SOLICITATION NOTICE
R -- Biometrics Operations and Support Services - Restricted Acquisition Draft RFP Questions and Responses
- Notice Date
- 7/21/2008
- Notice Type
- Modification/Amendment
- NAICS
- 541611
— Administrative Management and General Management Consulting Services
- Contracting Office
- ACA, ITEC4, Directorate of Contracting , 2461 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22331-0700
- ZIP Code
- 22331-0700
- Solicitation Number
- W91QUZ-08-R-0032
- Response Due
- 8/18/2008
- Archive Date
- 10/17/2008
- Point of Contact
- William L. Giles, 703-325-5770
- Small Business Set-Aside
- N/A
- Description
- Questions and Responses 1 through 37 Question: 1 Page: 2 Para.B.3.1 B.3.1 Time and Material Labor Hour/Firm Fixed Labor Rates states: Program Management Support Costs. Contract-level program management support costs are included as a percentage of each individual labor category rate, and encompass support for contract-level management, reporting requirements (See Section F) and related travel and meeting attendance costs associated with the Contractors program management staff, as it relates to overall management of the BOSS-U. As a result, these program management support costs are allocated across all of the task orders issued under this contract. Question- How does the Government envision these costs being reimbursed on a cost reimbursable task? Would the Government consider allowing these costs to be bid as an ODC on Cost Reimbursable tasks? Response: When proposing labor rates under a Cost Reimbursable Task Order the Contract-Level Program Management cost should be incorporated in the G&A rate used to burden the labor rates. Question: 2 Page(s): 2, 85 Para.B.3.1.a, L.2.3.e.5 Section B states that hourly rates will be based on a 40-hour work week (ex. 1920 hours per year or in accordance with the Contractors Cost Accounting (CAS) Disclosure Statement), while the Section L reference states the offeror shall &provide hourly rates based upon a 40-hour work week (1920 hours per year). Please clarify if all offerors are to 1) base hourly rates on 1920 hours per year, or 2) develop hourly rates based on their CAS disclosure statement. Response: All price proposals should be based on 1920 hours. The RFP language has been revised before release. Question: 3 Page: 2 Para.B.3.1.a In the pricing discussion of section B, the RFP details all the labor-related costs to be included in our burdened labor rates (page 2, B.3.1 (a)). Question- Will the Government provide instructions as to how to price shift differential pay and overtime pay in the ID/IQ submission, so that comparable input is provided by all respondents? Response: If required, shift differential and overtime pay will be negotiated at the Task Order level. Question: 4 Page: 2 Para.B.3.1.a Paragraph B.3.1(a) cites the following, All hourly rates are based on a 40-hour work week (ex. 1,920 hours per year or in accordance with the Contractors Cost Accounting Standards (CAS) Disclosure Statement. However, Paragraph L.2.3(e)(5) only cites the following, Contractor shall provide hourly rates based upon a 40-hour work week (1,920 hours per year). We suggest that the language in Paragraph L.2.3(e)(5) be modified to match the language in Paragraph B.3.1(a) to provide consistency with a contractors CAS Disclosure Statements. Response: All price proposals should be based on 1920 hours. The RFP language has been revised before release. Question: 5 Pages: 2,40 Para.B.3.1, H.29 Attach J4 For the purpose of determining Government site rates, what are the assumed CONUS work locations? Response: Washington Capital Region and Clarksburg, West Virginia. Question: 6 Page(s): 2, 85 Para.B.3.1, L.2.3.e.5 The use of uncompensated overtime is not encouraged. L The use of uncompensated overtime is not allowed. Question: Section B does not use the same language on this subject as that found in Section L. Are we correct in assuming that the use of uncompensated overtime is disallowed? Response: Uncompensated overtime will not be allowed under the BOSS-U contract. Question: 7 Page: 7 Para.C.1.2 There appears to be some functional category overlap between BOSS-U and BOSS-R, specifically in the management support and technology management areas. How will the Government determine which vehicle will be used for task orders falling in the overlapping areas? Response: Normal procedures will be followed in accordance with the DFAR, AFAR, FAR and local policies by each Task Order Contracting Officer to determine if the Level of Effort of a TO is suitable for Small Business. Question: 8 Page: 8 Para.C.2.1 Please clarify scope of the services expected under the bullet