employee and/or alternate can be one of the other key personnel listed under 1.4.9.4.2 through 1.4.9.4.4.

23 PWS Sections 14.6.1 and

As the PWS notes inclusion of procedures for key control in the contractor’s Quality Control Plan and Physical Security Plan, please clarify if variations in emphasis between the two plans are required.

The key control requirements are delineated in paragraph 1.4.6.1. To that end, there isn't a deliverable requirement identified in 1.4.6.1. Instead, the key lock and control plan requirements are addressed in the Physical Security Plan pursuant to paragraph 5.8.4.6. The Quality Control Plan requirement delineated in paragraph 1.4.3 is separate and distinct from the Physical Security Plan identified in paragraph 5.8.4.6.

24 PWS Section 1.4.1.1 and 1.4.9.4

Please clarify whether any key personnel who work in task areas described for telework are eligible to perform duties via telework or are required to work on site.

The Government will permit the contractor to telework in support of the functions identified in 1.4.1.1. Situational telework requests for any other functions shall be approved in advance by the Contracting Officer or the Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR).

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

25 RFP Page

In instructions for proposal submission, a statement is included that all proposal files shall be compressed in their native format and provided on CDs or DVDs.

Information preceding this statement says submissions will be made electronically through DoD SAFE and email. Please clarify regarding CDs, DVDs.

The final RFP has removed the reference to CDs and DVDs.

26 RFP Page

Instructions following “Indexing” call for a more detailed table of contents. This implies that volumes should have more than one table of contents. If this is correct, please provide additional guidance on expectations for each TOC.

The RFP has been updated to reference a single Table of Contents for each volume submitted by the offer, with the decision to include additional indexes (e.g., Table of Figures), when applicable, being left to the discretion of the offeror.

27 RFP Page

Instructions state that all lines of text shall be consecutively numbered within each volume. We request an exception for insertions of forms (SF33, amendments, etc.). We also request clarification that line numbering does not apply to tables (consistent with Attachment 2 Staffing Plan) or graphics.

The RFP has been updated to clarify the assignment of line numbers throughout a volume.

28 RFP Page

Instructions state that each file of the proposal shall include a TOC, Summary Section, and Narrative discussion. Should “file” be understood as “volume”?

Yes. The RFP has been updated to clarify.

29 RFP Page

Instructions state that each file of the proposal shall include a TOC, Summary Section, and Narrative discussion. Is a Summary Section, Narrative discussion to be included as part of Volume I or Volume V?

The RFP has been updated to clarify.

30 RFP Page

Instructions state that each file of the proposal shall include a TOC, Summary Section, and Narrative discussion. Please clarify whether these would be exempt from page limitations.

Only Volumes III and IV have page limits.

As provided for in the RFP, Tables of Contents are exempt from page limits.

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

31 RFP Page

Instructions state that contracts for Organizational Experience should have a minimum of two years of continuous performance. Please clarify that this requirement does not apply to Past Performance.

The referenced requirement applies to the Volume II – Go/No-Go Criteria for Organizational Experience.

32 RFP Page

Instructions state that for Organizational Experience the Government will not evaluate information or references relating to services performed by the offeror’s subcontractors, joint venturers, partnerships, or any other business associations. Then it states the CAGE code for any example of experience shall match the entity proposing or partner in the JV submitting a proposal. We request clarification, in particular that experience by an offeror who is part of a joint venture, partnership, or similar business association will be evaluated.

The instructions for Organizational Experience have been revised. Please refer to the updated RFP.

33 RFP Page

Regarding acceptance of contracts for Organizational Experience, we request that the Government consider allowing evaluation of parent and affiliate experience where it can be shown that either were meaningfully involved IAW guidelines provided for Past Performance.

The instructions for Organizational Experience have been revised. Please refer to the updated RFP.

34 RFP Page

Instructions ask offerors to provide a PWS cross reference table in accordance with Solicitation Attachment 2, Labor/PWS Cross Reference Tab. The draft solicitation included Attachment 2, Staffing Table, but there were no additional tabs for PWS cross reference.

Please refer to the updated instructions in the RFP. There is no separate “Tab.”

There is a column (Column I – Specific PWS paragraphs Labor category will be working), which requires identifying the PWS paragraph(s) that will be supported by the labor category.

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

35 RFP Page

Instructions state that resumes should not be included in any proposal volume. We request that the government allow resumes for several reasons that ultimately benefit the government:

pandemic impact on staffing globally has demonstrated the value of a company that is able to recruit, hire, and retain qualified personnel, and resumes are among the strongest evidence of this capability;

resumes provide documentation of actual capabilities that can be cross-walked to PWS tasks; while personnel may change, resumes of qualified personnel accompanied by letters of commitment provide a level of assurance to how the contract will be performed.

The Government will not accept or otherwise evaluate resumes. Due to the importance of the CoMSupCen mission, the Government has identified key personnel requirements notwithstanding the fact that this effort is performance based. However, in the staffing plan, the Government is requesting that offerors identify any additional “key billets” (i.e., above and beyond the key personnel identified by the Government in the PWS) that you believe meet the definition of “key billet” as provided in the solicitation.

Once again, the CoMSupCen competition is a performance-based acquisition. As such, the Government will evaluate labor categories and the corollary educational, experiential, certification and any other requirements for each respective labor category defined by the offerors, the Government will not evaluate resumes as this is performance based. The individuals that are performing any key personnel or other key billets will be required to possess the educational, experiential, certification and any other requirements for each respective labor category defined by the offerors. These requirements are performance based and are not specific to any individual.

Document (e.g., PWS, Solicitation, Attachment, etc.)

Page # Section/

Paragraph Reference

Line # Question Response

36 RFP Pages and

For Organizational Experience, the government requires references from the offeror only, and only as a prime contractor. However, for Past Performance, the government allows references where resources of the parent or affiliate company were meaningfully involved. As these standards are unequal and create the possibility of protest, we request that Organizational Experience requirements be revised to the standards for Past Performance.

The standards are not the same because the elements are not the same. In general, organizational experience refers to whether an entity has performed functionally similar efforts, whereas past performance concerns itself with the entity’s capability to perform and the quality of the results obtained.

37 RFP Will past performance from an affiliate 8A, commonly known as a sister company with a different cage code be considered for past performance?

The heading for Past Performance Section 3 (DRAFT RFP Section L.2.c.(iv)(3)) has been revised to describe the paragraph’s content more accurately.