transformation. Response: Support the transition/transformation of DoD Biometrics capabilities, standards, policies, and architectures. Question: 9 Page: 8 Para.C.2.1 - C.2.6 All six functional categories contain sub-functional items. While the sub-functional elements further delineate the elements within a particular functional category, we suggest that clarifying text be added for each sub-function to minimize uncertainty and potential duplication, while ensuring that proposals meet requirements and expectations. Response: Comment has been noted. Question: 10 Page: 9 Para.C.2.2 The list of anticipated activities for Functional Category 2 includes Incidental construction, component/system certification. Are we correct in assuming that these are two separate functional activities? Response: Correct, the elements should be under separate bullets. The RFP has been modified to reflect the error. Question: 11 Page: 12 Para.D.1 D.1 Packing, Packaging, Marking and Storage of Equipment states: All initial packing, marking and storage incidental to shipping of equipment to be provided under this contract shall be at the Contractors expense. This ID/IQ may require the shipping of significant amounts of equipment overseas. Question- Can this requirement be addressed at the Task Order level, to account for these projects? Response: Section D.1 has been changed in the RFP to read All initial packing, marking and storage incidental to shipping of equipment to be provided under this contract shall be at the Contractors expense, unless otherwise determined at the Task Order level. Question: 12 Page: 13 Para.E.1 Will the Government consider tailored acceptance criteria for each task order? Some examples on the need for flexibility- The 30 days to correct a rejected product may not be in the Governments best interest for fast-moving projects. A systems integration task order should be measured on verifiable interfaces created and utilized. A product should be measured on the degree to which it complies with a relevant specification Response: As stated in E.1.c, (c) The Government requires a period not to exceed thirty (30) days after receipt of final deliverable item(s) for inspection and acceptance or rejection, unless otherwise specified in the individual TO. Question: Section G.2.4 Contractors Program Manager states: The Program Manager shall act as the central point of contact with the Government for all program-wide technical issues, and will represent the Contractor at all post-award status meetings. Does this apply only to ID/IQ-level (Master Agreement level) status meetings, or to both ID/IQ-level and Task Order-level meetings? Response: Section G.2.4 will be clarified in the RFP. It is intended that the Program Manager shall be responsible for all issue resolution, program management, and other contract support including providing comprehensive account support for the BOSS-U contract and all Task Orders issued under the Contract. Question: 14 Page: 29 Para.H.2 (a) Unless exempted by the Contracting Officer (KO), communications after contract award shall be transmitted via electronic mail (e-mail). This shall include all communication between the Government and the contractor except Classified Information. Return receipt will be used if a commercial application is available. (b) The format for all communication shall be compatible with the following: (1) Microsoft Word 2000 (Not to exceed 20 pages or megabyte). (2) Microsoft Excel 2000 (Not to exceed megabyte). (3) Microsoft PowerPoint 2000 for presentation slides. (c) Files larger than 2 megabytes must use alternate means of transmission. (Note: This includes both the text message and the attachment). Large files can be submitted in disk format and mailed with the Contracting Officers approval. What method of delivery is preferred for electronic files greater than megabyte but smaller than 2 megabytes? processing, so that Proposals will be developed on a constrained timeline. Response: Limitations for size of electronic mail will be called out in Task Orders. Size constraints in H.2.b have been removed. Question: 15 Page: 30 Para.H.4(b) Paragraph H.4(b) states the following, The maximum cumulative dollar ceiling value of all contracts in this multiple award procurement is established at $497 maximum. However, the Solicitation Notice posted May 12, 2008 indicates $479M, while Solicitation Notice posted on May 23, 2008 indicates $498M. Suggest the numbers be aligned to avoid confusion and to best manage expectations. Response: The correct contract ceiling value is $497 million Question: 16 Page: 30 Para.H.4.b This statement conflicts with the Boss-U Draft Request for Proposal Notice which states The total estimated value for the BOSS-U requirement is $479 Million. Does the government intend to set the ceiling at $497 million or $479 million? Response: The correct contract ceiling value is $497 million Question: 17 Page: 30 Para.H.4.b There is a discrepancy between the contract ceiling value listed in the RFP and the value listed in the May 12, 2008 FBO posting. Is the total contract value $497 million or $479 million? Response: The correct contract ceiling value is $497 million Question: 18 Page: 35 Para.H.16 1. Please clarify what cross-teaming is allowable: a. Is a single contractor allowed to participate on a team under both the Unrestricted and Restricted BOSS solicitations, either as a prime contractor or subcontractor? b. Specifically, may a large business prime under the Unrestricted solicitation and also be a subcontractor to a small business under the Restricted solicitation? c. Is a large business allowed to be a subcontractor under both solicitations? d. May a business prime and sub on multiple teams under the same solicitation? Response: a. Yes b. Yes c. Yes d. Yes Question: 19 Page: 35 Para.H.16 This section states that the contractor is encouraged to have non-exclusive access to multiple products and service providers. However, there is nowhere in the proposal for offerors to describe their corporate resources, including the business relationships they have in place to ensure access to multiple products and service providers. Please indicate where this information should be presented (with appropriate page allowances) and how it will be evaluated. Response: It is up to the offerors discretion if and where they may wish to address this in their proposal. Question: 20 Page: 35 Para.H.16.a The referenced section states Prime Contractors may subcontract with other Prime Contractors on an individual TO basis; however, the Government reserves the right to prohibit Prime Contractor teaming on an individual TO basis. On what basis might the Government prohibit Prime Contractor teaming? Response: Decisions regarding teaming arrangements after award will be made at the Task Order level. Question: 21 Page: 35 Para.H.16.a States that Prime Contractors may subcontract with other Prime Contractors on an individual TO basis; however, the Government reserves the right to prohibit Prime Contractor teaming on an individual TO basis. We expect that the Government will have an expeditious process for Task Order processing, so that Proposals will be developed on a constrained timeline. Question- Will the Government provide a timeframe in which they would notify the contractor for allowing one PRIME contractor to team with another PRIME contractor on Task Orders? Response: Due dates for proposal submission is at the discretion of the Task Order Contracting Officer. Question: 22 Page: 35 Para.H.16.b The referenced section states The Contractor is also encouraged to have nonexclusive access to multiple product and service providers. This statement appears to encourage subs to team with many prime bidders non-exclusively, which could result in many teams consisting of the same key product and service providers. With little to differentiate the teams from one another, we are unclear what benefit the Government may realize by allowing non-exclusivity to this extent. Could the government explain the purpose/objective of this provision? Response: Under an exclusive arrangement the Government may not be able to provide awardees a fair opportunity to compete for Task Order awards. Question: 23 Page: 35 Para.H.17 The subcontracting goals stated in this section are different than the goals stated in Section M. Please indicate which set of goals is the correct set. Response: The goals displayed in section M are correct. This reference will be modified. Question: 24 Page: 35 Para.H.17 Under section H.17, the mandatory small business contracting goal is listed as 25%. Do the small business subs (of the prime with NAICS 541611 bidding the effort) have to fit under the NAICS code of 541611 to be a part of meeting this goal? For example, if a sub has a NAICS code of 541710, would the subs work be considered as part of the 25% goal? Response: I have been advised by our Small Business Specialist that the subs work would be considered as part of the 25% goal. Question: 25 Page: 35 Para.H.17(b) Paragraph H.17(b) states, The Small Business Subcontracting Participation Plan reporting will be as required in Section G, Contract Management. This reporting is separate from the Small Business Subcontracting Plan requirement as required for Contractors with a business size designation of large in accordance with Section I, FAR clause 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan, Alt II and DFARS clause 252.219-7003, Small, Small Disadvantaged, and Women-Owned Small Business Subcontracting Plan (DOD Contracts). The draft RFP requires specific small business subcontracting goals and cites FAR clause 52.219-9, Small Business Subcontracting Plan. Suggests the RFP be revised to allow DFAR clause 252.219.7004 be substituted for FAR clause 52.219-9. Response: Section H.17(b) has been removed, and section H.18 has been revised. Question: 26 Page: 35 Para.H.20 H.20. Key Personnel states: No changes in TO Key Personnel will be made unless the Contractor can demonstrate that the qualifications of prospective replacement personnel are equal to or better than the qualifications of the TO Key Personnel being replaced. This may cause an unanticipated escalation if a position requires a Masters Degree and a contractor fills it with a person with a PhD. All further replacements must have a PhD, even though it may not be necessary for full performance of the work. This may impact timely fills and may not be in the Governments best interes. Response: The intent of the Government is to keep highly qualified personnel in key positions. TO Key personnel will be the responsibility of the TO Contracting Officer. Minimum qualifications of Key Personnel will be managed at the Task Order level. Question: 27 Page(s): 35, 36, 80_ Para.H.20.1/2, L.2.2.1.b Is the Program Manger considered the only Key Person for the IDIQ master contract? If not, what are the criteria for being designated Key Personnel on the IDIQ master contract? Response: As of now, the Program Manager is the only identified Key Person for the ID/IQ master contract. Question: 28 Page: 36 Para.H.20 The second paragraph on this page addresses key personnel designations and defines how key personnel are identified under TO responses. Specifically, subparagraph (b) states; Personnel whose resumes were submitted with the TO proposal. With the understanding that TO Statements of Work will vary in management, technical, and staffing requirements and a Contractors response to a TO may require justification of providing appropriate staff experience the referenced subparagraph would dictate that any resume included under a TO response would be declared a key personnel resource. As subparagraph (a) captures the ability for the government to designate key personnel positions for the TO and subparagraph (c) captures the ability for the government and contractor to negotiate key personnel positions, would the government consider deleting subparagraph (b)? Response: H.20 has been revised in the RFP. Question: 29 Page: 42 Para.H.35 In Section H. 35 License Rights, the Government incorporates DFARS 252.227-7020, Rights in Special Works, which requires the contractor to assign copyrights of works first produced under this contract to the Government. The draft RFP also incorporates DFARS 252.227-7013, Rights in Technical Data-Noncommercial Items, and 252.227-7014, Rights in Noncommercial Computer Software and Noncommercial Computer Software Documentation. These provide the Government unlimited rights to the same IP. We believe that the Government will want to promote the use of innovative technology in this contract. Past DoD-sponsored studies have indicated that the potential loss of IP rights has deterred companies, especially non-traditional DoD contractors and small businesses, from providing cutting-edge technologies to the Government. It is believed that as a general policy, contractors are permitted to retain ownership (e.g., title) of the IP that they develop or deliver under DoD contracts; and that normally DoD receives only a (nonexclusive) license to use that IP the scope of the license depends on the nature of the data, the relative source of funding for development, and negotiation between the parties. Additionally, the exact nature of the work to be performed under the contract is not fully known at this time and may vary greatly from an IP rights perspective. Question- Would the Government consider removing the DFARS 252.227-7020, Rights in Special Works, from the Master Agreement and invoke this only when needed, on an individual Task Order basis? Response: This clause will remain in Section H.35 of the RFP. Question: 30 Page: 46 Para.H.43.d.2 H.43 Continued Performance during Support of Crisis Situations, Contingency or Exercise (d)(2) states: If a Contractor employee departs an area of operations without Contractor permission, the Contractor shall ensure continued performance in accordance with the terms and conditions of the contract. If the Contractor replaces an employee who departs without permission, the replacement is at Contractor expense and must be in place within five days or as directed by the KO. Providing a replacement in place in Iraq or a similar location within five days may not be possible due to CONUS Replacement Center (CRC) timelines, government transportation limitations, etc. Question- Can the timeliness requirement be addressed at the Task Order level? Response: H.43.d..2 Language reads or as directed by the KO. Consequently, the TO KO can make a change as they determine necessary. Question: 31 Page: 65 Para.H.16 Are we correct in assuming, for purposes of submitting a response to the IDIQ RFP, Prime Contractors may not be on other Prime Contractors teams? Response: There is no constraint precluding a Prime contractor being a sub-contractor on another Prime Contractor team. Question: 32 Page: 71 Para.J-4 On the pricing template, category number 37 repeats the Quality Assurance Specialist as Level III on site and off site two times. Should the second Quality Assurance Specialist instead be listed as either a level II or a level IV? Please clarify Response: Correction has been made to Quality Assurance Specialist Category in J-4 to identify levels as being II and III. Question: 33 Page: 71 Para.J-4 The Labor Categories and Qualifications Education and Experience Level Matrix contain just one matrix for all labor categories exempt, nonexempt, and management. Level 1 requires only a High School diploma or GED Certification and 1 year of experience. For many of the exempt jobs, the RFP job descriptions start at Level I. It will be nearly impossible to find an Application Systems Analyst with just a High School Diploma and 1 year of experience. Industry expects a Bachelors degree. Since we are mapping exempt and management categories based on the above logic, please clarify whether you will be updating the matrix in Attachment J-3 to more accurately to reflect industry? This guidance will save future confusion and help level the playing field in case other competitors are following the above matrix exactly as defined. Response: Comment has been noted. Question: 34 Page: 73 Para.J-3 In the attachment J-3, Labor Category Table, there are no levels provided for the Facility Maintenance Tech and Facility Mgr (pages J3-5&6). Question - If labor rates need to be provided, what is the minimum education and years of experience requirements for these positions? Response: A change has been made to J-3 to identify the appropriate qualification levels. Question: 35 Page: 73 Para.J3-1/12 Section J - List of Attachments on page 73 of the DRFP lists attachment J-3 as Pricing Table. However, the actual attachment provided shows J3-1 as Labor Categories and Qualifications. Suggest renaming the J3 Pricing Table entry on page 73 to match the J3-1 page, titled Labor Categories and Qualifications. Response: Changes have been incorporated to Section J of the RFP. Question: 36 Page: 73 Para.J4-1/11 Section J - List of Attachments on page 73 of the DRFP lists attachment J4 as Pricing Model. However, the actual attachments provided shows J4-1 as Price Table. Suggest renaming the J-4 Pricing Model entry on page 73 to match the J4-1 page, titled Price Table. Response: Changes have been incorporated to Section J of the RFP. Question: 37 Page(s): 79, 82 Para.L.1.d, L.2.2.3 The proposal content table shown on page 79 of the draft RFP shows that the maximum number of pages allowed for Part 4 Small Business Participation Plan is 5. Paragraph L.2.2.4 requires the following to be included in Part 4 of the proposal: (1) percentage of subcontracts planned for, (2) ACO rating, SF295 information, etc., and (3) a Small Business Participation Plan containing the elements required by FAR 52.219-9. Please clarify in the final RFP which portions of the material required to be submitted as part of Part 4 Small Business Participation are counted in the allotted 5 pages, or it is recommended the Maximum Number of Pages shown in the Proposal Content table on page 79 for Part 4 be changed to read no limit. Response: Page limit for Small Business Participation Plan has been changed to 15 pages.
- Web Link
-
FedBizOpps Complete View
(https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=12d10fee3404ffe9853432a0b0167ff6&tab=core&_cview=1)
- Place of Performance
- Address: ACA, ITEC4 Directorate of Contracting , 2461 Eisenhower Avenue Alexandria VA
- Zip Code: 22331-0700
- Zip Code: 22331-0700
- Record
- SN01619181-W 20080723/080721223342-26f5759862e18a114a36458572787000 (fbodaily.com)
- Source
-
FedBizOpps Link to This Notice
(may not be valid after Archive Date)
| FSG Index | This Issue's Index | Today's FBO Daily Index Page |